[ElpasoTXmom]

Hi all. I haven't been on here for a while. I hope asking a couple questions will be ok.

1. Do adoptee's have a fake birth certificate with the aparents names on it? If yes, how can this be legal?

2. I have a list of girls that were born on my little girls birthday. So I look up each name on a website (ancetors.com or something like that) and each name had a fathers name (and sometimes a mothers name) recorded except for one of them. I couldn't find a mother or father listed for her anywhere. Do you think that this was because names of the parents of a adoptee are kept confidential and it would be more likely that she was my daughter than the others on the list?

3. I have an address and phone number for this girl. I'd like to find out if she is still living there before I send a letter, but I'm afraid that if I call she might answer and then what would I do?

Just curious. Thanks for any help with this.

[Poleczech]

I don't think I can answer all of your questions, but I can answer the first one.

Adopted children, upon finalization of their adoption by their aparents, receive an amended bc -- the bc is amended by court order showing that the legal parents of the child are the aparents. If the child's name is changed at the time of finalization, that is also changed on the bc. The original bc is sealed. So it is not fake and it is a legal document issued by the state of birth.

As for looking up your child on websites such as ancestors.com etc., this can be very tricky, as sites like that typically only give info from records that date back 70 years or more, or the more recent information tends to be what others have contributed to a database.

Do you know the name of her aparents? Did you go through an agency when you placed? You might start with them first, as they may have kept their info current with the agency in the event that you would want contact at some point.

If you decide to take the chance and call this girl (you never said how old she is -- is she now an adult??) and she does answer the phone, I would start the conversation out slowly and not jump right in asking if she was adopted. You might start by saying are you the same Susie Jones (or whatever her name is) that was born in? Or are you the same Susie Jones whose birthday is such and such. That might help you determine if you are even talking to someone with the possibility of being your child. If the birthdates aren't even close, this likely is not who are you are seeking, and you can just politely apologize and say you have the wrong number. If the birthdates do match, then you could start exploring a little more.

Now, if your bchild lis not an adult, and she answers the phone, I would ask to speak with her parents.

I hope you find the answers you are looking for. Best wishes.

[ElpasoTXmom]

Hi... thanks for your reply. She was born on June 24, 1966. I don't know the aparents or the name of the agency that took her from the hospital on the day she was born. I was too young to have much say in the matter. I didn't even get to name her much less hold her or even touch her. I was only permitted to view her for a few minutes through a window and then they wisked her away.

Do they say on the bc that these are the aparents and not the bparents? If not, then is this fair if the child was never told she was adopted? And wouldn't this` mess up her pedigree for future generations that investigate their ancestry.

Michelle.

[mom2GRLC]

On the ammended birthcertificate the birthparents names are removed completely and the adoptive parents names and info are put in their place since they are the legal parents of the child. There is no mention of the adoption or the birthparents on the document.

Wether the child was ever told of the adoption was completely up to the parents/family.

Is this fair? that is all a matter of opinion. By law it is their legal right as the parents of that child.

As far as ancestory goes. Yes the child will always be a part of their blood ancestry. However when they are adopted they are also adopted forever into the "family history" of the adoptive parents. So no it does not mess up their geneology/family history. When they have children they can be listen on either or both the family records. That would be up to the adopted child.

I also recommend that you contact the hospital or someone who might still have access to your bchilds records or maybey join some national registry so that if your child was told about the adoption you can find one another. You may also ask for help from one of those search angels or private investigator. Just knowing the day she was born and the hospital she was born in should help you find her

[ElpasoTXmom]

Thanks for your reply. I understand that it wouldn't mess up the history of the child but it would mess up the genetic links in the pedigree since neither of the aparents genes are actually involved in her genetic pool. I've seen this with animal breeders when two males would get to a female and they'd just guessed as to which male to record on the pedigee. Or when their famous stud went sterile they'd use another of their studs to breed but would use the name of the famous one to get more money for the offspring. Things like this really mess up the pedigrees.... as it would with the achilds pedigree, right?

Michelle

[spitzlvr]

errr.... I have never heard of family history called 'pedigree'. I am adopted, and yes, being adopted (in a closed adoption) did cause some issues. The biggest issue I can think of is the lack of medical history.

The fact that I am not genetically related to my parents is not one I really care about. They are my parents.

I want to say more, but need to think before I type.

[Sniffles]

Originally Posted by ElpasoTXmom

1. Do adoptee's have a fake birth certificate with the aparents names on it? If yes, how can this be legal?

I am assuming that this took place in TX, so i will try to answer the best I can. What everyone else said was right. The birth certificate is amended to show the adoptive parents name and the original, here in Tx is sealed away in a file. However, adoptees do have the chance now to get a copy of our OBC, if we know the birth parents names that are listed. I am an adoptee from the state of Texas and my birth certificate is in no way fake.
Here are a few registries that helped me find my b-mom:
TxCARE™ Home
G'S United States Adoption Registry Home Page
They both have search angels who are really good about finding out information.

Originally Posted by mom2GRLC

As far as ancestory goes. Yes the child will always be a part of their blood ancestry. However when they are adopted they are also adopted forever into the "family history" of the adoptive parents. So no it does not mess up their geneology/family history. When they have children they can be listen on either or both the family records. That would be up to the adopted child.

I disagree with this. I was in the closed adoption era and all of my birth families history was erased when they sealed the files. My parents would of shared it with me, if they had it. I found my birth family without the help of the adoption agency or the state. I got lucky mine was easy to find. If I had never found them then my history would still be lost. So yes in the "closed adoption era" the genealogy/family history is messed up because it is not available. While I'm happy to have my history included in my a-family tree, I'm of both histories and should have that information and opportunity to have both. My uncle who is working on the family genealogy is adding all of my birth family history to my portion of the family genealogy.

[Sniffles]

Originally Posted by ElpasoTXmom

Thanks for your reply. I understand that it wouldn't mess up the history of the child but it would mess up the genetic links in the pedigree since neither of the aparents genes are actually involved in her genetic pool. I've seen this with animal breeders when two males would get to a female and they'd just guessed as to which male to record on the pedigee. Or when their famous stud went sterile they'd use another of their studs to breed but would use the name of the famous one to get more money for the offspring. Things like this really mess up the pedigrees.... as it would with the achilds pedigree, right?

Michelle

As an adoptee, I am actually very offended by this. I personally do not like my family history being compared to a dog's pedigree, I am not a dog. I hope you don't share your thoughts on pedigree with your b-child. You just might lose your chance at kind of relationship.

[healingfeeling]

Originally Posted by Sniffles

As an adoptee, I am actually very offended by this. I personally do not like my family history being compared to a dog's pedigree, I am not a dog. I hope you don't share your thoughts on pedigree with your b-child. You just might lose your chance at kind of relationship.

i agree with sniffles....i don't even understand at ALL how you could compare a child's adoption to be something that messes up her "pedigree"....i can't even believe we're saying the word "pedrigree" when i comes to humans...i do not know any humans that "breed" with other humans in order to make a really good "pedigreed child"..... if my bdad ever said to me what you just said about gene pools, etc that would be the last time we spoke.

adoption is about family not about genetics and faking genetics.

[HappyTwinsMom]

I was not adopted, but I'm offended by this comparison of a child's genetic history to that of a dog's pedigree. I agree with healingfeeling...

adoption is about family not about genetics and faking genetics.

[spitzlvr]

healingfeeling and sniffles said what I wanted to, and said it much nicer than what I had in my head.

thanks guys!

[cnb1099]

The term pedigree is really offensive to me when you are discussing my history. I am a human being, not a dog or a horse or any animal. I have a history and an ancestry..from both sets of parents..

[thanksgivingmom]

"pedigree"

it feels horrible as a bmom too, like thats all i was good for, to take my genes and "breed" a person. bmoms are not just breeders making babys for other parents.

[ElpasoTXmom]

FOR PETES SAKES PEOPLE.... you'd better know what you're talking about before you start ripping someone to shreds with your remarks. Web definitions for pedigree...... lineage: the descendants of one individual; "his entire lineage has been warriors" a person's line of ancestors. I now regret having come to this forum for ya alls advice. And as an added thought... the more I know people the better I like my dogs.

[Poleczech]

Ok, folks. I think there has been some comparisons here between apples and bananas and now everyone is miffed.

As a geneologist, I can tell you that the word pedigree is used in relation to family tree, but not in the way that I think most of you took it. And honestly, the way ElPaso worded it, it might have been a little misunderstood. I think what she was trying to say is that anyone investing their ancestry down the road who pulls a copy of the amended bc is going to see the aparents names and not the bparents name and assume that the child was born to the aparents and thus, on the family history chart (also known as a pedigree chart) they won't know any diffrerent and will put that child on the chart not knowing that the child actually has two sets of branches. They won't know to search the bparent history because there is no evidence of it.

ElPaso, is this what you were trying to say? Perhaps you could have chosen a better analogy, but I do think you have a legitimate question.

To those offended by her remarks, does this make more sense? I don't think she was trying to offend, but I can see where you are coming from as well.