[debsdone]

Hi Rainbow Mom! You know, your situation is a perfect example! I also believe we should be able to obtain our records. But even more so, I want parents to retain the right to protect their kids! You are wonderful to be doing what you are doing! And your child is very lucky. Debi

[Rainbow mom]

We have adopted three wonderful kids from abusive and abandon lives. I really do think everyone should be allowed to explore their roots but first they must grow their wings.

Kids may have to deal with the issues that may haunt their Bparents (drugs, alcohol, abuse, neglect, pedifilia sp?, emotional). BUT I am not saying all birthparents are bad people! Some have just not been ready to parent. The adoptive parent has the right/responsibility to determine if their child is safe in an open adoption case.

[raybuffer]

First let me clarify that my cause is to open adoption records (to adult adoptees 18 or over or to their legal guardian upon request) that were previously sealed. That is different from abolishing closed adoption although I personally, do disagree with it.

I understand the need to protect the child. But let me ask you this: What are you doing about the poor children with even more severe problems that are NEVER adopted. They grow up in foster care and hear this: They never have their birth certificates amended. They are afforded no special protection no witness protection program which closed adoption is comparable to. Children who grow up in foster care never have to search for original records because they are never altered.

Open adoption does NOT mean you must open your door to birthparents who molested and abused children. It also does NOT mean that you have to sit a five year old down and lecture them about their birth parents reminding them of the ordeal. What it does mean is that you as the adoptive parent will love and raise and protect the child using the laws available to every other citizen in the USA.

Debsdone: as far as feeling alone in your issue, you are not. There is a website called "The Adoptees' Enemy" that has these organizations listed. They (All Right Wing) all agree with you that closed adoption is great and should go on forever:

National Council For Adoption

Here is a national organization employing full-time paid lobbyists who claim to speak for waiting children, adoptive parents, birth parents, and all adoptees. The NCFA has a long history of coming into states that are contemplating legislative change such as making the adoptee's original birth certificate available to the adoptee and persuading legislators, through bogus and unfounded arguments, that open adoption records will cause more abortions and fewer adoptions. Find out who is speaking for you and what they are saying.


NCFA Member Agency List


Here is an interesting list of adoption agencies for anyone who wants to know who supports the National Council For Adoption, and, presumably, their goals in the United States.


The American Center for Law and Justice


The ACLJ is the Pat Robertson-founded legal organization that provides the polarized image to the American Civil Liberties Union. It is three attorneys from the ACLJ who, along with four individuals and an adoption agency, filed a class-action suit against Tennessee's equal access to adoption records law.


Christian Broadcasting Network


The Reverend Doctor Pat Robertson's web page offered a transcript of a CBN story about the Tennessee lawsuit. An interesting article that equates those who believe in open records with those who favor abortion, and also states the fact that the Tennessee open records challenge is the first case ever brought by the ACLJ of Tennessee. Are you a Christian who is opposed to abortion but who favors open adoption records? A member of the 700 Club who favors open adoption records? Why not drop the Reverend Robertson a line when you visit his web page?


American Life League


The American Life League joined with the NCFA as an amicus curiae in the Tennessee access to adoption records case. ALL is located at P. O. Box 1350, Stafford VA 22555. Voice: 540-659-4171; FAX 540-659-2586; BBS 540-659-7111. Email: sysop@all.org


Christian Coalition


The Christian Coalition joined the NCFA as amicus curiae in the Tennessee lawsuit.


Eagle Forum


Eagle Forum can be found at 316 Pennsylvania Avenue, Suite 203, Washington DC 20003. Tel. 202-544-0353; FAX 202-547-6996. They joined the TN case as amicus curiae.


Family Research Council


The FRC joined the TN case with the NCFA as amicus. They are at 700 13th Street, NW, Washington DC 20005. Tel. 202-393-2100. They sponsor an internet conference at FRC-INFO@NETCENTRAL.NET


Hear My Voice


Hear My Voice opposes open adoption records and has stated so by joining the case against the new Tennessee law. They are at 1100 N. Main Street, Suite 119, Ann Arbor MI 48104-1059. Tel. 1-800-95-VOICE. Email: hmv@cyberspace.org

Best Regards,


Ray Buffer

[Rainbow mom]

Parents of abused children in fostercare are never provided with their Fosterparent names or addresses. So there is no fear of them being snatched (besides there would be more action taken by Social Services). They meet at a Social Services Office to visit.

I said I agreed with you they should be offered the opportunity to all of their back ground info once they are 18. As a matter of fact I have told my kids I would help find their parents once they are 18. I think we are in agreement on that matter.

What I do not agree with is my kids safety. I cannot control what happened to them in fostercare but I can control who has access to them now. If you are implying that visiting a pedifile is OK for a child I have to think that you are wrong. He should be encouraged to meet them when he is old enough to defend himself emotionally and physically.

[raybuffer]

Rainbow Mom,

I agree with what you say except I do know that Open Adoptions can have no visitation and no contact clause attached for those that are indangered. There are also legal remedies available to all citizens: restraining orders, stalking laws, and harassment statutes. I'm simply against the sealing of the records. In your case, did both birthparents abuse the child? If not, what about the one that did not? The way the laws are now, you do not have the choice of saying "When my child is 18 let them know what they want" unless they were born in Alabama, Alaska, Kansas or Oregon. Sealed Records stay sealed unless a county judge arbitrarily opens them.

No, of course you don't need your child's tormentor knocking on your door, but there are legal remedies to that with out sealing a child's record from your access as well as the child's when they have grown.

Best Regards,

Ray Buffer

[Rainbow mom]

Actually they are from bi-parental abusive situations. All parents involved did drugs and were abusive. In the case of one of my kids BOTH Bio-parents were jailed for Pedifilia. The other childs sister had ciggarette burns all over her back and had been forced to drink lighter fluid.

I have the things they left my children to give them when they are older, blankets and pictures that were drawn/sewn for them. I do provide pictures and letters and items the kids were left from their Bparents. I don't want my kids to say they weren't given the information that I have later on.

We have a very open relationship and they are given all of the information (I was given copies of their files) that I have for them. I had a very lucky break and actually was "accidentally" given a copy of my son's original birth certificate in one case and the other I had been given copies of the files that contain their b-parents full names "accidentally".

Ocassionally they wish to look through the stuff, when they do it causes great pain for days, and makes their behavior regresses to very aggressive and violent behavior.

I consider my children God's children whom I have been blessed to raise. I do my best and in a perfect world they could have access to their Birthparents. This is not a perfect world. I do make sure they have access to their birth sibling so they have contact.

[debsdone]

I think you are, and have been, doing more for abused kids than most people ever will. you have no obligation to repair all the wrongs done to kids, you are doing something wonderful as it is. I hope you never have to defend your right to do what is best for your kids. Nor should you have to explain yourself or your situation. I wish the world had more people like you! Debi

[raybuffer]

Sunshine Mom,

It seems you are doing the best that you can in your situation. As you say it is fortunate that in a closed adoption you were able to retain so much identifying information for them to have = if they choose to have it = when they are older. I assume since you mention their jail time, you also know the identities of the bioparents. Unfortunately, most closed adoptions don't work that way. Sealed is sealed. I think there will always be exceptions to a rule, but I feel, and this is just my opinion, that the rule should be to abolish sealed records. That's not to say that a judge who is petitioned by a social worker for extreme circumstances shouldn't seal a record, but I think a reversal of the current process is in order. Instead of petitoning to unseal a record, the petition process should be to seal. Sealed records should be the exception rather than the rule.

Best Regards,

Ray Buffer

[shirleyville]

I am relatively new to this forum....I've been coming here for a couple of months, every day, and have found a lot of valuable support, answers to questions, and have made some friends along the way.
At the risk of making waves, I feel compelled to make a statement. I come to this forum to be with people who have been touched, in some way, by adoption....to have a place where I can find comfort and strenght.....NOT to have political agendas screaming at me from almost every thread, which is what I get from Ray Buffer. If I sign in, early in the morning, there his name is....attached to every thread, it seems.
I am ALL for unsealing records....I have petitioned to unseal my OWN. I just don't think that this forum is designed to have every thread centered around that agenda. Maybe there should be (or already is) a thread where this can be the continued topic of discussion..........
Frankly, I have taken to avoiding any of the threads where I see Ray's name, because I know there will either be grandstanding or some kind of argument going on.
It makes me very sad....
Sally

[raybuffer]

Sally,

I am sorry you feel that way. I don't believe I have debated any issue unfairly, or in fact debated at all except under this topic. I am simply defending my views because I was questioned (in what I considered a meanspirited fashion) about them. I appreciate these forums because they give me a chance to read what other's feel and think. In other threads I have posted supportive comments and given what search advice I could to those who request it. I suggest you go to "search" enter my username 'raybuffer' and see for yourself that this thread is the first conversation I've had where the debate is ongoing. These are sensitive issues. I don't however, understand why if (as you say) you deliberately avoid the threads that I post in, you found your way to this one.

Debi has indicated that there is a groundswelling of negative feedback towards me and I'm sorry for that. But in my short time posting to these threads I have received quite a few supportive and encouraging comments in the forum as well as through personal emails. I can only assume that what divides us truly are the issues.

On your last point, I can only say that I must post my comments earlier than you do, if you are seeing my name everywhere when you sign in. I'm sorry if my agenda puts you off, but I don't see anything different between my slant on things and someone else expressing their anti abortion viewpoint, or pro choice viewpoint, or pro adoption viewpoint.

I include information in my signature line to inform people what I am about. There are new people joining these forums everyday. and that's what the signature lines are for.

I am sorry you are sad. Truly.

Sincerely,

Ray Buffer

[schatz]

I skipped to the last page of this thread and read all the bickering going on. I went back to find out what all the fuss was about and I have to say that I'm surprised. From your reaction, Debi, I expected some really harsh posts from Ray. I didn't find them. What I found was the statistics you requested and a list of organizations that support your viewpoint.

Yes, this forum is a place for support, but I don't think anyone should be expected to alter their beliefs in order to support another poster. Also, I did not find Ray's posts to be unsupportive. As far as separating newborn adoption statistics from older child adoption statistics, I agree that would be helpful. Yet from experience, I can tell you that those adopted at birth are not immune from these statistics.

There are many who would argue, as you do, that the statistics are inaccurate because everyone is lumped together. In my opinion, this is just another way to deny the painful reality of adoption. I think that we need to step away and stop painting adoption as a purely positive choice when in fact it is an incredibly painful and life-changing choice for all parties.

[Bcelli]

Well, it's an old and dying argument now - but I AM a right wing Christian and frankly I find it offensive to have the classification thrown out as if it were an immediate insult. I even overheard a conversation once where an educated man actually said: "They have an adopted child. I bet you never expected a conservative to have an adopted kid, huh?" Hello?

Ray - if you are to champion your cause effectively, I recommend you update your statistics - I was particularly intrigued by the 1991 report saying 50%-80% of all international adoptions are disrupted. (By my own poll, I believe 0% of that.) Also, quoting poll reults from Playgirl magazine isn't exactly looking at situations with a scientific eye. Legitimate polls and statistical data have very defined criteria to ensure credibility. But good luck to you. Your cause seems to be just - and one I agree with in most situations - but please leave room for those of us who are simply trying to raise our children in a safe and loving environment. There are many well-adjusted adult adoptees who do not share your angst. I hope you find your birthparents.

[numbr1dbcksfan]

I have a semi-opened adoption.....if I had chosen to have a closed one....I would want my right of privacy protected at any cost. Even Tennessee gives the birthmom the right to veto that record from being opened....Im not sure that I could think of a reason that the Birthmother's rights should be violated.... Adoptee rights are just a matter of opinion....not to downplay the emotional nature of that opinion....but I would rather my LEGAL rights be protected by the court, and have to give my premission to unseal records...than to have some judge or some advocacy group make that decission for me...

[raybuffer]

numbr1dbcksfan,

I hope you will reconsider some of your opinions and thoroughly reflect on my points and those of my colleagues, below.

“...Im not sure that I could think of a reason that the Birthmother's rights should be violated....” and “....I would want my right of privacy protected at any cost”.

For years adoptees have died from terminal diseases that could have been caught earlier and treated, or predicted and cured had they had access to their true identity. Your standing on this issue continues to kill adoptees.

It is difficult for many non-adoptees to relate to the constitutional violations that adoptees must tolerate. If you were an Amnesia victim would it be right for me to keep your true identity and medical history away from you?

Simply because a child might be too young to remember their true history does not make it right to steal it away from them.

Some adoptees will never know their pedigree and heritage because of the current laws in many states. The next time you glance at a genealogy magazine at a Barnes and Noble, realize that you are enjoying a privilege that adoptees are denied the ability to appreciate.

“Adoptee rights are just a matter of opinion....”

Regarding Sealed Records, State legislators make that decision for you, regardless of the venue or the outcome. Birthparents do not have an absolute right to anonymity from their offspring, and where this privilege exists, in whole or in part, it exists in statute, not in juris prudens or constitutional case law.

In short, your statement that you have a legal right to privacy that extends to your relinquished child's birth certificate is an opinion as well, and depending on the jurisdiction, it's an opinion that has not carried the day in court.

The site in which adoptee rights will be decided, for better or worse, is in the arena of politics, where organized advocacy will carry the day, as it does with every other contested issue.

“..Even Tennessee gives the birthmom the right to veto that record from being opened...”

Contact Vetoes are Restraining Orders.

For every other citizen in the United States, Restraining Orders are imposed only after someone has shown a pattern of harassing, harmful behavior. A birth mother’s privilege in States like Tennessee to say "no" is not based on any form of harassment, since the decision is made prior to any contact, it is based on the sheer existence of the adoptee.

The existence of contact vetoes is a further violation of Adoptees’ Rights as it promtoes the relegation of adoptees to another class and treats the adoptee as Separate but Equal.

“…but I would rather my LEGAL rights be protected by the court”. and “..than to have some judge or some advocacy group make that decission for me...”

Please remember that owning a black slave used to be legal, as well as denying your sex the right to vote. Advocates from both of those groups helped change the world we live in today, and restore some equality where it had been stripped away.

Best Regards,

Ray Buffer

[tsegat01]

I am both a "birthmother" and an adoptee and I have to comment on your post. You mention "harassment" and I don't see how that applies here. The Oxford Dictionary defines HARASS as 1. trouble and annoy continually or repeatedly. 2. make repeated attacks on (an enemy or opponent).

I do not see how an adoptee seeking their roots and ancestry can be perceived as "harassment". My first son has the right to the same information as my other children have and take for granted. In most cultures throughout the world ancestry is an important part of a person's identity and anyone who lacks that information is often perceived as a threat or deficient in some way. Our folklore, literature, and movies support this attitude with such concepts as "the bad seed", "the mysterious stranger with no past", and "the tragic ****ens orphan".

Though most people do not consciously designate such tags to adoptees in our society, they are still part of our race consciousness and can have a profound effect on the adoptee and his/her family.

There is much talk about "invasion of privacy" and I would not advocate that my relinquished son should have the right to interfer in my personal life anymore than I would allow my other adult children to. I think many mothers are really more concerned with protecting themselves from the pain of opening old wounds and reliving past pain. When I looked upon my son as an infant for the first and last time, I did not see him as a future threat that would some day invade my life. I never asked for nor was promised protection from my own child. Such a thought could have never entered my mind. I cannot imagine it occurring to any mother in the same situation.

In order to debate this further, I think we need to define what we mean by "rights", "privacy", and "harassment".
Pat