• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should birth records be available to adopted children?

Should birth records be open to adopted children

  • Yes

    Votes: 9 50.0%
  • No

    Votes: 1 5.6%
  • Depends on the circumstances

    Votes: 7 38.9%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 1 5.6%

  • Total voters
    18

Bonnie1988

Banned
Joined
Oct 28, 2008
Messages
947
Reaction score
142
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Private
I haven't posted a poll so hope I can figure out how.

For a few years I've been all but certain I was adopted as an infant. It is not only how much I don't look like either of my parents and different core personality, but circumstantially. I am an only child born 9 years after my parents married. Always in my life has been a distant aunt and who I share much in physical appearances with. She would have just turned age 16 when I was born.

There has never been a Christmas that she hasn't been with me, I used to be sent to her every summer for a few weeks no reason given why, always a birthday card and gift from her. She came to my graduation. When I was in the hospital after the attack, this seems basically confirmed. Across country the relatives that came were my parents and her. Much of the first couple days I was in a drugged up semi-conscious state and she had asked to be alone with me. Then, thinking I was asleep, she called me "my baby" many times, how she always prayed for me and she always wondered if she made "the right decision, but that she thinks I've had a good life.

When I thought of this a few years ago I knew if I asked my parents they would tell me, but what would I ask and why? I am unconfused as to not only who my Mom and Dad are, but also who is my mother and father. It is the two people who gave up so much of their lives for me. My aunt is just my wonderfully loving aunt, but no more than that. If that decision had been made 21 years ago, it was good decision I see no reason to disturb or redefine relationships to other than what they really are.

I don't think birth records should be open to children adopted as newborns or infants.
 
Last edited:
I think they should be open for more than these few of reasons.

1. Medical reasons. Knowing your family history can be a life-saver... literally.
2. The only person who should make this decision is the adoptee. A third party having control over these issues is preposterous.
3. Knowing the biological parents in no way diminishes the relationship with the real parents.
 
I do agree, in theory, with some of the things Tucker said, but let's be honest, some birth parents don't want to be found, if they did, they'd be the ones making the effort. I think that, at the time of adoption, the birth parents should be able to opt in or out of being contacted later, say at age 18. If the parents are amenable to being contacted, the adopted child is given that information, if not, they are not. Seems simple enough.
 
Prehaps we should leave their genetic records/medical history available but not reveal their identity if they want to keep it secret?
 
I don't think I've ever met a single person who wasn't interested in finding out their heritage even if it turns out it's not all roses. I certainly have a thirst for finding out where my people(family) came from on both sides and even though I've found out a lot of horrible things I've also found a lot of beautiful things. My parents are part of my heritage and I think if I had been adopted I'd want to find out who they are.
 
I don't think I've ever met a single person who wasn't interested in finding out their heritage even if it turns out it's not all roses. I certainly have a thirst for finding out where my people(family) came from on both sides and even though I've found out a lot of horrible things I've also found a lot of beautiful things. My parents are part of my heritage and I think if I had been adopted I'd want to find out who they are.

Should it solely be the adoptee's decision though?

I'm undecided on this. I suspect, though, that there'd be an increase in abortions if adoption became a less attractive option. Whether that matters to you or not, I dunno.
 
Should it solely be the adoptee's decision though?

I'm undecided on this. I suspect, though, that there'd be an increase in abortions if adoption became a less attractive option. Whether that matters to you or not, I dunno.

I don't know. I think it should go by age. Once the kid hits 18/21 he should be allowed to find out who his real parents are.
 
I understand all the reasons why adopted individuals would like to know their biological parents, but I'm against giving up those records unless the biological parents have waived their right of privacy.

In all too many cases it's the mother who makes the decision to give a child up for adoption. The reasons are many, but frequently it's because she is too young or financially unable to care for a baby. Also all to frequent, the father of the child is either unknown or wants nothing to do with it. This is a wrenching decision.

Fast forward 10-20 years. Chances are the woman has gone on with her life, has a husband and children of her own. (The father too, but I'm using the mom as an example.) Many women don't share that information with their husbands or with their other children, either from a sense of shame that they were unable to keep their baby or because they feel the knowledge might confuse or upset their families, or because it's just to painful to discuss. In these cases, having a biological sibling/child suddenly show up could cause a real family crisis.

In this internet age, any biological parent who wants to meet children give up for adoption can certainly make their wishes known. But those who don't for whatever reason should not be forced, particularly when they were promised privacy at the time the decision was made.
 
Many women don't share that information with their husbands or with their other children, either from a sense of shame that they were unable to keep their baby or because they feel the knowledge might confuse or upset their families, or because it's just to painful to discuss. In these cases, having a biological sibling/child suddenly show up could cause a real family crisis.



I don't see how a woman could hide the fact that she's had a child from future sexual partners.
I mean, how are you going to explain?
Would you say, umm, "Oh, I used to weigh 300 pounds; I've lost weight, which is why I have more stretch marks than the Fruit Stripe Gum zebra. Also, I sometimes masturbate with a two-liter soda bottle, which is why my vagina's all bent out of shape."

That would take some balls (figuratively speaking) for a mother to try to pass herself off as a woman who's never had a baby.
I suppose she could say she'd had a kid and it died, or something.
 
I don't see how a woman could hide the fact that she's had a child from future sexual partners.
I mean, how are you going to explain?
Would you say, umm, "Oh, I used to weigh 300 pounds; I've lost weight, which is why I have more stretch marks than the Fruit Stripe Gum zebra. Also, I sometimes masturbate with a two-liter soda bottle, which is why my vagina's all bent out of shape."

That would take some balls (figuratively speaking) for a mother to try to pass herself off as a woman who's never had a baby.
I suppose she could say she'd had a kid and it died, or something.

Trust me, it's been done more than once. I'd bet it's done frequently. I even know of one case where an acquaintance gave up a baby as an adolescent, and didn't tell her husband that she'd previously born a child. He was pretty stunned when the kid showed up on the doorstep.

I don't think that men automatically can tell if a female has had a baby. I didn't get stretch marks with my first (got a few with my second), and from what my gynocologist and my husband both said, my vagina when fully healed was not "all bent out of shape."

People are different, I guess.
 
Trust me, it's been done more than once. I'd bet it's done frequently. I even know of one case where an acquaintance gave up a baby as an adolescent, and didn't tell her husband that she'd previously born a child. He was pretty stunned when the kid showed up on the doorstep.

I don't think that men automatically can tell if a female has had a baby. I didn't get stretch marks with my first (got a few with my second), and from what my gynocologist and my husband both said, my vagina when fully healed was not "all bent out of shape."

People are different, I guess.

I guess so. :shock:

I was left stripey all over and with a 2-inch long curved episiotomy scar (actually, I have no clue how long it is, but it's definitely there).
Dunno how that could be explained away.
"Oh, that lil thing? I, uh, slipped and cut my poontang on a broken beer bottle. Yeah, it took twelve stitches to close it up. Couldn't sit down for a month."

Of course, I was just a wisp of a thing in those days, and my first son was 7 pounds 14 oz.
But yeah, it certainly took a toll.
The next one didn't seem to do much additional damage, but he was premature. it wasn't a full-term pregnancy.
 
I think they should be open for more than these few of reasons.

1. Medical reasons. Knowing your family history can be a life-saver... literally.
2. The only person who should make this decision is the adoptee. A third party having control over these issues is preposterous.
3. Knowing the biological parents in no way diminishes the relationship with the real parents.

You nailed it. I was adopted at birth. All I know is that I have older siblings. I saw my mother (who was also adopted) have a bad experience meeting her biological siblings and has made me hesitant to find my own.

The people in my life are the people in my life.
 
I do agree, in theory, with some of the things Tucker said, but let's be honest, some birth parents don't want to be found, if they did, they'd be the ones making the effort. I think that, at the time of adoption, the birth parents should be able to opt in or out of being contacted later, say at age 18. If the parents are amenable to being contacted, the adopted child is given that information, if not, they are not. Seems simple enough.

Screw the sperm/egg donors. Boo hoo if you have to face reality someday.
 
Screw the sperm/egg donors. Boo hoo if you have to face reality someday.

Hey then, by all means, have an abortion if you're going to have to face your unwanted child later on. Thanks for supporting tons of extra abortions. :2wave:
 
Hey then, by all means, have an abortion if you're going to have to face your unwanted child later on. Thanks for supporting tons of extra abortions. :2wave:

Do you really believe that women would terminate the pregnancy because of what could happen in 18+ years? Why wouldn't they just abort in the first place? My guess is that they don't believe abortion is the personal choice for them.

Men can take precautions to ensure they don't get a girl pregnant. They know they don't have any real say in what happens to the child.
 
There are many reasons given for sealing them.

The first reason is so that 6 months, 1, 3, 5, 10 years later the birth-mother doesn't suddenly appear claiming now she has her life straight and wants her child back - putting the child and adoptive parents into both an emotional and leagal fight.

Other reasons are in some ways it isn't then an adoption, but a loan, of a child for which at anytime, without warning, a child could search out the birth-mother due to conflict with the parents or the birth-mother could seek out the child. The concept of newborn adoption is a total swap of who the parents of the child are, not an ongoing quasi-relationship with the birth-mother who gave up (abandoned) the child a birth.

On the birth-mother's end, she is giving up the child at birth by agreement because she doesn't want the child. Opening up birth records would make that impossible for her to do.

I've never heard of anyone who was adopted at or near birth that had a good experience in searching out their birth-mother and bio-family.
 
There are many reasons given for sealing them.

The first reason is so that 6 months, 1, 3, 5, 10 years later the birth-mother doesn't suddenly appear claiming now she has her life straight and wants her child back - putting the child and adoptive parents into both an emotional and leagal fight.

That can be a huge problem in adoptions. My great aunt back in the late '50's got pregnant by a married man and was pressured to give the baby up for adoption by the guy and her family. She moved to CA to give birth and once she had the baby she knew she had made an awful mistake and since she had the adoption information she started a legal battle for the baby right away and lost. Her whole life she regretted it terribly and lived a rather lonely and sad life. No one in the family knew, except my grandma and her sisters, about this until my great aunt died and we found a suitcase full of letters to the parents begging to let her talk or see her dating back from when the child was born up about 18 years and the court documents.We also found letters from her daughter that she explained she found out about her as her birth mother and wanted to see her, but that's about all it said and there was never any mention about any meeting or anything like that to us, her family. It explained alot to us about her but it was also so sad to hear about someone going though something like that. So it's hard for me to say if it always best to know all that because it can be hard on everyone. I would say though the child has a right to know everything and can make a decision on their own what they want to do with their knowledge.



I've never heard of anyone who was adopted at or near birth that had a good experience in searching out their birth-mother and bio-family.


I've heard bad and some good. Truly though it's only been one good story about a friend who found her birth mother who gave her up at 16 and they started a good relationship and she still lives with her adoptive mother. However, most adoption stories I have heard from people don't turn out that way.
 
Do you really believe that women would terminate the pregnancy because of what could happen in 18+ years?

If they have absolutely no control over having that child coming back to find them down the road, then I'm sure some might. A person has a right to privacy and if they do not wish to be found, that should be respected, no matter how much their birth child may wish otherwise.
 
I think they should be open for more than these few of reasons.

1. Medical reasons. Knowing your family history can be a life-saver... literally.
2. The only person who should make this decision is the adoptee. A third party having control over these issues is preposterous.
3. Knowing the biological parents in no way diminishes the relationship with the real parents.

My adviser was adopted as a kid, he said the best thing ever was that they closed off adoption records. First off, he even talked to a doctor about the genetics thing, if there's markers or something for genetic disease. The doctor said why? If you get it, you get it. If you have the test and it confirms you have something; the only thing it will do will be to make it near impossible to get insurance to cover you when you need it.

He has seen families ruined by interference of the parents, either adoptive of biological, when both are known about. Is it possible for this not to be the case? Of course, but on average it will happen with a fairly good frequency. If the child is raised by a family and becomes successful, then there's nothing to prevent the birth parents from trying to get back in. The reverse is true as well. Maybe a family has given up a child early in their marriage when they don't have means to support; but later become very successful. There can then be a lot of resentment from child towards birth parents.

I do agree that if you are to have this, the only one able to open records should be the one whom was adopted. But I think it behooves many people to think about this; knowing the truth won't necessarily bring about a better circumstance. Those given up for adoption were given up for adoption for a reason and the one's whom raised you and loved you are your true parents anyway. You can drudge up extremely painful memories, or hurt whole new ones; and these affects are well more probable than a Disney ending.
 
If they have absolutely no control over having that child coming back to find them down the road, then I'm sure some might. A person has a right to privacy and if they do not wish to be found, that should be respected, no matter how much their birth child may wish otherwise.

They gave up their right to privacy when they fornicated. Let them get a restraining order if the first meeting doesn't go well.
 
They gave up their right to privacy when they fornicated. Let them get a restraining order if the first meeting doesn't go well.

Oh, and where in the Constitution does this "giving up their right to privacy" appear? I just don't see it, maybe you can point it out to me. :roll:
 
Oh, and where in the Constitution does this "giving up their right to privacy" appear? I just don't see it, maybe you can point it out to me. :roll:

You realize that the Constitution only protects citizens from the government intruding on rights don't you?
 
You realize that the Constitution only protects citizens from the government intruding on rights don't you?

Ah, so private citizens can intrude on another private citizen's rights to, say... property, huh? It's not the government doing the intruding... :roll:
 
Ah, so private citizens can intrude on another private citizen's rights to, say... property, huh? It's not the government doing the intruding... :roll:

It depends on the situation, but yes. That can happen.

Civil lawsuits being an example.
 
Ah, so private citizens can intrude on another private citizen's rights to, say... property, huh? It's not the government doing the intruding... :roll:

Where does The Constitution say "thou shall not trespass"? You brought up The Constitution.
 
Back
Top Bottom