Yesterday, the Judiciary Committee passed a Fiona Ma’s bill, AB 372 that insults adult adoptees by allowing the birth mother who legally relinquished to veto access to their original record of birth. Why would this insult an adult adoptee?  When you are an adult and need to obtain documents about yourself for whatever reason, you shouldn’t have to have permission a relative to do so. It also assumes that the release of factual information about one’s own birth is somehow dangerous to the point that the government has to intervene and provide a witness protection plan. It is as if the state of California doesn’t trust birth mothers and their adult offspring to manage their own private affairs.

For reasons that may include, but are not limited to, rape, incest,

religious beliefs, or personal preference, I do not authorize the

State Registrar to provide a copy of the original and unredacted

birth certificate to the adoptee.

The problem with this plan is there is no way to make sure every birth mother gets the chance to veto without violating their privacy whether it is by certified letter or as one legislator suggested placing an announcement in the newspaper.

I am one of those California adult adoptees and found my birthfamily in 1994 under California’s depression era (not this one, the last one) sealed records law. It turns out that the first 3 months of my life my name was Cynthia Anne Henke and I appear in the California birth index twice. This is because my original birth certificate only gets sealed when an adoption becomes finalized. Once finalized, I get a new birth certificate with my adoptive parents’ names as if they knew I existed at that time.

My parents who raised me were promised that when I turned 18 I would be able to get all my information. It was a lie. It was only in 1983 that California adult adoptees could get non-id information and participate in a passive registry. It was up to a complete stranger to look at my information and determine subjectively what information I could be trusted with.

This sealed record system sprang up in the depression era. Back in the 1930s, states around the nation would often stamp the birth certificates of illegitimate children with the word “illegitimate”. It was a shameful thing to be born out-of-wedlock. Well meaning people decided that wouldn’t it be better for the child if they were given a new birth certificate to hide their shameful origins away from the prying public eye. The original intent of these laws was never to protect the parties of adoption from each other, but provide privacy from the public. The adoption process already transfers legal responsibility from the birth parents to the adoptive parents.

Over the years, agencies and other “professionals” would use this secrecy to do unethical things to Tennessee’s Georgia Tann baby stealing scandal (Tann provided pseudo-twin baby girls to actress Joan Crawford) to a social worker lying to a birth mother to get her to sign a relinquishment form. As someone who ran the premier adoption website in the 1990s, I heard plenty of stories from birth mothers that would tear your heart out at the way they were treated. Under the veil of secrecy, there is no accountability. This is why in California there is a resistance in opening records, because it is clear from the way birth mothers were treated, the state really doesn’t care about their welfare.

With the help of my birth relatives I can trace my birth roots to the 1400s, yet when I walk into the San Francisco Vital Statistics office with this information, I get a blank piece of paper. That is just absurd. I am a law-abiding, tax paying citizen, not a borderline stalker.

My birth mother and birth grandmother voted for the 1998 Oregon Initiative, Measure 58, to allow adult adoptees to unconditionally get their original birth certificates. She will tell you as many other birth mothers will that they were never promised anything, but were told to never contact their offspring and just get over it. I worked on passing Measure 58 with countless birth mothers, many who were victims of rape who went on record on a full page ad in the Oregonian the weekend before the election. 600 birth mothers came forward in less than 48 hours to add their voices with a picture of three generations of birth mothers.

Flush with the victory of Oregon and the opening of records in Alabama, there was an attempt to open records in California. We not only had a great legal ruling of Doe v. Sundquist (1996), but the refusal of the Supreme Court to hear challenges to the Oregon initiative. Reproductive rights do not extend to the right to privacy from one’s offspring. We already had data from Oregon that showed that earth did not crack open and release all the maladies the foes of open records claimed.

I cannot tell you how it felt to hear Darrell Steinberg suggest that we couldn’t be trusted with our own information. How would you feel if a person who represented you and your native state suggested that your birth is so shameful that it deserves to be sealed forever? Legal arguments, experiences in different open states and countries, our testimonies, and another full page ad of birth mothers in support did not matter over the possibility that one or two people out there might not be able to handle their personal interactions well. My information is held hostage to someone else’s potential embarrassment.

Some would say that it is only piece of paper and ask, “What is the big deal?” It is true that it is a piece of paper and not all adopted persons care about accessing it. I would like for my native state to restore my right to my own information and trust that I will do the right thing. I want the reason why I want my original birth certificate to be my business and I shouldn’t have to do an inch more than any other native Californian to get that.

Why can’t I be treated like adopted persons in Britain, Alaska, Alabama, Oregon, Kansas, New Hamspire, and Maine?  

(Candidates made quite the effort to talk with bloggers at the convention. Thanks for writing your experience up, Marinmaven. – promoted by Brian Leubitz)

Something is happening in the 44th Congressional District and it is excellerating. Whether it is the economy or changing demographics, Bill Hedrick wants harness that change into a win for republican, Ken Calvert’s congressional seat.  

I got to meet Bill Hedrick last Saturday at the 2009 California Democratic Party Convention in Sacramento. He looks like a teacher and it turns out that is his exact background. He is the President of the Rialto Teacher’s Association and was elected for 4 terms as president of the Corona-Norco Unified School District.

I am from Marin County where the democratic candidate always wins to the point that I suspect the Marin Republican Party picks their doomed candidates to run by lottery and perhaps as part of a hazing ritual. Being a Marinite means if you want to make a difference in the state or the country, you have to take a look at the difficult districts in the state and see what you can do.

District 44 is difficult. So difficult, when Bill Hedrick ran in 2008 his candidacy was off the radar of the DCCC and most everyone else. He lost, but not as much as other candidates in similar districts. District 44 is Riverside County and South Orange County. While he did well in Riverside, he had real problems with conservative Orange County. Hendrick points out that The Real Housewives of OC film in this district.

So the big question in the room was, how can he win this time?

First of all, this time around his calls to the PACS are being returned. The DCCC is helping with messaging. There is an ad running that points out that the incumbent republican voted against the stimulus package that would have benefited the 44th District more than any district in California.    

Of course, Bill Hedrick knows there is much more his campaign can do. Last election he had little over 900 volunteers and it was a very grassroots campaign. The contributions amounted to 900 contribution with the average contribution being $65. Often it was clear that the contributors were digging way deep into their pockets to make a meager contribution. He recognizes that he needs to expand is volunteer base and create a national contributor base. Hedrick needs more feet on the ground in Ladera Ranch.

Another area of growth is in voter registration. While Orange county portion of his district has a registration rate of 90%, Riverside County has only 50%.

Hedrick points out that the inland empire is issue oriented which is good for cross-over voters. He has been able to have the conservative voters in his district take another look at him because of his opposition to the TARP bill and his support of the stimulus bill. The people in his district are facing a 60% loss in equity in their homes and there are blocks where you can find 10 empty homes or more from foreclosure.

Hedrick believes that the Obama plan for renegotiating mortgages is not enough for Californians even in his district.

He is also concerned about the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. His family is a military family that has seen a total of 10 deployments. Hedrick feels strongly that last year was the time for troops to start pulling out and give the responsibilities to the Iraqis. The concern is that there will always be discoveries that will lead to new excuses that will keep us from getting out.

Personally, I got a really nice vibe from him.  

Wouldn’t it be great if we could win this seat?

http://www.hedrickforcongress….

(keep ’em coming.  It’s a beautiful weekend for equality. – promoted by Dante Atkins (hekebolos))

It was an amazing day for a rally. The sun was warm and the skies were clear for the Anti-Prop 8 Rally in front of the City of San Rafael City Hall. Organizers put the the crowd at least 500 which is plenty given the venue and perhaps many in the County chose to go to San Francisco rally. Everyone in the crowd was friendly and in good spirits despite the major setback of the passage of Prop 8. There was a sense that out of this defeat that the real movement had begun.  

It was not surprising that the majority of those attending were families, because after all people move up here to raise their kids here. Signs ran out pretty quickly, and there was one little girl who wanted to hold a sign so I let her have mine. Nearby kids were lining up to jump in piles of leaves as leaves rained down on them when a breeze hit.

Attendees with their partners wore buttons showing how long they have been together. There were plenty of couples who had been together 20+ years. There were straights like myself and progressive clergy there as well. A young women with rainbow colored wings held a sign, “They will know we are Christians by our Love”.

A KTVU (Channel 2) news helicopter hummed overhead for some time.

The rally had spilled out to the opposite side of Fifth Street and cars would drive by and honk in support. Marin County did vote against Proposition 8 by 73%. To thinking and compassionate people the injustice of Proposition is quite apparent. As long as one minority group can have their rights stripped, rights of minorities of all kinds are not safe.  

One gentleman was carrying a large “Don’t Tread on Me” Flag. There was a sign by the stage that said, “Morman Law is Now Morman Law,” in reference to the Morman Church’s massive contribution to the Yes on 8 campaign.

Local musicians pitched in and so did our local politicians. San Rafael City Councilman, Damon Connolly spoke about how disappointed his family were about the outcome of Proposition 8. Marin County Supervisor, Susan Adams (District 1) spoke in solidarity with the No on 8 movement.

Fliers were being handed out about next weekend’s rally in Sacramento, “Take It To Sacramento”. It will be on Saturday, November 22, 2008 at 2:00pm at the State Capitol Building and they are hoping for at least 30,000 people. For more information, go to www.californiaoutreach.com.

I am hoping that the turnout totally blows away expectations and becomes 50,000 to 100,000 people or more.