“Keeping [birth] records closed perpetuates the myth
that open adoption is a fringe movement,
flirting with the potentially dangerous idea
of not cutting adoptees off from their families of origin.”
“Closed records play into the fiction that there is something
shameful in adoptees’ pasts. … They reinforce the idea
that first parents should disappear into the shadows
after relinquishment if they know what’s best for them
and their child. They suggest to adoptive parents that
the only way to be their child’s real parent is to see
themselves as replacements for the biological parents.”
“They [closed records] are simply an outdated and unwarranted
part of adoption … premised on the idea that adopted children
needed to be protected from the wayward parents who conceived
them and the stigma of illegitimacy. First parents needed to hide
their shameful secret from prying eyes. Adoptive parents needed to
be able to pretend they were a biological family.”
Wow. Is anyone else hearing the harps and angels sounding — or is it just me?
Kudos to Heather at Production, Not Reproduction who’s written a fantastic piece on the connection — yes, there is one! — between open adoption and the need for open records, both issues of import in this, my little corner of the blogosphere.
Anyone visiting here regularly knows how I feel about the need for open birth records, a position fueled initially by the fact my husband’s own closed adoption and the fact that his very own story is not, well, actually his own. You also know how strongly he and I feel about open adoption, and that we are committed to ensuring our daughter Maeve’s adoption remains that way. (Of course, one day she will step to the helm and steer her own course.)
Heather (she’s over there snug in my blogroll, by the way) makes myriad connections in her piece that had me nodding my head yes and thinking I should check for my byline at the top of it. We are absolutely kindred spirits on this.
For all my hours toiling away here with these issues, she’s got me wishing I’d gone and said it this clearly before. (Maybe I have, maybe not, sometimes it’s hard to see the forest for the trees.) All I know is this rings so true with me.
I could keep blathering on about why this piece touched me, how it states so wonderfully why I believe what I do and why I advocate for what I do, but ya know what? I’d be doing it — and you — a disservice.
Just go have a read for yourself.
Now. (Ahem. Please.)
NaBloPoMo Stats: 7 down, 23 to go.