Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
it matters for what? i understand that for many adopted kids, its very important to them to know their birth parents. however, its just a desire to satisfy personal curiosity. i dont see it as being "legally important" where they should have this right to the information even if the birth parent doesnt want them to.
I say heredity doesn't matter and should be ignored.
Reality disagrees on the first part. Your heredity affects who you are.
Quote:
Determinism is poisonous nonsense. It is an attempt to escape from one's own incompetence by externalizing it to some diffuse and arbitrary pre-determination or destiny. Which is garbage. There is no destiny. There is no fate. There is no predetermination.
Determinism is a separate issue. If determinism is true, there's no point to anything; even this thread is simply playing out the way it was predetermined to.
Heredity matters to me and it's not a crutch, curse, or an excuse to discover one's own convictions. I don't care what matters to you. You come off as a very harsh, uncaring individual. Yet, you are passionate when you write, so this can't be true. You have a right to feel the way you do, (we all do) but can you say it in a way to not make it sound like others are crazy, if they disagree with your beliefs.
I do believe heredity matters to you. And others. My argument is that it shouldn't.
It may sound harsh (how could such an argument sound otherwise?), but I believe it to be the truth. Others will disagree. That is really the point of these forums. Opinions and ideas. I prefer not to window dress mine. They just go out there, and the public can embrace, ignore, or object at their pleasure.
Vigorous unedited debate is more interesting than overly polite debate any day of the week. Too much civility can be a bore, so I'm doing my part to avoid such a fate.
Reality disagrees on the first part. Your heredity affects who you are.
Maybe 3%. Your character and quality determine the other 97%. And since you can control your character, but cannot control your heredity, it is logical to conclude that it is a waste of time to dwell on your heredity, while it is a productive use of your time to improve your character.
This is reflected in The Serenity Prayer that we all know and love:
God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.
So, for an adoptee to go on a Fantastic Voyage to ascertain the identity of the two irrelevant organisms who spent 30 meaningless seconds of their lives producing the embryo that resulted in his birth, is, to me, a waste of time and effort. And a misdirection of energy and attention focusing on the things they cannot change.
But even in a normal life, wasting time thinking about the limits of your forebears, and how they have, or must, become your own limits? Outrageous. You are not your parents and you are not your heredity. Quoting Invictus:
It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate:
I am the captain of my soul.
I do believe heredity matters to you. And others. My argument is that it shouldn't.
It may sound harsh (how could such an argument sound otherwise?), but I believe it to be the truth. Others will disagree. That is really the point of these forums. Opinions and ideas. I prefer not to window dress mine. They just go out there, and the public can embrace, ignore, or object at their pleasure.
Vigorous unedited debate is more interesting than overly polite debate any day of the week. Too much civility can be a bore, so I'm doing my part to avoid such a fate.
I have to agree with you. The majority of us really don't care about heredity. We listen politely to stories of ancestors or relatives we never met but don't really give a crap. They have no bearing on our lives and what we do with it. At most it is a curiosity even for those with intense interest of the past.
However, it has been drilled into adoptees head that heredity is important, medical records is important, their civil rights are being taken away and the fairy tale of a happy reunion is important all excuses to get birth certificates opened.
The truth is life is what you make it. The truth is we always yearn for something we don't have. A name on a piece of paper, heredity, none if matters what mattered was you got a chance at making life what you want it to be because a birth mother chose adoption instead of abortion.
Let's first ban all the adoption mills... the fake-Christian adoption agencies that pressure vulnerable young women to give up their child so the child can have a "better life" rather than providing job training, affordable housing, and teaching parenting skills so the kid can stay with his mother. They are nothing better than child abduction agencies.
How can anyone let their child go and not wish to someday be reunited with their flesh and blood?
Opponents of this bill are trying to protect the adoptive parents... it is not about protecting the privacy of "birth mothers." Anyone who uses the term "birth mother" is a proponent of the adoption industry which steals children away from their mothers and fathers.
People sign legal documents to surrender their children. A person who considers the options and makes the best decision for the situation does not regret later on. THat is just maudlin.
Really...I would absolutely think that I am entitled to know the medical history of my parents and what genetic issues I might have or what I may someday pass on to my children. Do you know the medical histories of your biological parents...and if they had a genetic disorder that could effect your children or future children would you not want to know?
The bottom line is most adoptions today are open (and I know the facts because I recently looked into adoption) and this point will be mute...
I don't think this issue affects many people in a serious way at all. I know my parent's health history, which is of no help at all. I don't know that of my grandparents, though. Ask me if I care. Some genetically carried weaknesses skip generations, though, and if I were really as concerned as you I would be looking into my grandparent's ailments.
Well, I do have a dairy sensitivity and as far as I know there is no one who had that, though it is supposed to be hereditary.
I don't think the inherited ailment concept is important, but just a way of pushing forward a person's insistence in knowing the birth parents.
This sort of controversy is just another issue to factor into a woman's choice re abortion.
why should they feel obligated to explain anything to you?
everyone wants to have their sad story it seems. "ohhh i have suffered terribly as an adoptee, i cant even face my accuser! woe, is me!"
Yeah. I was reared by my birth parents and cannot tell you how many times I was convinced that I must have been adopted. I insisted on seeing my birth certificate and looked closely for typeovers and erasures.
Most kids probably feel this way and just get over it. These people, though, have information that just feeds into the delusions. They should just consider themselves lucky that they were born, in my opinion, and stop acting like brats. Think of how those adoptive parents must feel. They might not express it, but it must make them feel sad. How selfish.
It was mentioned before that by now any birth parent who was interested in a meeting with the offspring would have registered to do so. Those who have not are the ones being pursued by this proposed change. Obviously, they don't want to be bothered and these birth children will most likely register shock or disappointment if they meet these uncaring parents.
What makes anyone believe that these parents who do not wish to meet these children would talk to them anyway, or give them medical history? I agree, they'd probably get a door slammed in their faces.
Last edited by goldengrain; 02-11-2012 at 04:50 PM..
Could you send a quick email if you oppose this bill to your legislature or Governor Christie (who has already conditonal vetoed it last year but it is re-introduced this year. Many of these woman are elderly who have been able to keep their privacy for over 50 years. Many aren't internet literate and many aren't aware of the possibility of this law changing. They can't organize, create websites to gather support without their identities being known.
It isn't just about past birth parents it changes adoption in the future ( many of those wanting adoption reform also want to end adoption). It is about woman's right to choice. It is about a right to privacy and not having it taken away. A mutual consent where birth parents who want to and adoptees who want to can unite.
Good to see that adoption records will be unsealed in NJ
This is good news for adoptees and many birthmothers.
Even those birthmothers who want no contact are BETTER protected in states/countries with unsealed records.
This is because they can actively put on a veto and thus when the adoptee goes through the official channels to get their OBC and find a veto, they will know that their bparent doesn't want contact and it stops right there.
I know that there is a particular "maternal source" (her words) out there who is protesting against unsealing records because her biological daughter unknowingly contacted a relative of this woman (the adoptee thought she was just contacting a solicitor). If the adoption records had already been unsealed, then what would have happened is that "maternal source" could have put a veto on, adoptee would have gone through official channels to apply for her OBC and told that there was a veto and thus NO contact would have ever been made. "Maternal source" would have been better off if the NJ records had been unsealed.
6 states and countless other western countries have unsealed adoption records and society hasn't collapsed. In fact, bmothers who want no contact probably feel MORE protected as they know they will not be contacted. In closed records states, they can still be contacted through CIs. Also with the popularity of DNA, one would hope that these reluctant bmothers don't have siblings who are into genealogy and have registered with Family Tree DNA/23 and me etc.
As for confidentiality, they deserve and get confidentiality from society knowing about their secret - however, confidentiality was never originally about protection from their child knowing who they are. The sealing of records came about to protect the adoptive parents/family from "interference" by the bparents - the major opponent of opening records is the NCFA - in fact, they were formed for this very reason. Note also that adoption records are SEALED at the time of adoption - if a woman relinquished a child but the child never ended up being adopted, then that child would have access to their birth certificate - the sealing of an OBC is reliant on an actual adoption taking place. Also, many adoptive parents were given the names of the bparents, even, I am sure, of those who were told that the adoption was confidential.
For those who wish to know more about the history of the sealing of adoption records, here you are:
Btw I am an adoptee. I was born and live in open records countries. The bmothers in those countries who don't want contact are well protected. In one of the countries, if they put a veto on, they can also put a letter in the file to explain why - I think that can help the adoptee know more about the reasons.
Another way that unsealing records can make things better is that because adoptees apply for their OBCs through official channels, then those official channels can also control education if they so wish. I received an excellent booklet from the government which helped explain how bparents might feel and way of making contact and I am sure that that has helped people more prepared for the possible eventualities.
In the end, it will all be a storm in a teacup. I do understand the fears of bmothers but they often don't realise that in fact, they will be well treated and, in fact, perhaps be better off.
It is interesting to note that each time a state decides to open records and they bring out the "horror stories", these stories are from their own state or other closed records states. As I said earlier, "Maternal Source" would probably have been better protected if she and her adopted daughter had had the option to go through official channels because then the adoptee would have known that contact wasn't wanted.
Btw I am in contact with my extended family and things are going well Because my bmother had passed away, a mutual registry would not been of use. I am also very respectful of my bfamily and it took me a long time to work out the best way of making contact. Though I didn't expect it, I have earnt more about myself than before (I can put things in context) and my relatives have told me that they have more of an insight into their much loved sister (who died young). I now have more family than I did before - both my lovely afamily and my lovely bfamily. Life is good
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
