Why are people against adoption records being open?

Question

Do you think people have the right to know where they came from when they turn 18? Why do you believe that adoption records should be kept closed?

I just don't understand. I just saw a question on yahoo about adoption. The question said something like, "Should people know who their parents were in a closed adoption?" And some people said, "Always open" and there were thumbs down.

I just want to know why. I don't get it. I'm not adopted and my parents have been married more 17 years, so I just don't get it.

Answer 1

I can't think of a single valid reason why adoption records shouldn't be open from age 18 - they are in the UK and in other countries such as Australia. My adoption was closed whilst I was a minor, but then I was entitled to my original birth certificate (never used but that's not the point) and other basic information such as my bio mother's full name, date of birth, address at the time of the adoption etc. I can understand why it may occasionally be preferable (even necessary) to have a closed or only semi-open adoption while the adoptee is a child, for example if the natural parents were abusive or their lifestyles posed an immediate risk to the child's safety, but when an adoptee reaches adulthood they should be given at least the basic details of their background.



Some adoptees will never want to search for their bio family, and that's fine. Others are desperate to search, some will not feel an immediate need but may change their minds later in life, maybe when they have kids of their own. Every adoptee has the right to at least be given a proper starting point for their search.



There are some bio parents (hopefully a very small percentage) who would rather not be traced - but to my mind that's tough. Even if they choose not to maintain a relationship with their child after reunion, they should at least be prepared to answer the question 'why?'



Edit @ Frockney - disagree with such sweeping statements. Every single situation is unique, and not every parent who's lost a child is a blameless paragon of virtue.

Answer 2

1

Answer 3

I don't understand it either as it doesn't benefit anybody least of all adoptees and natural parents. Most natural parents want to be found but even if they don't want contact then they can make that choice if found. The same goes for adoptees who don't want contact.



If parents have made bad choices in life or have abused they child my opinion still stands as adoptees still have a right to information. They still have a right to medical information and extended family members.



Children raised by their parents know all this so adoptees deserve the same respect. In the UK records are open and it works well here so I don't understand why people can't 'get it'. Using the argument that a parent tried to kill their child doesn't swing it for me either as the adoptee still has a right to know the truth.



My mum was verbally abusive towards me and had I been adopted I would still want to know the truth.

Answer 4

I dont know. There is NO promise or guarantee of privacy when you give up a child. I know this, because I have done so. 99% of the women who voluntarily give up a child WANT privacy from that child its just part of the paperwork - so WE dont accidentally contact sd child. I am 42 years old and in the US. I cannot get my birth certificate. I cannot get my medical records. I cannot find out who my 3 older siblings are. So.

I can imagine there are some instances where they need to keep privacy - children that have been taken away for horrible abuse or something but MOST NEWBORN adoptions in the US are NOT for this reason.

Answer 5

I believe there is nothing wrong with adoption records being open IF the biological parents knew at the time they put the child up for adoption that their identity would be available to the child at age 18. Where I have a beef is with laws that are applied retroactively. I think it is unfair to the biological parents to think that their identities will be protected only to have the laws changed year later and their privacy invaded. I know of at least one woman who placed her baby for adoption 40 years ago who desperately wants her identity kept secret and has revealed to me that she would have aborted (either legally or illegally) had she known that her identity could someday be revealed.

Answer 6

There are many reasons why the records should not be opened. In some cases the biological parents really don't want the baby and just want to get rid of it. I had a friend who paid a private detective to trace her biological mother - who she was devastated to discover was an alcoholic prostitute who had had so many babies and given them up for adoption, she couldn't even remember how many! She didn't want to know her daughter, didn't have a clue who the daughter's father could have been, and refused to have anything to do with her after the daughter (my friend) refused to hand over the money her biological mother tried to extort from her.



In many cases, though, the mother has given up the baby because she is unable to afford to raise it herself. It is a terribly painful time for her and the only way she can cope is to force herself to get on with her life. She may go on to have a career that would be at risk if it was known she had given up a baby for adoption. She may go on to marry and have a family who don't know about the baby she had adopted. She spends the rest of her life carrying the secret but intense love she will always have for her secret baby. But if that baby suddenly turns up, it could ruin her life, ruin the lives of her family, and perhaps others.



Of course, there are other scenarios. Some adoptive parents spend years desperately wishing and waiting for their child to contact them. But even then it doesn't always end happily. Some babies are taken away because the parents are considered a danger to the child. This has to be pretty serious. So the file is closed for a reason. It would not be safe for the child to contact the adoptive mother. Even when the file is open, I know so many adopted children who were disappointed in their biological parents, and sometimes even taken advantage of by them and had their lives ruined by them. The trouble is, unless it is an open adoption, you just don't know what you are dealing with. Most teenagers go through a difficult time with their parents, so this is often when adoptees decide that they want to contact their biological parents. This is tough on the adoptive parents who may be trying their best with a very difficult teenager. And if the biological parent is found, it may be difficult for the teenager who discovers 'mom' is not the person she always dreamed she would be.

Answer 7

I think the majority of people agree that adoption records should at least partially be open especially in regards to medical information. The difference of opinion comes in in regards to whether or not identifying information should be given to an adoptee about their biological parents or does the privacy rights of the biological parents take precedent over the right of the adoptee to know? There are good arguments on both sides and it is something our state legislators will have to think about since the trend is moving towards open records and/or mutual consent registries.



As for the thumbs down, sometimes that really has nothing to do with how valid ones argument is. A lot of people will thumbs down a post simply because they have the opposite view or they don't like the person. It doesn't really have anything to do with the issue at hand sometimes.

Answer 8

It makes no sense to me. In what other instance is an adult held to a "contract" made on his or her behalf without her consent when he or she was a minor?



I *gasp* talk to my biological family all the time. Still love my adoptive parents too.

All records should be open.



Period. End of sentence.



Wishing you well.

Answer 9

99,99% of natural parents want to be reunited with their lost children, 97,3 % of them had no choice in the matter anyway, they were forced to surrender their children.



Many adopters use double speak when talking about the adoption, that is if they talk about it at all.



They said "child X came to us", whereas the child did not go to them of their own accord, they were fetched our brought, etc..



They say they respect the right of bio-parents to privacy, whereas they just want to exclude any challenge to their parenting and are scared that the child they raised "as their own" will prefer their blood parents after all.



They say the adopted child was "chosen". Of course, the child was not "chosen". It was the only one they could get their hands on. There is a shortage of adoptable, healthy white children...



Closed adoptions are only there for the adopters' sake. The adoptees and the bio parents suffer under this system.



http://www.amfor.net/

Answer 10

"Always" is too broad a term.



Should someone who tried to kill his child be entitled to know where she is now, so he can go back and have another go? Really?



That is what "always open" would mean. Always is always. Not oh, but of course not if it would be wrong.

Answer 11

Because it can cause issues with the child's adoptive parents. And slot of the time the birth parents are not proud of what they have done by giving their baby away or just want to forget about it so they don't want to be found and have to face their child