73adoptee Bears Witness for Those "Left Behind"

73adoptee has a crucial blog, which can be found here, "Compromise Legislation: Why Some and Not Others", which I consider a must-read for everyone interested in AB 372 (Asm. Ma, D-San Francisco). It is crucial not simply for 73adoptee's eloquence and intelligence, it is crucial because of who 73adoptee is: an adoptee left behind by compromise legislation. One of the rhetorical methods used by C.A.R.E is to reduce adoptees to numbers, to statistics. But adoptees who have been left behind have their own voices, and we should listen to them before we marginalize any more.

I attended an AAC conference back in the late nineties, not as a registrant, but as a guest of their Board to discuss ways in which AAC and BN could work together on legislative campaigns. The conference took place in Nashville, Tennessee, and was themed as a celebration of the enactment and implementation of Tennessee's open records law. There were many happy folks in attendance; adoptees and first mothers who had effected successful search and contact, many testimonies of the law's beneficial impacts. Since I was a guest and not a registrant, though, I wasn't allowed to attend the official programs, so I roamed the halls, talking with people, which is what I prefer to do anyway. It was in the hotel lobby, by the registration table, that I met a young man who was not celebrating.

This young man explained to me that he was a subject of Tennessee's contact veto provision. The contact veto worked this way; he was allowed access to his records of birth, but since his first mother had made a simple check in a box on a form, he was not allowed, under civil and criminal penalties, from making contact with her. Or his siblings. Or his uncles, aunts, cousins... Anyone with a relationship with his first mother. Ever. Now, bear in mind that most, if not all, of these people with the exception of his first mother, probably had no idea that this adoptee even existed. They wouldn't know that there is a de facto permanent restraining order on this young man placed in their name.

There weren't any banners at the conference celebrating this young man, who looked shell-shocked and bereft. He did not expect to be called to the podium and applauded along with the other first mother/adoptee dyads. He was truly and utterly screwed, invisible, a non-entity. He didn't count, he was one of the .02% or so we are told must be sacrificed so the other 99+% can be made whole under the law. It's actually more than we are told if you count adoptees born in the "donut" hole in states that carve out years, even decades, in which adoptees are born that can expect no records.

Those of us who insist that every adult adoptee has a right to unconditional access to their unaltered records of birth are being told in California that we should accept compromise for the greater good. One of the first things we were told at the beginning of this year's legislative effort is that if we will not accept compromise then we shouldn't be involved. We are "divisive", we threaten "unity". We were more interested in "statements" than working in the "real world". Basically, we were told that we should accept that we are invisible, that we didn't count, that we are non-entities. If we weren't ready to celebrate, then we were welcome to roam the halls like ghosts, like that young man in Nashville.

Again, it is clear that we need to contact Assemblywoman Fiona Ma, the author of AB 372, and let her know we believe that no adoptee deserves to be left behind, invisible, excommunicated. Her webpage, with contact info, is linked here.