Joan Wheeler says adoptee’s have a civil right to their sealed birth certificates! Since when?
Joan Wheeler says adoptee’s have a civil right to their sealed birth certificates! Since when?
On a Internet news site I found the following rant of Joan Wheeler using her AKA of halforphan56. My comments follow each segment.
Know that I have no opinions nor agendas regarding any issue of adoption reform. My sole purpose for presenting Joan’s words and arguments is to show up her lies, misrepresentations and her many misunderstandings of reality. Personally I do have to wonder at the inappropriate use of certain terms that Joan Wheeler and other adoptees use when they are arguing for their cause, but since their cause is NOT my cause I will plead ignorance. That being said, it does not take away from the fact that, in my opinion and perhaps many others, that the misplacement and misuse of certain words and phrases STILL need to be pointed out as extremely misleading to the general public.
An example would be in these adoptees MISunderstanding of the purpose of adoption. For clarity sake here is a definition. Adoption: The official transfer through the court system of all of the parental rights that a biological parent has to a child, along with an assumption by the adopting parent of all of the parental rights of the biological parents that are being terminated and are assumed in their entirety by the adoptive parents, including the responsibility for the care and supervision of the child, its nurturing and training, its physical and emotional health, and its financial support.
This definition assumes a more legal sense, but nonetheless, it is accurate and it is WHAT some adoptees object to. Why? I can’t fully say, but knowing Joan Wheeler, I would have to say that it boils down to the fact that some adoptees feel and believe in a great conspiracy AGAINST them, from the moment they were adopted, even under the best of circumstances. So here is where I found Joan and her statements.
By Star-Ledger Guest Columnist The Star-Ledger | Friday, February 04, 2011, 5:43 AM
halforphan56 February 05, 2011 at 7:13PM
Part 1: A contact intermediary system would only facilitate possible reunions or prevent reunions between an adoptee and natural parents, but it does not provide what adoptees are seeking: the civil right to our pre-adoption birth certificates. There are no rights of natural parents to be protected at all since their parental rights were taken away at the surrender of the child. This isn’t about contact: it is about the civil rights of adoptees to their sealed birth certificates.
Gert says: Is there a civil right to having a pre-adoption birth certificate? Let’s look, again, at definitions, taken from an on-line site “Civil Rights” vs. “Civil Liberties” – FindLaw
It is important to note the difference between “civil rights” and “civil liberties.” The legal area known as “civil rights” has traditionally revolved around the basic right to be free from unequal treatment based on certain protected characteristics (race, gender, disability, etc.) in settings such as employment and housing. “Civil liberties” concern basic rights and freedoms that are guaranteed — either explicitly identified in the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, or interpreted through the years by courts and lawmakers. Civil liberties include:
- Freedom of speech
- The right to privacy
- The right to be free from unreasonable searches of your home
- The right to a fair court trial
- The right to marry
- The right to vote
One way to consider the difference between “civil rights” and “civil liberties” is to look at 1) what right is affected, and 2) whose right is affected. For example, as an employee, you do not have the legal right to a promotion, mainly because getting a promotion is not a guaranteed “civil liberty.” But, as a female employee you do have the legal right to be free from discrimination in being considered for that promotion — you cannot legally be denied the promotion based on your gender (or race, or disability, etc.). By choosing not to promote a female worker solely because of the employee’s gender, the employer has committed a civil rights violation and has engaged in unlawful employment discrimination based on sex or gender.
Gert says…Seems to me that legislature needs to be rewritten before one can use ‘rights’ to anything related to adoption and the fact that Joan Wheeler and others insist on their ‘civil rights’ being violated shows their ignorance of the very words and concepts they use. So when Joan says…This isn’t about contact: it is about the civil rights of adoptees to their sealed birth certificates is she RIGHT? or is she just bullshitting?
Halforphan56 Part2: There is the assumption that all adoptees come from “shameful” births that “need” to be hidden. This is just not so. There are many adoptees who were relinquished by widowed parents, divorced parents, and parents who remain married after surrender. None of these adoptions warrant the stigma of illegitimacy and the dictates of a handful of mothers who want their perceived right to privacy. They don’t have a right to privacy because all their rights were tossed out of the window when they signed the relinquishment papers. I am a half orphan and I see no reason why these mothers’ feel that their perceived rights should supersede my right to my own birth certificate: I am not illegitimate so their logic does not apply to me, or other half or full orphans, or step-parent adoptees or foster care adoptees.
Gert says: Is there REALLY a stigma of illegitimacy about adoption? I doubt it. I adopted my own son with my second husband…certainly nothing illegitimate about that and certainly no stigma was ever utter over it, only by Joan who said I was harming him by adopting him. Personally I think it’s all in Joan’s warped mind. Somewhere in her childhood, being raised by those adopted parents, she was taught some pretty weird things, certainly nothing like the way we blood siblings were raised. Joan has a very unhealthy attitude towards many things and such attitudes are LEARNED.
Oh and did you caught this…handful of mothers who want their perceived right to privacy…there is that ‘right’ again! I am a half orphan and I see no reason why these mothers’ feel that their perceived rights should supersede my right to my own birth certificate...there you have it…according to Joan if someone else has a RIGHT than Joan MUST have the same right to have that RIGHT. Again, it is only Joan that has the NEED to constantly talk about RIGHTS that she doesn’t have while she walks over everyone else’s right when ever she can.
Halforphan56 Part 3: Adoption legitimizes the illegitimate. Since I was born legitimately to married parents, I did not need to be legitimized by adoption. My legitimate and true birth certificate was sealed upon finalization of my adoption and a falsified birth certificate was issued to replace it. I want my legitimate birth certificate returned to me. My argument is not a slap in the face to my fellow adoptees, it is simple fact. I am an adoptee and I stand with my fellow adoptees (illegitimate and orphaned) for the right to our true birth certificates. Whatever we do with our birth certificates is up to us. Our birth identities are on these documents, therefore, they belong to us and no one else.
Gert says: This is wrong logic…adoption DOES NOT legitimize a person. Adoption TAKES a person INTO a family unit, what was is no longer there…where that person was or what circumstance that person had before adoption does not exist anymore. That is the WHOLE purpose behind closed records. Personally I feel medical information ought to be made available to the adoptee, but that in itself and other aspects of birth records, does not make adoption a legitimatizing venture.
Halforphan56 Part 4: We are adults and do not need parental permission to do anything in life. Our adoptive parents lost their parental rights over us when we reached adulthood. Our natural parents lost all their parental rights to us when they signed relinquishment papers. It is that simple. There is no need for a compromise between a small segment of mothers who wish to hide behind illegitimacy forcing even orphans to comply and the total number of affected adoptees. ALL adoptees deserve access to their true birth certificates sealed from them, not just some adoptees who fit any bill of compromise. All adoptees are denied their civil rights, therefore, write a bill that will return civil rights to all currently victimized adopted citizens. To those who oppose adoptees access to our birth certificates: What part of denied civil rights to adoptees do you not understand?
Gert says: Again, here is that faulty thinking process…civil rights to a birth certificate!
Halforphan56 Part 5: Why are adoptees’ birth certificates falsified immediately upon adoption? The answer is to hide illegitimacy. But half of adoptees are not illegitimate and should not be banned from their birth certificates based upon presumption of illegitimacy. The logical solution is to maintain the right to the original and true birth certificate and to produce an adoption certificate upon adoption. But that point is missed by the ACLU and Right to Life. Even if a mother is in hiding, if her daughter or son is never adopted after relinquishment, that PERSON has the right to her birth certificate at any age, indeed, that right becomes actual use of the birth certificate throughout life with no repercussions on the parents who relinquished. If no adoption takes place the birth certificate remains unsealed. It is the stigma of adoption itself that is driving this unnecessary debate.
Gert says: Again…faulty thinking…certificates are NOT falsified nor are they used to hide illegitimacy. Their purpose is part of a society’s record keeping for their populations, to register births and any other CHANGES that occur with any particular individual in the course of their life. A person is born, gets a Social Security number, and other forms of ID. If a name is changed that is NOT falsification, it is a CHANGE. And again, Joan has to assert that there is a STIGMA to adoption and that there is a conspiracy against adoptees.
No wonder these angry adoptees can’t get the proper attention and real changes made in the laws…because…of their faulty thinking. These people are not able to stand on their platform without going after people and browbeating them into submission. Why don’t they do it the right and proper way, by getting the right persons to lobbying the law makers, correctly. If they think that by going out on new sites and browbeating regular people that they can ‘change’ public opinions, they are wrong. People don’t respond to bullying!