Email to John Rustin

Welcome

NC Coalition for Adoption Reform

"This is, in fact the 21st century and I believe it is time to add maturity to this 20th century legislation"

[NC General Statute Chapter 48 - Adoptions] by L. Gibowski

From: Marysia Marts
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 22:47:16 -0400
To: <jrustin@ncfamily.org>
Cc: Roberta MacDonald

Dear Mr. Rustin,

I am concerned that you have decided to speak on my behalf as a birthmother. Not one thing that you mentioned in the address to the NC legislature represents my views.

I placed my son for adoption in 1979 when a closed adoption was my only choice. I didn't have a clue at the time that when my son was 18 or 21 he would not be able to contact the agency and find out who I was. Below is a quote from you:

"Allowing non-consenting biological parents or other family members to be contacted without prior consent would result in the significant disruption of families across North Carolina and cause great harm to the public's perception of adoption. It would also eliminate adoption as a viable solution for a woman facing an unplanned pregnancy who desires to maintain her anonymity."

At no time was my anonymity a concern of mine. In fact, had I known that he would not be able to contact me later in his life if he chose to do so, I may have chosen to keep him. I certainly would not have chosen to have an abortion which seems to be implied by your statement above. Adoption is a loving choice that birthparents make because the life of their child is of utmost importance. Abortion is not a second choice for those who choose the path of adoption. At least that has been my experience with many people in the last 29 years. I am very weary of hearing that the lack of anonymity will cause a woman to have an abortion. I would really like to challenge you to find someone today that feels that way.

I know there will be birthparents who do not wish to reunite with the adoptee. That is certainly their right. I am just not one who feels that way. In fact, I have just spoken for the first time with my son last night. We will meet for the first time in a few days. He tried to find out who I was when he was 18 and was "broken hearted" as he put it, when the adoption agency told him what the law of NC was at that time. That was 10 years ago. His parents stood by him then and continue to do so to this day. They are very happy for him. Adoptive parents are being portrayed as inconsiderate, uncaring people who are scared to death that their children will find their "real" parents and somehow abandon the parents who raised them. This couldn't be farther from the truth. He has an incredible family; why would he want to turn his back on them now? I too have a wonderful family that I am not willing to give up to be his mother. He's not looking for someone to raise him; he is a grown man who wants to know the details of his heritage. It is my pleasure to speak with him and meet with him and answer any questions he has, and he has many.

I thank you for your concern for birthmothers, but please listen to those of us who have walked this path. You may see that you have a lot to learn from us. Some may never want to meet their children again, but I believe adoptees should have the right to find out on their own if that is the case or not. My son asked me if I had his birth certificate. I told him no, that it was sealed by the state of North Carolina. This angered him. To tell you the truth it angers me. He should have the right obtain his original birth certificate. Please continue to listen to all of us in the adoption triangle. We would really appreciate it.

Sincerely,
Marysia Marts
Reunited Birthmom

On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 1:04 PM, John L. Rustin <jrustin@ncfamily.org> wrote:

Ms. Marts,
Thank you for your email. I appreciate you taking the time to share your experiences with me as well as your perspective on my comments at the last meeting of the House Select Committee on Adoptee Birth Certificates. Let me first clarify that at no time did I suggest that I was attempting to speak on your behalf.

I am pleased to hear that you have had the opportunity to speak with your son and that you both will be meeting in the near future. That is wonderful, and I hope your relationship will prove to be meaningful and enriching for both of you. I expect that it will, and I agree that the reunification of birth parents and adoptees is ideal, but only with the mutual consent of both parties. You acknowledge in your email that there are birthparents who do not wish to reunite with the adoptee, and I think we can agree that there are also adoptees who do not wish to reunite with birthparents.

The primary concern of the North Carolina Family Policy Council, which I stated in Wednesday’s committee meeting, is that several of the recommendations the committee was considering, and that were subsequently approved, would very likely lead to birthparents and other members of the biological family being contacted without their prior consent. If the confidential intermediary program is expanded to include individuals beyond the adult adoptee and the biological mother and father, adoption agencies and departments of social services will be authorized to contact all of those individuals in an attempt to obtain their consent to be contacted by the adult adoptee. If the biological mother and biological father, for example, are contacted and refuse to provide their consent, the placement agency could also contact the biological sibling(s) of the adoptee. The biological sibling(s) may or may not even be aware that their parent had another child who was placed for adoption. If a biological sibling consents to be contacted by the adoptee, and is, they could easily disclose the identity of the biological mother and/or father, who would then be subject to being contacted without their prior consent. By no means is this a far-fetched notion.

As for anonymity, expanding the law to allow sealed adoption records to be opened beyond what is currently allowed by law or allowing an adoptee to obtain a copy of their original birth certificate (disclosing the identity of the biological mother and/or father) or their birthparent’s death certificate, if deceased (disclosing the identity of the biological mother or father), would effectively eliminate the option of closed adoptions in North Carolina. While the identity of the parties to the adoption may not be disclosed at the time of the adoption, that identifying information would become available at some point in the future. I am pleased to hear that anonymity was not a concern for you and commend you for your strong stance in favor of life. However, for some, confidentiality is of utmost importance, and they should have the option of being able to place a child for adoption and at the same time maintain their anonymity. I could not agree with you more that adoption is the loving choice, but for someone facing a crisis pregnancy who believes that confidentiality is extremely important, the elimination of an anonymous adoption process leaves only one available confidential option.

I am hopeful that this more clearly explains our concerns about the recommendations discussed Wednesday and my related comments. Again, I thank you for taking the time to share.

By way of this email, I also respond to the emails I received and that were copied to those above from Roberta MacDonald and Mary Watson regarding the same matters.

Sincerely,
John

John L. Rustin
Vice President & Director of Government Relations
North Carolina Family Policy Council
P.O. Box 20607
Raleigh, North Carolina 27619
Phone: 919-807-0800
Fax: 919-807-0900
Email: jrustin@ncfamily.org

Dear Mr. Rustin;

Thank you for your reply to Ms Marts and other's emails which have been sent to you.

However I personally feel you still do not "Get It" in regards to what has been recommended in the House Select Committee.

In regards to your first comment below "Let me first clarify that at no time did I suggest that I was attempting to speak on your behalf."

Your organization and the National Council for Adoption inadvertantly do this by making the following types of blanket comments:

"The primary concern of the North Carolina Family Policy Council, which I stated in Wednesday’s committee meeting, is that several of the recommendations the committee was considering, and that were subsequently approved, would very likely lead to birthparents and other members of the biological family being contacted without their prior consent."

Chapter 48 as it is written, has ALWAYS had the provision for an adult adoptee to do this through the court system, and it is happening every day through reunions via the internet. But with the CI program there will be a Confidential Intermediary who will be contacting these individuals and they can either say YES or they can say NO. In the scenario's you have below Mr. Rustin, you say if a birth sibling is found by an adult adoptee (although what was actually intended was to allow birth siblings and or 1/2 siblings who know their mother had another child prior to them and was given up for adoption being able to contact that adult adoptee) you state that the sibling "could easily disclose the identity of the biological mother and/or father".

Being we live in the USA Mr. Rustin, an individual has the right to speak to anyone ONE time. If the person does not want any more communication with the person who is speaking to them, they have the right to tell that person to leave them alone. If the individual continues in wanting communication, then the person not wanting the communication has the right to put a restraining order out against the person who is still communicating with them.

However, the way you and your organization would rather work to keep the status quo is to allow the one person, the birthmother who relinquished ALL of her rights to be allowed to have a permanent 'restraining order' against the person she gave up all rights regarding.

Are there any other cases in which an individual gives up all of their rights regarding another individual and is allowed to have this type of permenant restraining order? Or is there ANY cases of anyone being allowed to have a PERMANENT restraining order period? In most cases I have heard of, restraining orders have to be renewed every 60 - 90 days.

In regards to your comment: "As for anonymity, expanding the law to allow sealed adoption records to be opened beyond what is currently allowed by law or allowing an adoptee to obtain a copy of their original birth certificate (disclosing the identity of the biological mother and/or father) or their birthparent’s death certificate, if deceased (disclosing the identity of the biological mother or father), would effectively eliminate the option of closed adoptions in North Carolina. "

Once again Mr. Rustin I must point out to you that at NO TIME would allowing an adult adoptee to obtain a copy of their original birth certificate, "effectively eliminate the option of closed adoptions in North Carolina". Because any time an adoption is finalized, the adoption records are SEALED in North Carolina and almost every other state except for Alaska and Kansas.

They are STILL sealed in Tennesee, Delaware, Oregon, Alabama, New Hampshire, and will still be sealed in Maine. These are states in which adult adoptees are allowed to receive a copy of their original birth certificate, at age 18 - 21. NONE of these states changed anything about the SEALING of adoption records. Please do not confuse the issue. The adult adoptees and members of the adoption triad in North Carolina NEVER had anything in HB445 about NOT sealing the adoption records while the adoptee is still a child. What we want is for the State to UNSEAL ONE document the original birth certificate when we become an ADULT.

Lastly Mr. Rustin, you and the NC Family Policy Council believe in what you do, and by doing so, you do more harm to even the birthmothers out here who may not want contact.

By your statements saying they could be found or disclosed, you berate the women who should be commended for committing such a unselfish act as relinquishing their child for adoption. You insinuate and consistently treat them as women who are weak and haven't told their family, or just can't handle having the child they relinquished come back into their life.

These are women who get a double standard from all sides of society. They are told that to give up their child for adoption into a loving family is so courageous, and then the same people come back and say "but how could you ever give your own flesh and blood away"? For over 98% of the birthmother's who relinquished a child, they would welcome knowing what happened to the child they relinquished, or that they grew up and are ok.

I believe in what you say Mr. Rustin, only to the extent that it keeps the adoption industry going strong as the largest unregulated industry in the world and keeps secrets and lies in the adoption world perpetuated.

Thank you for your time and attention to this.

Roberta MacDonald