REPORT ON BILLS FAVORABLY REPORTED BY COMMITTEE

TITLE OF BILL:

AN ACT PROVIDING ADULT ADOPTED PERSONS WITH ACCESS TO INFORMATION IN THEIR ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATES.

SPONSORS OF BILL:

REASONS FOR BILL:

The Adoption and Foster Care Task Force brought the bill to the Select Committee. Section 1 of Raised Bill No. 4 allows any adopted person eighteen years of age or older born in Connecticut to apply and receive a copy the person's sealed original birth certificate or record and any contact preference form or completed health history form attached to the sealed original birth certificate.

In Section 2, the Department of Public Health and any municipality's registrar of vital statistics shall provide access to and issuance of a certified or uncertified copy of sealed original birth records or certificates to any adopted person eighteen years of age or older born in the state provided the department or registrar is satisfied to the identity of the person requesting the record or certificate and procedures, fees and waiting periods for such records are identical to those for records issued to other persons.

Upon request for an original birth record or certificate, the Department or the municipality's registrar of vital statistics shall make available to each birth parent or the birth parent making the request a contact preference form and a health history form that the birth parent may return. The contact preference form shall have the following options a) I would like to be contacted, b) I would like to be contacted but only through an intermediary or c) I would prefer not to be contacted at this time. When the Department or registrar receives a completed contact form or a completed health history, the registrar will attach the form to the adopted person's sealed original certificate or record. Only a person authorized by the Department or registrar to process an application for original records may process a contact preference form or updated health history form.

Any adopted person under the age of eighteen or parents of an adopted person under the age of eighteen must obtain a written order from the probate judge for the district in which the adopted person was adopted or born or obtain a written order of the Probate Court stating that the court is of the opinion that the examination of the birth record of the adopted person under the age of eighteen will not be detrimental to the public interest or to the welfare of the adopted person or the welfare of the genetic or adoptive parent(s).

(The Committee's JFS language for Section 1 of the bill allows only persons eighteen years of age or older, adopted on or after October 1, 2006 or, if such person is deceased, such person's child or grandchild, to apply for and receive a copy of the adopted person's original birth certificate or record and any contact preference form attached to the sealed original birth certificate or record.

The JFS language in Section 2 removes the municipalities' registrars of vital statistics from the requirement to provide access to and issuance of a certified or uncertified copy of sealed original birth records or certificates to any adopted person eighteen years of age or older born in the state provided the department or registrar is satisfied to the identity of the person requesting the record or certificate and procedures, fees and waiting periods for such records are identical to those for records issued to other persons. The Department of Public Health will provide all access to and issuance of sealed original birth records or certificates.

Also in Section 2 the municipalities' registrars are removed from handling or retaining either contact preference forms or health history forms. The Department will perform these duties.)

RESPONSE FROM ADMINISTRATION/AGENCY:

DARLENE DUNBAR, Commissioner of Children and Families supports the concept of the bill. This bill represents the complexity of setting public policy.

Under the current law, adult adoptees have limited access to the information in their adoption file, which is that they can obtain their non-identifying and medical information from their records. This is a summary of birth family and medical history, only which which is documented in the closed adoption records, often prepared on “Genetic Parent Information” forms. Those adults whose adoption was processed through a private adoption agency often have to pay a fee in order to obtain these histories, including their medical information. It is important to note that medical histories of birth parents are often poorly documented and insufficient.

Although the original birth certificate for an adoptee is “sealed” under current law, there are ways to access this document. An adoptee can petition the probate court that finalized the adoption for release of the original birth certificate. A fee is involved with petitioning the court. The probate judge would review this application, and if deemed necessary, appoint a guardian ad litem to represent the interests of the birth parent and the requestor will be responsible for the attorney's fees. The determination to release the birth certificate will be at the judge's discretion.

The adoptee only has access to the original birth certificate through order of the probate court even in situations where consent has been provided, such as in a case of a consensual reunion between the birth family and the adoptee, or in cases where our responsibility to maintain confidentiality is moot, such as in the deaths of the birth parents.

Adoption law originated in 1944 in Connecticut. From 1944 until 1975, adoptees eighteen years of age or older and/or their adoptive parents in the state had access to their original birth certificates through the Department of Health or the registrar of vital statistics at the town level. In 1975, the original birth records were sealed both from that point forward and retroactively.

MEG HOOPER, Branch Chief, Planning Branch/Vital Records Unit, Department of Public Health opposes certain provisions of the bill that require the Department to carry out additional administrative responsibilities. This bill would give the same responsibility as the Department of Children and Families and private child-placing agencies has for collecting, maintaining and updating the Birth Parent Health History form to the Department of Public Health and 169 local registrars. (The JFS language removes this responsibility from the 169 local registrars.)

The bill further requires the Department of Public Health and the local registrars to provide a birth parent contact preference form and health history form, upon request of such birth parent or the person whose birth was recorded. If an adopted person wants to know the contact preference and health history of his or her biological parents, the law would require the Department of Public Health to search for the biological parents in order to provide the forms. This is beyond the role of the Department of Public Health, which is merely the keeper of birth records. (The JFS language removes this responsibility from the 169 local registrars.)

Also the bill allows an adopted person under 18 years of age to obtain the original birth certificate. This provision is inconsistent with all other vital records laws that set a minimum age of 18 to obtain a vital record. (The JFS language restores the original statutory language to “over eighteen years of age.”)

Section 2(e)(2)(B) lists the options that are contained on the Contact Preference Form. The option “I would prefer not to be contacted at this time” should be changed to “I do not want to be contacted.” (The JFS language makes this change.)

Section 4 does not apply to adopted persons, but rather to children born subject to a surrogacy agreement. Section 4 is beyond the scope of this bill's purpose and should be deleted. (The JFS language deletes Section 4's language.)

JUDGE JAMES J. LAWLOR, Probate Court Administrator has concerns about the bill. Original birth certificates are currently sealed in order to protect the identity of the birth parents. Although the bill takes into account the contact desires of the birth parents by creating a contact preference form, there are thousands of records already on file in the state. While we believe that the child has the right to know their birth parents, this does pose an ethical issue. It should be mentioned that these birth parents may have surrendered their children for adoption in the belief that their identities would be protected. We have no objection to making adoption records more available. However, we ask that the legislature give due consideration to the interest of those birth parents whose children were adopted under existing law. (The JFS language makes sealed original birth records available only to those adopted persons eighteen years of age or older who were adopted on or after October 1, 2006.)

JEANNE MILSTEIN, Child Advocate supports Raised Bill No. 4.

ELAINE ZIMMERMAN, Executive Director, CT Commission on Children supports the bill and stated that the Adoption and foster care Task Force heard testimony that adult adopted persons should be allowed to obtain basic information (especially health) regarding their birth parents, so that they have the proper information to make critical health decisions throughout their adult life.

SENATOR BILL FINCH, 22^nd District testified that he was adopted when he was four months old. It really wasn't until he was a parent that he was interested in finding out his biological and genetic background.

“In terms of my rights to my birth certificate, I want to make a big point to differentiate. We're not looking for birth records. We are looking for our birth certificates. We're not interested in court proceedings. We're not interested in home studies. We're not interested in termination hearings or documents about that. We don't want our file opened. Many of these things are best left where they are.”

“What shouldn't be left where they are is my identity, because I need it. I have four boys, and they only know half of their medical history and their genetics. So when they go to the doctor, they say well I know some, and I know none.”

NATURE AND SOURCES OF SUPPORT:

FREDERICK F. GREENMAN, Attorney proposed revisions to the raised bill. The first revision would provide that if an adoptee is dead, the adoptee's child or grandchild may have access to the original birth certificate. (The JFS language allows children and grandchildren access to the adult adopted person's original birth certificate.)

Another proposed revision would authorize issuance only of an uncertified copy of an original birth certificate to an adoptee. Issuing a certified copy might cause confusion by creating proof of two different names for the same person. The purpose of this revision could be accomplished by requiring a notation on a certified copy but we believe it is simpler to issue an uncertified copy. (The JFS language for this section reads “2) The department shall provide access to and issuance of a copy of a sealed original birth record or certificate marked with the same notation required for such records under subsection (c) of section 7-53, as amended by this act, to any person eighteen years of age or older whose adoption was finalized on or after October 1, 2006,”)

Mr. Greenman went on to testify that prohibiting adoptees from seeing their original birth certificates violates their right (moral, if not constitutional) to information about themselves. The State is concealing from the adoptees their most personal information, namely the identities of their biological mothers and fathers.

By denying adoptees access to medical information that can only be obtained from their birth families, the Sate also condemns many of them to early and unnecessary death.

This is not a privacy issue. Allowing adoptees to see their birth certificates discloses nothing to the public. The identities of birth parents will be disclosed only to their own children, not to anyone else.

LINDA L. SMITH, Catholic Charities, Inc. Archdiocese of Hartford supports S.B. No. 4. She stated that at this time in history, we believe most birthparents who voluntarily discern a plan of adoption to be in the best interest of their child, if not actively involved in the selection of the permanent adoptive family, are aware of the natural curiosity their children may develop and the impact of this curiosity going unresolved may have on their lives. This proposed legislation does offer a format (requesting a contact preference form) that allows the reticent birthparent options that we believe continue to protect their individual rights. This is an important inclusion that allows us to support this legislation.

ADAM PERLMAN, Executive Director, Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute testified that studies show sealed records are an anachronism born of society's desire to protect the reputations of adoptees and birth parents at a time when unwed mothers were highly stigmatized and their children were branded as “bastards.” Birth certificates were often labeled with the word “illegitimate.” Over time, the cultural rationale for closed records shifted to maintaining the anonymity of birth mothers. Nearly all available research indicates these women, while often wanting privacy, overwhelmingly, desire some level of contact with or knowledge of their children.

AMY EMERY, National Association of Social Workers CT Chapter stated that not until the 1950's was a suggestion made by professionals that adult adoptees should not have access to their original birth certificates. The purpose of this was “to increase the statistical accuracy of birth records and to promote the welfare of illegitimate and adopted children,” not as a means of privacy for adoptive families.

Starting in the 1970's and continuing through today, adult adoptees have demanded access to their original birth certificates and sealed records. Kansas and Alaska allow unconditional access to original birth certificates for adult adoptees without exception. A 1998 ballot initiative in Oregon allowed all adult adoptees full access to their original birth certificates. The ballot initiative was challenged in the Oregon State Supreme Court with legal appeals based upon the birth mother's right to privacy. The United States Supreme Court, in an opinion written by Justice O'Connor, upheld the right of Oregon's adult adoptees right to access their original birth certificates.

BARBARA MONTGOMERY, South Norwalk testified as a birthmother, who gave her son up for adoption with the promise that she would be able to contact her son when he turned 18. She would have never signed the relinquishment document had she known that she would be unable to contact her biological son.

There are no federal or state laws in existence about birthmother confidentiality. Connecticut adult adoptees deserve the same basic right given to all Connecticut non-adopted residents. Adult adoptees deserve to know their origin and their medical history, which are vital, not only to their health, but also the health of their children. Adult adoptees are adults, yet they have been treated as children.

DIANE HOOK, Middlebury testified as a birthmother who understood that when her son was of legal age he would have access to his original birth certificate. When she did inquire about her child once he was of legal age, she learned the law had been changed and the records were closed.

For 40 years she kept her silence and then searched for and found her son. It is unconscionable to deny a particular group of adults the vital information that is the very foundation of their lives, of their genetics, of their heritage.

DORIS KINDER, Social Worker stated that our thinking and our knowledge of what constitutes good adoption practice has changed considerably over the years. We now know that secrecy and confidentiality, once considered essential to successful placements, do not benefit adoptees, birth parents, or adoptive parents.

LOUISE LEAVENWORTH, Waterbury worked as a social worker in adoption for 44 years. She has heard from adoptees, adoptive parents and birthparents that there should be more openness and more available information especially when medical information is sought.

RUTH BARNES MOYNIHAN, Storrs testified as the mother of an adopted son. When her son became a teenager, he became more curious about his birthparents. His adoptive parents supported his decision to locate his birthparents, both of whom he found. It was a wonderfully healing experience for them.

Human beings have an innate longing to know about their genetic inheritance. They have a practical need for information about health records and the possibility of inherited medical problems.

JOHN GUENIAT, Committee to Promote the Rights of Adopted Individuals, Connecticut Council on Adoption testified that the adopted individual's search is actually a search for ones self. The laws of the 1970's that removed the rights of adult adopted individuals, though maybe well-intended, nonetheless created consequences that we hope this legislature will correct.

THOMAS F. HOWARD, East Granby testified as the parent of two adoptive children and as a genealogist. Mr. Howard noted that in the new provisions for the adoptees they would have a choice of certified or non-certified copies of the birth records. Non-certified copies should be available to all who are given access in the previous paragraph of the law. It used to be that way. It would reduce the security concerns over the use of these records if these non-certified copies were stamped “invalid for identification purposes” as is the case in California. He is in favor of making non-certified and certified copies available and recommend s the committee amend the bill.

Mr. Howard is concerned about closing genealogist's access to birth records currently allowed under Section 7-51. For thirty years genealogists have had access to all vital records and have done enormous service for town tax collections by clearing titles; and to probate judges by helping find families. They serve countless people who today because of distance, family separations or incomplete transmission of family history need help to find their families.

TONY E. JORGENSEN, Esq. testified as an adult adoptee. Mr. Jorgensen stated that current law on the right of an adult adoptee to have access to an original birth certificate violates Article First, Section 20 of the Connecticut Constitution which reads:

No person shall be denied the equal protection of the law nor be subject to segregation or discrimination in the exercise or enjoyment of his civil or political rights because of religion, race, color, ancestry or national origin. (Emphasis added by Mr. Jorgensen.)

Adult adoptees are being denied equal protection of the law and are being discriminated against because of their ancestry. There is no compelling, legitimate or otherwise rational basis to keep the current Draconian legislation on the books.

CYNTHIA CASCIO, South Meriden testified as an adult adoptee. She stated that her amended birth certificate is only the beginning of her story. Her original birth certificate would be the reality of who she is.

At 18, she was deemed an adult. She has the right to vote but does not have the right to her original birth certificate. At 39 years of age, she still has no rights to her own reality.

JANE SERVADIO, Committee to Promote the Rights of Adopted Individuals, Connecticut Council on Adoption testified as a birthmother that she is tired of people, who are not birthmothers trying to tell the world how birthmothers feel. “We are the only ones who know how we feel, and we can speak for ourselves. It is a myth, a very tenacious myth, that birth mothers do not want to be reunited with their lost children. We don't seem to be able to stamp that out somehow.”

“I'm hoping that in our currently repressive society, we can achieve what many other countries have, that the birth of a child, no matter how he or she got here, should be a joyous event. Most birthmothers continue to want privacy from the public but not from their own children.”

DARLENE DUNBAR, Commissioner of Children and Families (See above.)

JEANNE MILSTEIN, Child Advocate (See above.)

ELAINE ZIMMERMAN, Executive Director, CT Commission on Children (See above.)

SENATOR BILL FINCH, 22^nd District (See above.)

NATURE AND SOURCES OF OPPOSITION:

PATRICIA STRAUSS, Legislative Committee, Connecticut Town Clerk's Association, in written testimony, stated that current law already allows for access to original birth records after a written order of the Probate Court is obtained stating that the court is of the opinion that the examination of the birth recorded of the adopted person by the adopting parents or adopted person, …will not be detrimental to the public interest or to the welfare of the adopted person or to the welfare of the genetic or adoptive parents.

The proposed law puts the burden of the opinion and possible detrimental public consequences on the registrars of vital statistics in each of the 169 towns as to gather and authenticate paperwork, namely the newly created contact preference form. The registrar of vital statistics should not be asked to process forms that currently are approved at the level of Judges of Probate and the Department of Children and Families. (The JFS language removes these responsibilities from the 169 local registrars.)

MEG HOOPER, Branch Chief, Planning Branch/Vital Records Unit, Department of Public Health (See above.)

JUDGE JAMES J. LAWLOR, Probate Court Administrator (See above.)