The Disclosure Veto
The AARA explains that the opportunity to register a Disclosure Veto is available to adopted adults and to birth parents who were involved in adoptions that were finalized before September 1, 2008. If a person chooses to register a disclosure veto, this will prevent the release of any information found in birth registrations and adoption orders that would identify the person who filed the veto.
This veto was put in place for people who feel very strongly that releasing their identity may pose a risk or a threat to them or may cause serious disruption for their lives. Some birth parents may have kept the birth of their child a secret from the rest of their family and they may not be ready to share that information. Some adoptees feel strongly about being happy in their adoptive family and worry about disruption to their lives by including birth family who they do not know. Some people may be aware that there is a troubled history and they may be fearful of having their name released.
It is anticipated that not many people will file a disclosure veto. In fact, other jurisdictions that have opened adoption records have found that although some people feel very strongly about their need or right to file a veto, actually only a small percentage of people file a disclosure veto.
If you want to file a disclosure veto you can do this anytime after September 1, 2008. Applications are available on line through http://www.serviceontario.ca/ or by calling 416-325-8305 or toll free at 1-800-461-2156. This is also the way for the public to access forms, have your questions answered and application updates can be given to you. It can be done anytime but should be done before June 1, 2009, if you do not want to have your information released when the program opens.
A Disclosure Veto will not be available for adoptions finalized after September 1, 2008, but a no contact notice or a contact preference may still be filed. People involved in adoptions after September 1, 2008, understand that their identity cannot be kept private when the child turns 18 if the adoptee asks for it. The adopted name will be released to a birthparent who asks for it after the child turns 19.
Some people may decide that they do not mind if their identity is made known but they do not want to be contacted. If you do not want to be contacted or if you have a preference for how you would like to be contacted you would file a no contact notice or a contact preference notice through http://www.serviceontario.ca/
H.
The AARA explains that the opportunity to register a Disclosure Veto is available to adopted adults and to birth parents who were involved in adoptions that were finalized before September 1, 2008. If a person chooses to register a disclosure veto, this will prevent the release of any information found in birth registrations and adoption orders that would identify the person who filed the veto.
This veto was put in place for people who feel very strongly that releasing their identity may pose a risk or a threat to them or may cause serious disruption for their lives. Some birth parents may have kept the birth of their child a secret from the rest of their family and they may not be ready to share that information. Some adoptees feel strongly about being happy in their adoptive family and worry about disruption to their lives by including birth family who they do not know. Some people may be aware that there is a troubled history and they may be fearful of having their name released.
It is anticipated that not many people will file a disclosure veto. In fact, other jurisdictions that have opened adoption records have found that although some people feel very strongly about their need or right to file a veto, actually only a small percentage of people file a disclosure veto.
If you want to file a disclosure veto you can do this anytime after September 1, 2008. Applications are available on line through http://www.serviceontario.ca/ or by calling 416-325-8305 or toll free at 1-800-461-2156. This is also the way for the public to access forms, have your questions answered and application updates can be given to you. It can be done anytime but should be done before June 1, 2009, if you do not want to have your information released when the program opens.
A Disclosure Veto will not be available for adoptions finalized after September 1, 2008, but a no contact notice or a contact preference may still be filed. People involved in adoptions after September 1, 2008, understand that their identity cannot be kept private when the child turns 18 if the adoptee asks for it. The adopted name will be released to a birthparent who asks for it after the child turns 19.
Some people may decide that they do not mind if their identity is made known but they do not want to be contacted. If you do not want to be contacted or if you have a preference for how you would like to be contacted you would file a no contact notice or a contact preference notice through http://www.serviceontario.ca/
H.
6 comments:
All sealed birth certificates is an act of discrimination against adopted persons. All tax-paying voting citizens should be treated equally.
In no legislation or on any adoption contract does is state that mothers were promised anonymity, confidentiality or privacy from their daughters and sons. Surrendering mothers did not seal their children's birth certificates - the adopting parents had to officially seal the birth cetrtifcate after an adoption was finalized. This means the mother had alreay terminated her rigts or her rights were terminated by the courts. This had nothing to do with the child's birth certificate.
If a mother claims she was promised anonymity, then she must take that issue up with the agency that facilitated the adoption and gave her a false promise of confidentiality.
Adoption agency staff and CASs had no business promising anyone anything. It was not within their power or mandate to do so.
When a mother's parental rights are terminated, she terminates all her rights - that includes the right to privacy.
What we "hear" from legislators and propenents of sealed birth certificates and disclosure vetos, is that a mother deserves to have her identity withheld from her daughter or son because that daughter or son may cause her harm and destroy her life. (Remember that this is not written anywhere, the birth certificates are just sealed.)
Who else in society has had their rights taken away based on the presumption of harm? Is the adopted person a potential threat to others, simply because she or he was adopted? This is discrimination and extreme character defamation.
Why would the Ontario government have a system of adoption, if adoption itself creates humans who will cause harm to others, to the point of locking away their original identity?
Disclosure vetoes allow some adoptees to possess their birth certificates and others not. This is more discrimination. Either all birth certifcates are unsealed or none. It is creating class within a class of adopted persons who are already discriminated against.
In Ontario, birth certificates were sealed to appease those adopting, not the mothers of children adopted.
Thanks for the thoughtful comments. I am not sure exactly what you mean in your last paragraph about sealed birth certificates. Your comment about a class within a class is interesting, however I would argue that this has always been the case in the sense that those who did not agree to being contacted under the former adoption disclosure registry left a number of adoptees or birth parents in a similar position. The AARA was the result of much lobbying over the years and a good deal of research that supports the mainstream desire for more openess in adoption. The disclosure veto was deemed necessary to protect individuals rights to privacy upheld in our charter. I can not speak to what birth mothers were told about guarantees to confidentiality at the time of the adoption but the ruling was based on the fact that "secrecy was the norm". The adoptee as you point out has never had any rights to their genetic identity and the debate goes on...is this a case of discrimination?
Ok, I will clarify: birth certificates were never sealed because mothers requested privacy. It was the people adopting that wanted privacy; no worries that a mother would come back; and to adopt her child with the "as if born to" idea. Interestingly, in 2005, the Ministry removed the "as if born to" clause from the legislation.)
Screcy in adoption did not evolve from mothers wanting their identities hidden. Some mothers were told their children would be able to contact them at age 18, others were told they would never see their children again. Some mothers were told their babies died if they decided against adoption; what was said to a mother depended on the worker, hospital, maternity home or agency involved in the potential adoption. There was no province-wide mandate to tell mothers anything. And it certainly isn't/wasn't written anywhere. The secrecy is a myth and adoption secrecy laws are based on this myth.
When people say that the DV is required for a mother's (and fathers are also included - they can file a DV if their name is on the birth certificate) protection, I must asks how this is acceptable?
One person's rights are taken away so another person can be protected. Yet, the person whose rights have been taken away have done nothing to warrant it. They were born, the adopted. This is discrimination and character defamation. An adopted person is deemed a threat to others to the point of their identity being withheld from them -their own identity - how can this be happening?
It is a law that denies adopted persons the right to their own information based on the presumption of harm. A mother can not own her child's idenitity simply because she does not want contact with her daughter or son. An identity belongs to no one but the person born. All birth certificates should be unsealed as the law/legislation does not and never did state why a birth certificate is sealed in the first place.
With all change in social policies, there will be a percentage who feel they are being wronged by the suggested change. In the case of adoption, an adopted person can not possess their birth certificate - a mother can possess her birth certificate -all non-adopted people can possess their birth certifcates - it's all or none, otherwise it's dicrimination.
You first premise of all tax paying voting citizens of Canada should be treated equally is problematic - what does that say about those who do not pay taxes or vote...are they not worthy of equal treatment? That certainly is not in accordance with our charter, which states that "Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination".
Also - I wonder if an adopted person's "right" to their birth information is actually guaranteed anywhere? It certainly is not present in the charter. This does not necessarily mean that it isn't a "right", but it does leave this argument on fairly shaky ground. Canadian privacy rights are guaranteed under PIPEDA (Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act)under which adoption agencies are bound to protect personal information. Under PIPEDA, organizations are required by law to "obtain your consent when they collect, use or disclose your personal information".
Also, the relinquishment of parental rights does not necessarily mean that a parent relinquishes their personal rights as a Canadian citizen at the same time. An individual's right to privacy as it is written under PIPEDA is not dependent on parental status or conditional based on who is requesting information.
Anon,
The adopted person has a right to her/his information because all citizens (not adopted) are entitled to their birth information. Why are adopted persons excluded from this same entitlement? This is not being treated equally. Tax-paying or not, all birth certificates should be sealed, or none. That is why it's discrimination.
The personal information that is protected is exactly that- personal information that pertains to an individual - however, a person's identity belongs to the person born.
Privacy laws are to protect information about a person from being released to the public. An identity is given to the person born, the key word here "given" - a birth certificate is created for the person born, not the person who gave birth. All non-adopted individuals are entitled to their birth information - so denying a sector of the population their birth information for any reason is discrimination.
A mother gave birth - she relinquished her parental rights, and with that, relinquished all information that pertains to the person born. It is not her information to (legally) withhold.
A woman brought a human being into the world and with that birth passed on hers, the father's and generations of DNA before them to that human. The identity of the person born correlates with that DNA. The legal owner of that identity is the person born.
If one mother can have her identity protected, then all mothers should have that same right.
A mother may leave her family after her child is born - she may want to disappear and never have contact again, does she have the right to anonymity from her child? Why is this only allowed in adoption? A person can change their identity and move to other side of the world - but there is no law that offers that person protection via anonymity from her offspring. She can be found (legally) any time. Again, it is discrimination to categorize certain individuals as potentially causing harm to others, therefore denying those individuals the same services and documents that are freely provided to everyone else.
Michelle, it sounds like you will be welcoming the chance to access your birth name! Did you know that you can access non identifying information about your history from the CAS where your adoption took place as you always could, if you are looking for that?
Many adoptees already know their birth name. When adoptive parents receive the original adoption order it may have the complete original birth name or the first name and last initial on the adoption order. It is my understanding that the birth certificates were sealed along with the the rest of the adoption records and court orders by the court and by the CAS as directed by the Ministry of Community and Social Services, and not by the adoptive family or the birth family. The adopted person received a "substituted birth certificate" which shows their adoptive name and does still show their date and place of birth just as the original birth certificate did.
The original birth certificate name is what you will receive under the widely advertized changes in the disclosure law! As I said before,many adopted people already know their birth name, especially if the child was not an infant at the time of placement!
Many birth parents did expect anonymity because they gave birth to a child in an era where being an unwed parent was taboo. Many women went to stay with relatives out of town or went to a maternity home so people in their own community maybe did not ever know that they had given birth to a child. Many of these women have always wondered if their child grew up to be happy, healthy and successful. Some may welcome hearing from their child and it will fulfill a lifelong dream for them. Others live in dread of the day that someone could ever find out about their "secret". They may have never told their families and would find it traumatic at their age to be faced with the fact that their birth child is now looking for them. A person is such a situation may choose to register a disclosure veto because of their own need andnot because of fear of harm from their child. If they ever do come decide that they would like to have information or meet afterall they may chose to undo their veto at any time.
Post a Comment