The Adoption Disclosure Information Act (AIDA) - Bill 183, was introduced into the Ontario Legislature on March 29, 2005. The Act was constructed to provide adopted persons and birth parents with a right of access to each others personally identifying information in adoption-related records. Following the bill’s introduction however, there was a fairly significant outcry regarding the controversial issue of the retroactive application of the bill. The Ontario Privacy Commissioner Ann Cavoukian conveyed her concerns about the privacy implications to the Standing Committee on Social Policy. The privacy commission was urging that the bill be amended to give birth parents and the adoptees the right to file a disclosure veto for adoptions that occurred prior to the introduction of the new legislation. The disclosure vetos would allow birth parents and adoptees who did not wish to have their identities revealed to block access to their files. Despite the concerns, the proposed disclosure veto was not adopted by the government and on November 3, 2005, Bill 183 received Royal Assent and became law without the protective veto. The law was to come into effect in 2007. In 2007, four applicants challenged the constitutional validity of AIDA on the basis that it violates section 7 of the charter of Rights and Freedoms. As a result, AIDA was declared unconstitutional. In May 2008, the Ontario legislature passed a new adoption information disclosure law called the Access to Adoption Records Act, 2008. This new law gives adopted adults and birth parents more rights to information and privacy. We will look at this legislation in more detail in our next post.
D.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
making connections
We will be approaching our research for the purposes of this blog from the point of view that the changes that have been instituted in adoption disclosure policy reflect the change from a colonialist position preferring government regulation to an emphasis on self-regulation and autonomy. Adoption records have been closed since 1927 and secrecy surrounded adoption as was considered best at the time. The previous form of the policy emphasized the governments need to “protect” a person from social shame and marginalization. The new policy form recognizes the importance of looking at who speaks for whom and under what conditions, rather than the government making sweeping changes that not all birth families, adoptees, or adoptive families may be comfortable with. There is more of an emphasis on allowing individuals to decide what they need, and an increase in the emphasis on the individual’s ability to account for and speak for themself. This is evidenced by the fact that the individual is now expected to make their choice about vetoing contact on their own when the child turns 18. Our society has long viewed birth mothers needing to place her child up for adoption as a shameful act that should not be acknowledged. It was thought that the pregnancy should be hidden and never spoken about again. The idea that a birth child could come back and contact them later in life was thought to be a scary idea for birth mothers, and it was thought that the government must protect them from that by sealing adoption records. In recent years however, birth mothers have been speaking out and saying that they are not ashamed of having put their children up for adoption and wanted the choice to seek out reunions with their birth children. They no longer wanted the complete protection of the government, and they wanted the ability to autonomously decide whether reuniting was in their best interest or not. This ability to choose does not fail to acknowledge the potential harm there is in providing complete access to private information, rather it asks that that the birth mother and the child have the opportunity to choose for themselves whether they want to take that risk or not, and to place their own conditions on that risk (such as through contact vetoes and preferences).
L.
L.
ideological issues around adoption disclosure
There are four main ideological stances taken by those advocating within the field of adoption disclosure. These are the civil rights ideology, the psychology of adoption ideology, the search rights ideology and the identity rights ideology.
Civil Rights Ideology:
Proponents of this ideology argue that adult adoptee citizens, as their right to equal treatment under the law, have the right to unconditional access to their original birth certificate and government-held adoption files. They argue for legislation that would create this unconditional access, including unrestricted freedom to contact their birth parent. They argue against contact vetoes and closed adoption files.
Psychology of Adoption Ideology:
Proponents of this ideology argue that adoption creates special relationships that must be protected by the law. They argue that there is potential harm to all of those involved if there is unlimited access to personal government held documents. They advocate for legislation limiting access to these documents such as disclosure vetoes, contact vetoes, adoption registries, etc.
Search Rights Ideology:
This ideology is steeped in the belief that it is the right of adoptees and birthparents to search and be "reunited." Advocates believe it is intrinsic to the well-being of the adoptee and birthparents that they search and be "reunited." Proponents of this framework include Adoption Search professionals, Confidential Intermediaries, and Private Investigators
Identity Rights Ideology:
This ideology originates in the belief that humans have a right to know their biological origins and no organization has the right to deliberately keep this information from them. This argument addresses both the personal information needs of people without the usual documentation and the general need for greater transparency and accountability in adoption practice. Those who work from within this framework serve Aboriginal and Native adoptee groups, black market adoptees, late discovery adoptees (a person who was adopted as an infant or a young child, was not told that they were adopted and who discovers their adoptive status later in life), gamete donor offspring, and adoptees with falsified, incomplete or inaccessible adoption files.
A more complete overview of these ideologies, who works within them, who is served by them and what their activism goals are can be found at: http://www.bastards.org/bq/bq14/trends.html
L.
Civil Rights Ideology:
Proponents of this ideology argue that adult adoptee citizens, as their right to equal treatment under the law, have the right to unconditional access to their original birth certificate and government-held adoption files. They argue for legislation that would create this unconditional access, including unrestricted freedom to contact their birth parent. They argue against contact vetoes and closed adoption files.
Psychology of Adoption Ideology:
Proponents of this ideology argue that adoption creates special relationships that must be protected by the law. They argue that there is potential harm to all of those involved if there is unlimited access to personal government held documents. They advocate for legislation limiting access to these documents such as disclosure vetoes, contact vetoes, adoption registries, etc.
Search Rights Ideology:
This ideology is steeped in the belief that it is the right of adoptees and birthparents to search and be "reunited." Advocates believe it is intrinsic to the well-being of the adoptee and birthparents that they search and be "reunited." Proponents of this framework include Adoption Search professionals, Confidential Intermediaries, and Private Investigators
Identity Rights Ideology:
This ideology originates in the belief that humans have a right to know their biological origins and no organization has the right to deliberately keep this information from them. This argument addresses both the personal information needs of people without the usual documentation and the general need for greater transparency and accountability in adoption practice. Those who work from within this framework serve Aboriginal and Native adoptee groups, black market adoptees, late discovery adoptees (a person who was adopted as an infant or a young child, was not told that they were adopted and who discovers their adoptive status later in life), gamete donor offspring, and adoptees with falsified, incomplete or inaccessible adoption files.
A more complete overview of these ideologies, who works within them, who is served by them and what their activism goals are can be found at: http://www.bastards.org/bq/bq14/trends.html
L.
theoretical approaches
There are a number of Theories that can be applied to our discussion about Adoption and the revised contact laws.
Feminist Perspective
If the Feminist Perspective is used it would give social, political and all other rights to women, equal to men. The Theory would respect the attainment of rights for women. It objects to paternalistic views of a person’s rights. From a feminist perspective, women are expected to take responsibility for making plans for their child if they are not able to care for the child. Fathers are expected be equally responsible as a parent and to be involved to support the mother. Some fathers escape their responsibility by their own choice or by expecting the woman to take care of the “problem.”
Oppressive Perspective
When the Theory of Oppressive Perspective is used, Oppression is explained as the cause of most social problems. Oppression occurs when a person is blocked from opportunities for self development or is excluded from full participation in society. A person may be assigned second class citizenship not because of individual talent, merit or failure, but because of his or her membership in a particular category of people. (Mullaly, B. 2001, p. 312). Challenges to bringing about change are created by the psychological and interpersonal difficulties associated with oppression. Empowerment is a way to transform an oppressive environment. The experience of adoption and the new Adoption Contact Laws can fit under this perspective. If one looks at the history of adoption, there was a time when it was taboo for a single woman to become pregnant and to care for a child alone, resulting in second class citizenship for those who broke Society standards. Individual suitability to be a good parent was not considered.
Anti-Oppressive Perspective
An Anti- Oppressive Perspective Theory has a political purpose and a goal for social justice. Anti-Oppressive Theory must benefit the local community. Links are made between personal problems and their structural causes to enable oppressed people to change themselves and their social conditions. People may feel the frustration of being denied basic individual rights and so they use collective action to attain these rights. A key concept of anti-oppressive work is ‘empowerment’. Troubles are redefined in social or political terms, thus providing alternative explanations. Using the process of liberation, anti-oppressive theorists confront stereotypes and develop a positive self image. Using the concepts of this theory, anyone may chose to place their child for adoption if they believe that they cannot meet the needs of the child for whatever reason. Single mothers have gained respect in society. Policies and community resources to meet the needs of families and children have been set up. This theory may have contributed to the development of the original Disclosure Registry and of the revised Adoption Contact Laws.
Critical Perspective
The Critical Perspective Theory is used to critique a changing society as a whole. It considers the critique of domination, emancipation, interest, fusion of social/cultural analysis and considers explanation and interpretation with social/cultural critique. This perspective could also be used to review the policy related to adoption and would consider the needs and wishes of all stakeholders and it would consider the wishes of the Society at large separately.
Post Colonial Theory
The Post Colonial Theory focuses on subjectivity, identity, power and knowledge. Post colonial theory enables readers to ask questions about who speaks for whom, under what conditions and to what ends. This Theory would look at the way Society has changed since the time when European culture was predominant in Ontario. Adoption records have been closed since 1927. Secrecy surrounded adoption since this was considered to be the best way to handle adoption at the time according to Colonial thought. Post Colonial Theory recognizes the needs of individuals, some who may be interested in change and some who wish to maintain the status quo. In Post Colonial Theory, it is important to gain knowledge, to look at who speaks for whom and under what conditions, rather than to make sweeping global changes that not all birth families, adoptees, or adoptive families may be comfortable with. Post Colonial Theory would allow individuals to decide what they need, when and if they wish to have contact and what any type of contact would look like.
H.
Feminist Perspective
If the Feminist Perspective is used it would give social, political and all other rights to women, equal to men. The Theory would respect the attainment of rights for women. It objects to paternalistic views of a person’s rights. From a feminist perspective, women are expected to take responsibility for making plans for their child if they are not able to care for the child. Fathers are expected be equally responsible as a parent and to be involved to support the mother. Some fathers escape their responsibility by their own choice or by expecting the woman to take care of the “problem.”
Oppressive Perspective
When the Theory of Oppressive Perspective is used, Oppression is explained as the cause of most social problems. Oppression occurs when a person is blocked from opportunities for self development or is excluded from full participation in society. A person may be assigned second class citizenship not because of individual talent, merit or failure, but because of his or her membership in a particular category of people. (Mullaly, B. 2001, p. 312). Challenges to bringing about change are created by the psychological and interpersonal difficulties associated with oppression. Empowerment is a way to transform an oppressive environment. The experience of adoption and the new Adoption Contact Laws can fit under this perspective. If one looks at the history of adoption, there was a time when it was taboo for a single woman to become pregnant and to care for a child alone, resulting in second class citizenship for those who broke Society standards. Individual suitability to be a good parent was not considered.
Anti-Oppressive Perspective
An Anti- Oppressive Perspective Theory has a political purpose and a goal for social justice. Anti-Oppressive Theory must benefit the local community. Links are made between personal problems and their structural causes to enable oppressed people to change themselves and their social conditions. People may feel the frustration of being denied basic individual rights and so they use collective action to attain these rights. A key concept of anti-oppressive work is ‘empowerment’. Troubles are redefined in social or political terms, thus providing alternative explanations. Using the process of liberation, anti-oppressive theorists confront stereotypes and develop a positive self image. Using the concepts of this theory, anyone may chose to place their child for adoption if they believe that they cannot meet the needs of the child for whatever reason. Single mothers have gained respect in society. Policies and community resources to meet the needs of families and children have been set up. This theory may have contributed to the development of the original Disclosure Registry and of the revised Adoption Contact Laws.
Critical Perspective
The Critical Perspective Theory is used to critique a changing society as a whole. It considers the critique of domination, emancipation, interest, fusion of social/cultural analysis and considers explanation and interpretation with social/cultural critique. This perspective could also be used to review the policy related to adoption and would consider the needs and wishes of all stakeholders and it would consider the wishes of the Society at large separately.
Post Colonial Theory
The Post Colonial Theory focuses on subjectivity, identity, power and knowledge. Post colonial theory enables readers to ask questions about who speaks for whom, under what conditions and to what ends. This Theory would look at the way Society has changed since the time when European culture was predominant in Ontario. Adoption records have been closed since 1927. Secrecy surrounded adoption since this was considered to be the best way to handle adoption at the time according to Colonial thought. Post Colonial Theory recognizes the needs of individuals, some who may be interested in change and some who wish to maintain the status quo. In Post Colonial Theory, it is important to gain knowledge, to look at who speaks for whom and under what conditions, rather than to make sweeping global changes that not all birth families, adoptees, or adoptive families may be comfortable with. Post Colonial Theory would allow individuals to decide what they need, when and if they wish to have contact and what any type of contact would look like.
H.
Brief History of Adoption in Ontario
Formalized adoption history in this country goes back over 80 years. There has been a slow evolution to the place we are at today. Adoption in Canada was not regulated by the government at all until the 1920’s. Up until this point, adoptions in Canada were arranged privately most often through the churches. The First Adoption Act came into effect in Ontario in 1921. Six years later, in 1927 the Adoption Act was amended to seal adoption records in an effort to protect the privacy of the individuals involved as reflected in the prevailing social norms of the time. In 1954, the Adoption Act was repealed and adoption became regulated under the Child Welfare Act, the precursor to the Child and Family Services Act. In the face of emerging social movements for the civil rights of adopted persons, the Child Welfare Act was amended in 1978 to establish the first passive voluntary disclosure registry. Following closely along came the Adoption Disclosure Register which provided active searches for those wishing contact however both parties were required to agree. It also included veto rights for the adoptive parents that could be enacted by the adoptive parents regardless of the age of the adoptee. In 1980, the Child and Family Services Act replaced the Child Welfare Act. The Ministry of Community and Social Services commissioned the “Disclosure of Adoption Information” report and in 1986, the adoptive parent veto was rescinded, non-identifying information was defined and the provincial registrar was empowered to conduct searches at the request of the adoptee. In 1994, Ontario’s Adoption Disclosure Bill was drafted to include access to birth certificates however; this bill did not pass third reading. Between the years 1998-2003, a total of 7 Bills were introduced into the Ontario legislature but never made it passed second reading. In the face of mounting pressure for adoption reform, Bill 183 , the Adoption Information Disclosure Act was passed in Ontario in 2005. Adoption policy has been a “hot topic” since the introduction of Bill 183 and warrants more in depth review of the events that have transpired since this time. We plan to focus more on these events and we welcome input along the way as we continue to review the way adoption policy has emerged in Ontario.
D.
Adapted from Ontario Genweb Project: Adoption in Ontario: A Brief History
www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~canon/research-topic-births-adoption.html
D.
Adapted from Ontario Genweb Project: Adoption in Ontario: A Brief History
www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~canon/research-topic-births-adoption.html
Outline of our goals
We plan to look at the history of adoption disclosure as it evolved to the Access to Adoption Records Act (Vital Statistics Statute Law Amendment), 2007 (AARA) and to examine the changes that were made in this legislation as implemented on May 14, 2008. We will look at ideological issues around adoption disclosure and will look at the ways that theoretical framework can be used to examine the concepts surrounding disclosure and the new contact notices and contact preferences. One lens will be chosen to be the framework for our continuing research into this issue.
We plan to provide an overview of the current policy, and a history of how the amendments came to be. The Systems involved will be explained, including information about which levels of government and which agencies will be participating in the process. We will be most interested in seeing how the recent changes will affect the people involved in the adoption triangle.
As information is shared through this blog, and through your input, we wish to examine what impact this policy will have on adult adoptees, on birth parents and on adoptive families. We will do a critical analysis of the policy to determine what is positive and what we find is not positive. Is there anything that can or should be changed? If so, how would this policy serve people better and how could such hypothetical changes be implemented?
We welcome you to join us as we start to explore all sides of this topic.
L.
We plan to provide an overview of the current policy, and a history of how the amendments came to be. The Systems involved will be explained, including information about which levels of government and which agencies will be participating in the process. We will be most interested in seeing how the recent changes will affect the people involved in the adoption triangle.
As information is shared through this blog, and through your input, we wish to examine what impact this policy will have on adult adoptees, on birth parents and on adoptive families. We will do a critical analysis of the policy to determine what is positive and what we find is not positive. Is there anything that can or should be changed? If so, how would this policy serve people better and how could such hypothetical changes be implemented?
We welcome you to join us as we start to explore all sides of this topic.
L.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
