Open birth records
Adoptees are among your family and/or friends. They're in my family — an adopted daughter and two sisters my mother released for adoption (being born in states having open birth record laws for adult adoptees enabled them to contact me).
I've done home studies for an adoption agency, counseled adolescent and adult adoptees, and been a foster parent for pregnant women planning on releasing their infants for adoption. This personal and work history showed me how much harm the secrecy surrounding adoption does by denying a significant portion of the adult population access to its medical and cultural history.
We all acknowledge the importance of our medical history. We are instructed to know it as part of our health care.
Pennsylvania adoptees — including my daughter — cannot fill out doctor forms. This has health implications for her.
The goal of state House Bill 162 is to allow Pennsylvania-born adult adoptees to obtain their original, factual birth certificates. It passed the House unanimously on Oct. 23.
HB 162 is now before the Senate Aging and Youth Committee. I urge you to support this bill by contacting state Sen. Bob Mensch, R-Montgomery County, committee chair; state Sen. Kim Ward, R-Hempfield, vice chair; and/or state Sen. LeAnna M. Washington, D-Philadelphia, minority chair.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Pedro must go
- Duty to disclose
- Steel at stake, too
- Not taxpayers’ responsibility
- Reverse red-kettle ban II
- Oberdorf firing
- Beware this Wolf I
- Reverse red-kettle ban I
- Good riddance
- PETA & its tactics II
- Lawsuit: Publicity stunt