Adoption Politics: Bastard Nation and Ballot Initiative 58

Rating:
Summary: Adoption Politics Gets it Right
Review: As someone who was closely connected to the events detailed in Adoption Politics: Bastard Nation & Ballot Initiative 58, I was very happy to see that Professor Carp has changed his position on open records for adult adoptees since his Family Matters, in which he advocated mutual consent registries as the most equitable solution to the contentious issue of adoptee access to adoption and birth records. Here he clearly comes out for open records for those to whom they pertain, the adult adoptee.

In his introduction to Adoption Politics, Carp says: "In blending adopted adults' access to their original birth certificates with a protection for the birth mothers' right to privacy through a contact preference form (without legal penalties for violation), Measure 58 should be viewed as a model piece of legislation for other states to emulate." (p. 3-4)

And in the conclusion: "It [a coalition of adoption activists, adoption agencies and social workers] would not only confirm that a new age is dawning, but also that this new age makes it imperative to give adult adoptees access to their original birth certificates. It would be a clarion call that in the world of adoption it is time to look with fresh eyes at an old institution." (p. 169)

I do have to disagree with several points, though, such as the following in the conclusion: "But to achieve this goal nationwide, Bastard Nation and its supporters must free themselves of ideological blinders and recognize that adoption agencies do not constitute a single, monolithic 'adoption industry.' They must recognize that, either out of altruism or self-interest, the majority of adoption agencies support openness in adoption, including open records. ... The NCFA [National Council for Adoption]...will become increasingly isolated." (p.168)

I think BN does recognize that. The "adoption industry" usage was appropriate political rhetoric for our ballot initiative campaign in Oregon. On the other hand, in California, for example, many adoption agencies joined the CA Open Coalition in its legislative push for open records for adult adoptees, at BN's urging. One has to recognize that the neutrality of Oregon's Right to Life and Catholic Charities was extremely fortunate and unusual, and not something BN can count on elsewhere. In many states Catholic Charities is one of our biggest foes.

I was dismayed by the imputation of anti-birth mother sentiment to BN as a whole on p. 109 ("BN's dislike of birth mothers"), explained by the fact that "some adopted adults harbored resentment toward their birth mothers, whom they viewed as having callously abandoned them." I can't argue that some adoptees didn't/don't feel that way, but it was unjust to tar the organization as a whole with that sentiment. Nothing in Bastard Nation's policy, strategy or tactics reflects such a bias.

In regard to his discussion of the controversial use of the term "birth whore": the book states that "e-mail messages from Bastard Nation members ... that frequently referred to birth mothers as 'birth whores'" were found on the unmoderated Usenet newsgroup, alt.adoption, by members of the Boys and Girls Aid Society of Oregon, which opposed Measure 58. (p. 86) Carp does say in a footnote that this term wasn't used on BEST (BN's internal e-mail listserv) or in BN publications or in public during the campaign (can you imagine?!), and that the organization wasn't a home for "virulent anti-birth mother beliefs," having several respected birth mothers as members, but he doesn't put those many messages on alt.adoption into any kind of context. (p. 194-195) Only one person used that term seriously, and she wasn't a Bastard Nation member for long. The vast majority of posts were from BN members and others who objected to her use of that term, and several were posts in which BN birth mothers themselves used the term as a joke, as in someone's calling herself the leader of Birth Whore Nation. It is really too bad that this kind of misinterpretation has found its way into this book since one of the points we've always tried to make is that the struggle for open records isn't one of adoptees vs. birth mothers, but of all of us (enlightened adoptive parents as well) against the dinosaur faction of the industry as represented most strongly by the NCFA.

On the whole, though, very well done! The roller coaster excitement of those days was vividly brought back to me, the feeling of making history in adoption reform. The case on both sides is fairly presented, and the legal explanations are exceptionally lucid. (...)