A comment on yesterday’s blog from JA taking issue with birth parent names on birth certs started a thought process that once again grew out of the box and turned into a post.
Stating that “even if a married woman gives birth to a child fathered by someone who isn’t her husband, the husband’s name legally must go on the BC”, JA relates a number of thoughts that have me pondering …
I have no doubt that there are many, many people with birth certs that don’t reflect the reality of paternal genetic contributions, but that feels like a different issue.
JA does bring up an interesting point on the document in general, however, and that is its use as a commonly demanded proof of … what? … existence? citizenship? that seems outmoded in this day and age.
If, for example, I needed to prove identity, how far does a paper issued 56 years ago go to prove anything? I happen to still use my maiden name for part of my signature, but I could just as easily not, and the information on my birth cert is far from anything that could identify me now.
As a document of birth, it seems right to me that the details included should be about those involved in that process … although there is nothing to stop a mother from filling in the name of her husband even if she knows the child was fathered by another, so it is an imperfect process from the beginning.
But I’m drawn back to the question of the raison d’etre of the document in the first place. If proof of birth is the point, why would information such as the marital status of the parents need to be included? After all, a person is just as much a person … just as “born”, so to speak … whether or not their mother was a certain age or race or married to the father.
If, as JA suggests, a certificate of birth is “not technically about who the bio parents are”, what is it about? That there is any indication implied by a birth cert as to “who is responsible for the child” seems far fetched, and I wonder what the point is of having a legal document to show that someone was born when the person required to present the document so obviously has been.
If documentation is required for the reason of compiling a statistical database, why would the same doc need to be used as identification? If it is date or place of birth that needs to be established to determine if someone is old enough to drive or to obtain some of whatever citizenship conveys, does possession of a paper that says that at this time on such-and-such a day, so-and-so, weighing such-and-such, was born to so-and-so and so-and-so, who either were or were not married to each other, was delivered by doctor-fill-in-the-blank at this hosptial-that-no-longer-exists prove anything? I have yet to hear about any official agency asking someone to remove a shoe to compare the baby footprint to the size 12 wanting to drive in the state, but that seems it would be better proof that it’s the same person standing in front of you … a person who may very well go by a completely different name, as well as being much bigger than 6 lbs. 12 ounces … as the one mentioned on the paper.
There’s no question that many of the processes we go through in life require the sharing of information that could be considered private. Being required to produce tax returns, for example, seems intrusive considering how many people could peruse at their pleasure just because they’re in a position of access. Is it anyone’s business who you decide to support through charitable donations or what you spent on entertainment or medical care?
But to our issue here …
I agree that changes to the way birth certs work do need addressing all the way around. It seems one of those things that people assume will always be the way it is because it is the way it is, so little thought is put into challenging a status quo that appears so static.
As it is, however, when we’re talking about people born 20, 30, 40 years ago and more, it’s not changes to today’s birth certs that is at issue or the process of getting a driver’s license or a passport, but rather their right to know the names of the people who made them. I can’t speak for anyone, but it seems to me that a paper listing birth parent names presented to DMV wouldn’t bring even a glimmer of a blink to either the DMV employee or the person applying for a license or whatever, but it would serve to prove that so-and-so was born to so-and-so then and there, and when the so-and-so that was born is you, that’s a really big deal … and a basic right.
A couple of other random thoughts on this …
Suppose someone’s father, say, died of drink or a venereal disease or OD’d on heroin, and that person needed to present the death certificate to numerous people and agencies as proof of death for whatever purposes. Would that be reason enough to list something less controversial … or embarrassing or less likely to have someone make an assumption about that person or that person’s family … as the cause of death on the document? If so, there would be little point to “official” versions, would there? If not, then why should a certificate of death be any less malleable than a birth cert?
Another thought involves a woman I know who was married for a while and had two children with her husband. Eventually, she divorced and had another child by another man. She insisted, however, that her third child have the same last name as her first two kids, the last name of her ex-husband, and went to great lengths to make this happen.
Her reasoning? She didn’t want people to learn her kids’ names and think she had children by different men. The fact that this is, indeed, the case had no impact at all on her. By massaging her third child’s reality, she virtually wiped out his legal connection to his biological father, proposed a connection that doesn’t exist in anyone’s mind, as her ex knows perfectly well this is not his child, created a false relationship between siblings, set up a confusion that will last a lifetime for the poor kid, and perhaps stimulated some suspicion all the way around as to who is who to whom in that family.
I’m asking a lot of questions today, and hoping for discussion, enlightenment and answers … and while I’m here, I would like to thank everyone participating in this effort — and I know it is an effort — to create one little corner of the adoption-related world where one topic can be deliberated, one issue can be addressed, and perhaps one wrong can be righted.
A collection of my short stories:
I'm in this one, too ...
And I'm in here, as well ...
Paradise Preoccupied 
Thanks for addressing this issue in its own blog post! I thought of more situations to add to the complexity: egg, sperm, and embryo donation, and maybe even surrogacy. What’s to be done in those cases? I think the only official records of biological parentage in those cases are medical records (though I could be wrong?), which are subject to privacy laws. I’m assuming that the State has no interest or concern with maintaining records of biological ancestry – but at least in adoption, the courts (or another country) are involved, so there are some official records through that process.
It’s definitely a complex issue! Reminded me of a pbs series about reproductive technology… here’s a link to a very long interview with a bioethicist who discusses these issues (including adoption, and records, and so much more!):
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/fertility/interviews/annas.html
Sandra and many others,
I just wanted to write and say how pleasantly surprised I have been by the respectful and informative discussion that has been occurring here. The issues that you bring up, think about, discuss…are important in a very long range way, in that many of you are looking at this through a lens of a lifetime of experience. What I mean to say is that people are trying to see the bigger picture.
The problem that I have is that our adoption journey has been extremely difficult thus far. Adopting a larger sibling group of special needs children is one way to shake up your comfortable little world, if you happen to be looking for some adventure as you mature. But I feel as though I am in the middle of a triage unit, being asked to contemplate the philosophy behind the war. If I am a doctor, I might just block all of that out of my mind and begin to try and stop some of the bleeding.
The few times I have sort of stumbled across these sorts of discussions in the online adoption world, they have seemed mean spirited, and mud slinging, and steeped in bitterness. Quite frankly, I am up to my armpits in unpleasantness most days, and I just don’t know that I can bear any more. But I love my children, and I don’t want to sweep all of this out of my brain and under the rug, just because it feels easier for me.
So I greatly appreciate this “kinder, gentler” discussion. Much thanks to you all for keeping the discussion going, and sharing so much. I believe that many of you will not ever really know how far your wisdom has been allowed to spread, or the unlikely places that ideas begin to take root. Or how many children will live different lives because of exchanges like these.
Birth certificates are going to be a hot topic for a while and I think a topic more and more discussed because a new generation of people are coming of age and have some very serious concerns with their birth certifcates as well.
This Monday I am going to be interviewing a girl for The Adoption Show and she has had 15 failed DNA tests and has written over 500 men looking for her father, who was a sperm donor.
Donor Conceived people get one birth certificate. And sometimes neither parent on it is their biological parent depending on if donated sperm and egg were used or just one with one of the biological parents other.
Parents who are at the hospital, for the birth are the parents who go onto the birth certificate. Assumed paternity of the father, like you mentioned above Sandra, when in a marriage.
Some states even allow two mothers on a birth certificate as parent 1 and parent 2 and there IS NO FATHER listed.
( this is not about gay rights for me, this is an adoptee rights issue only)
Its really interesting to me that when I gave birth to my oldest daughter who is 3 her (father and I aren’t married) he had to sign a pledge of paternity on a form that I was looking at today, in order for him to be listed on the birth certificate. Stating that he was legally the biological father of my daughter. Its criminal to say that you’re the biological father and not be if you’re not married to the mother.
why then, is it okay to list 2 mothers in another state, we all know that 2 mothers cannot naturally produce a child, the capability just isn’t there. 2 eggs don’t make a baby. I guess I’d have to look into those state laws to see if its criminal to list yourself as the biological father and not be. It clearly states “biological” in the california law for fathers name, when not married to the mother.
If its not about ancestrial connections, and relations and ties, then what IS it about? And if its about statistics and people tracking then what does it matter who’s on the certificate and why would he have to declare he’s the biological father? Why can he only be taken off the birth certificate ( which it says is possible ) if he has a DNA test? And what happens in the case of donor parents? if that father wants off the birth certifcate 2 years into a marriage and a divorce later? he’s clear to go? is the mother also? if they used both donor sperm and donor egg, couldn’t this be possible? Then what the human being has NO parents of birth?
I think reform in this department needs to be massive as well. I DO believe that we use birth certificates as a way to trace ancestry, that may not have been the original intention behind them, however, we all know that the technology and abilities behind human life and conception weren’t even close to what they are today. Times have change and the laws need to be amended as well.
thats a really nice post scraps. I’m not always nice, sometimes I can be a complete brat. I’m seeing progress here though, and it inspires me, so I’m trying and I’m learning.
Scraps,
Thank you. It seems everyone participating is trying hard to keep the conversation moving toward something positive. As for the triage comparision, that would seem to be the case for many of us, but for adult adoptees this issue IS the war … at least for now. Like much in our little world, POV is everything.
I don’t hear calls for everyone to shift this to the front burner, but for individuals to study the issue, decide for themselves if open records are something worth support, and if so to lend that support in whatever way is proper for each.
As a practice in cooperative thinking and an effort to break some bad habits, it has value, as well, I think.
Gershom,
A “pledge of paternity” to be listed as father on the birth cert, and illegal to claim paternity on the birth cert for anyone but the bio father? Only IF you’re NOT married? Is that the stipulation? Like it’s okay if you are married to claim a child not biologically your own? But only in California? This is very interesting.
And really silly. I mean, really … How arbitrary are our “official records”?
As for the donor conceived, that’s a fascinating discussion better saved for later. Given the tenuous nature of the relationships we’re trying to build on OBCs, I’d rather not complicate the matter with biomedical ethics and ramifications quite yet.
“Its really interesting to me that when I gave birth to my oldest daughter who is 3 her (father and I aren’t married) he had to sign a pledge of paternity on a form that I was looking at today, in order for him to be listed on the birth certificate. Stating that he was legally the biological father of my daughter. Its criminal to say that you’re the biological father and not be if you’re not married to the mother. ”
That DOES seem whacky……