I mentioned in a news roundup post a few days back a story about a Canadian woman who had slapped her elderly adoptive mother with a lawsuit claiming her adoption had been conducted under fraudulent circumstance and that she had suffered “emotionally and financially” because of it.
It is back in the news in an expanded version that suggests hideously nefarious circumstances in that case and others.
A report on violence against women from the United Nations Economic and Social Council, refers to the case of an unmarried woman who gave birth at Toronto’s Mount Sinai Hospital in 1970. The 2003 report says Tina Kelly was reportedly told by her doctor that the baby boy had died and that she was not allowed to see its body.
Kelly later realized she had never received a copy of the death certificate, the report says. The hospital’s records indicated her baby went home with her.
She later reunited with her son.Kelly allegedly discovered her child had been put up for adoption and that her doctor had accepted a bribe.
A Quebec search and reunion worker says that she believes “false claims of stillbirths were common in her province” during the “baby scoop era”, and there are apparently many who agree with her assessment, as other examples are given in the article.
Thanks to patient addressing of adoptee issues by readers, some of what had been slipping under my personal radar no longer does, so the last paragraph in this report brought me up short and has my conspiracy detector beeping.
Marge, an Edmonton adoptee who has long searched for her birth parents, said she fears the lawsuit will discourage the government from increasing access to adoption records.
Is it possible that there’s an element of spin happening here? Could it be that some of the attention this topic is getting now, or possibly even the lawsuit, has been inspired or manipulated to impact the fight for open records?
I certainly don’t mean to suggest that bad things didn’t happen, but in this world where much contention pits one against the other, often in confusing ways, it seems worth a wonder.
And, by the way, has the UN stated a position on adoptee rights and open records?
Anyone … ?
A collection of my short stories:
I'm in this one, too ...
And I'm in here, as well ...
Paradise Preoccupied 
I certainly hope that this doesn’t affect open adoption records from progressing. I’m afraid I don’t know anything about the UN, just what goes on here in America and I see progress being made one small step at a time.
I try to do what I can to help by providing free legal forms for adoptee’s (and birth parents to modify from their point-of-view) to petition the courts to open their records. So anyone who reads this can go to http://www.AdoptionRecords.com and get a free self-generating, completely finished, and ready to file notice, legal petition, affidavit, and order. I sure do hope this helps adoptees everywhere because as a reunited birth mother of 22 years, I want to see everyone get their questions answered and find their roots, no matter what they might be. My daughter and I have had our ups and downs but we’ve worked through it and I’ve found a friend in her.
Good luck to anyone searching.
Thanks for providing that link, Teri.
Re: UN and children’s rights
UN Declaration on Human Rights 1948
See Article 16 (3) and Article 25 (2)
UN Declaration on the Rights of the Child 1959
Principle 3: The child from his birth shall be entitled to a name and natiionality.
UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989)
Part 1: Article 7
(1) The child shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have the right from birth to a name, the right to acquire a nationality and, as far as possible, the right to know and be cared for by his or her parents.