Horse and human pedigree compared - Humboldt Beacon
Join the discussion below, or Read more at Humboldt Beacon.
#1 Sep 9, 2010
You'd be hard pressed to find a society throughout history that didn't consider familial lines important. Some religions are even based on ancestor worship. There are whole sections of the Bible that only deal with who begot whom. And yet today many people will tell adoptees that whose DNA they have doesn't matter because they are lucky to not have been aborted, or that their biological parents have the right to anonymity.
It is time to stop treating adoptees like children or human property. Every person has the right to track their ancestry. At one time people were not allowed to question the morality of slavery as an institution and practice. Today we agree as a nation that slavery was a horrendous practice, both corrupt and corrupting. The same may be said of infant adoption some day. We must not let the industry and the popular views of adoption get in the way of giving all people equal access to their records.
Even if you love adoption, even if you are offended by someone questioning the ethics of it, remember that there are people who, because of this practice, are stripped of certain rights that the rest of us take for granted. Keep an open mind and listen to what adult adoptees have to say.
#2 Sep 9, 2010
I couldn't agree more with Mara and billyandme. I find it very disturbing that adoptees are expected to be grateful for being stripped of their biological heritage, especially in this day and age. How would you feel if you had to leave the medical history blank whenever you saw a doctor? How would you feel not knowing if you had a genetic predisposition to particular cancers, diabetes, MS, Parkinsons disease? How would you feel if your child died because you did not know that you carried particular genes? So many people take these things for granted. All the love in the world from your adoptive family can never make up for not knowing your roots.
#3 Sep 10, 2010
Government seizure of birth certificates for infants who are in the process of being adopted is certainly a form of slavery. A birth certificate records the facts of a specific event. Those facts cannot be changed physically because the genes live on in the adopted person and future generations, with or without factual documentation. When a persons birth certificate is changed by the government under the guise of protection from illegitimacy, the individual is thought to be reborn through adoption. Illegitimate infants are legitimized by the adoption process, giving a fatherless child two legitimate parents on a new Certificate of Live Birth. The idea reeks of eugenics of decades long gone in which unwed mothers were considered imbeciles (Google it), so why does this practice continue? Both practices need to be abolished: the continued sealing of birth certificates of adoptees, and, falsifying new birth certificates. To add injury to this barbaric legal practice is the fact that not all adoptees are of illegitimate birth: millions of adoptees were born to married parents and one or both parents died, resulting in the adoption of the half or full orphans whose birth certificates are also seized, falsified and kept from the adopted person for life. It is not the circumstances of birth, but the condition of being adopted that perpetuates these atrocities.
#4 Sep 10, 2010
I agree with this article, my mother was adopted in Texas in 1922, so other than her name I have nothing more about her "pedigree". She was a great lady and but my brother and I begin and end with her.
#5 Sep 11, 2010
The ideas of bloodlines, heritage and ancestry have resonated with all cultures throughout history. Today, by using affordable DNA technology, people can determine the migration routes of distant ancestors, long before written records were kept. The success of genealogy-by-DNA testing companies shows that many people value this information for its own sake and are willing to pay hundreds of dollars for that knowledge.
Genealogy is the second most popular hobby after gardening. With the advent of Internet sources, it is now within reach of those who didn't have the time or resources to invest in digging through old court and church archives.
So - wanting to trace one's family tree is universally accepted, even if not everyone wants to personally do it.
Unless you're adopted.
Then any disinterest is held up, not as a personal choice, but as a noble gesture. Anyone interested in tracing their heritage is considered selfish and ungrateful and their motives suspect.
Why such a double standard? It's not like we're asking for something that no one else has.
Contrary to the belief of the general public, the records are not sealed when someone relinquishes a child for adoption, nor when the child becomes a ward of the state (either through the death of parents or involuntary termination of parental rights).
The records only seal upon ADOPTION. Any relinquished child has full rights to the original birth certificate UNLESS and UNTIL they are adopted. Since that is the law - why do people still insist that relinquishment guarantees anonymity? The law simply doesn't work that way.
Add your comments below
|Doubts arise over history of Galena's Murder Bo... (May '13)||Jun 5||wcfireman||18|
|What's Going On||Jun 4||Community Disorga...||3|
|Publisher reissues genealogies of early South C...||Apr '16||Lucy||1|
|Tahiti: Looking for lost family? (Jun '07)||Mar '16||Carmille Ngatuakana||60|
|Vernon Historical Society to launch the Simmons...||Mar '16||Jethro||2|
|TV Show's Revelation About Dustin Hoffman's Roo...||Mar '16||George||8|
|Kalaupapa tribute planned||Jan '16||LJAINAK77||1|
Find what you want!
Search Genealogy Forum Now
Copyright © 2016 Topix LLC