Reply #36: A small quibble: [View All]

[Occulus]

The laws need to addressed regarding adopted children and the identities of their biological parents. As a result of the laws in place when I was born, for example, my biological parents were able to hide their identity and their complete medical history from me. All I have on my family history record is a bunch of meaningless descriptive information (so-and-so was this tall, and was good at these things, etc.); it doesn't contain anything of use to... well, anyone.

Since this was in 1975, long before DNA sequencing was common and screening for genetic diseases was able to be performed, well... I have no clue what diseases my parents' bloodlines are susceptible to. For family history, on doctors' office forms, I have to write 'Unknown- adopted'. Never mind that I can't say why I look the way I do...

I can hire a PI to ferret the information out, but I can't just pick up the phone and give a call to the people who brought me into the world... and I'm not even told anything about them when they're dead. I can't know what they died of (maybe it was a family history of cancer appearing after the age of 30, and it wasn't found out until after I was born), and that worries me a bit.

Personally, I think all that information should be available to every adopted child from the age of 18. No, I don't believe people giving up their child for adoption ought to expect any right for their identity or their medical history to be hidden from the child. It's both a bit cruel and a medical roll of the dice, for the adopted child and any family they may have when they reach adulthood.

I didn't mean to hijack the thread, but it's something most of us simply don't have to think about, which is why the laws are the way they are. I've even heard some people tell me I don't have a right to know who my parents are. It's funny, though- they get the horrors when I turn that around and tell them the same thing...