Unsealing DIistrict of Columbia Adoption Records

[Anonymous]

I am unclear why people are being so hostile to you. Of course you have a right to know this information about yourself. Even the justifications for sealing records pre-DNA was incentivizing people to give kids up for adoption rather than abort or kill them. No one really thinks adoptee children aren't entitled to all of the information available about themselves... at least I hope not!

Best of luck. Truly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think it is a wise idea.

Why on earth not? I cannot imagine why it is a problem? I know who all the parties are, all the relatives, on both sides, as well, and they all know about me. All bio and adoptive parents are dead. There's nothing I don't know about anyone, and vice versa, as I’ve done DNA. No one should be without this knowledge.

So, you think it's not a good idea for me to know:
My actual birthday?
The time and place of my birth?
What was written on my birth record?

Why do you get to know that and not me? I am not a rescue mutt, who, BTW, comes with a lot more information than I actually have.

You don’t get to tell someone else’s story. You are one individual they are another.

Big whoop someone birthed you.

They are their own human. Not your punching bag.

There are many reasons a woman does not want their story told.

Spare us your ridiculous nonsense and get a life no adoptee deserves to ruin life of the mother years later.

Example
My BF was a product of rape insest when she was 11 years old. Her own brother viciously raped her, Her catholic parents shipped her off to a maternity home in Idaho from
Long Island. What do you not understand about that trama ? Those records are sealed for a reason.

Sorry, my birth story is mine. We don't "protect" mothers and fathers from old patriarchal mores anymore. And, additionally, most mothers in the 50s and 60s had no choice about keeping their baby or not. There couldn't be a unmarried mother.

Also, there's no reason for mine or anyone else's, to seal records- we all know who everyone is, including me, due to DNA now. The names of everyone, parents, all siblings, haIf siblings, etc. If you actually read the post you would know that. Lastly, all parent parties are long dead. There's here's no secrets anymore that a sealed record is keeping for me and anyone, other than my actual birthdate and where I was born.

Reading comprehension- try it.

How do you know who is listed on the records?

You have likely never have done a DNA test since you are asking this question. Here's a piece of information you may be interested to know. In your lifetime, even if you never take a DNA test, if someone is looking for you in any capacity, or even if they are not, they can find you very easily even if the closest relative you had that did take a DNA test is as far out as a 5th cousin. If I was looking for you, it would take very little time.

You are assuming the records reflect reality. The mother may have given a different name for the father. Do you know whose name is listed on the record?

I think you may be under the impression that a DNA test produces a birth record. There are artifacts, yes, online, but no, DNA only shows DNA- which connects to other DNA.

And yes, when I find my original record, the father's name will not be the actual father- I already know that. Another fun fact- millions of people all over the world who are not adopted have learned that their fathers were not actually their fathers, through DNA testing. It’s common, and it is called a non- parent event.

However I have known, through DNA, who the father actually was. I am not looking for my parents at all. I already know who they were. I am looking for my birthdate and place.

Regardless, the listed father deserves privacy. Is DC going to provide a redacted record?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think it is a wise idea.

Why on earth not? I cannot imagine why it is a problem? I know who all the parties are, all the relatives, on both sides, as well, and they all know about me. All bio and adoptive parents are dead. There's nothing I don't know about anyone, and vice versa, as I’ve done DNA. No one should be without this knowledge.

So, you think it's not a good idea for me to know:
My actual birthday?
The time and place of my birth?
What was written on my birth record?

Why do you get to know that and not me? I am not a rescue mutt, who, BTW, comes with a lot more information than I actually have.

You don’t get to tell someone else’s story. You are one individual they are another.

Big whoop someone birthed you.

They are their own human. Not your punching bag.

There are many reasons a woman does not want their story told.

Spare us your ridiculous nonsense and get a life no adoptee deserves to ruin life of the mother years later.

Example
My BF was a product of rape insest when she was 11 years old. Her own brother viciously raped her, Her catholic parents shipped her off to a maternity home in Idaho from
Long Island. What do you not understand about that trama ? Those records are sealed for a reason.

Sorry, my birth story is mine. We don't "protect" mothers and fathers from old patriarchal mores anymore. And, additionally, most mothers in the 50s and 60s had no choice about keeping their baby or not. There couldn't be a unmarried mother.

Also, there's no reason for mine or anyone else's, to seal records- we all know who everyone is, including me, due to DNA now. The names of everyone, parents, all siblings, haIf siblings, etc. If you actually read the post you would know that. Lastly, all parent parties are long dead. There's here's no secrets anymore that a sealed record is keeping for me and anyone, other than my actual birthdate and where I was born.

Reading comprehension- try it.

How do you know who is listed on the records?

You have likely never have done a DNA test since you are asking this question. Here's a piece of information you may be interested to know. In your lifetime, even if you never take a DNA test, if someone is looking for you in any capacity, or even if they are not, they can find you very easily even if the closest relative you had that did take a DNA test is as far out as a 5th cousin. If I was looking for you, it would take very little time.

You are assuming the records reflect reality. The mother may have given a different name for the father. Do you know whose name is listed on the record?

I think you may be under the impression that a DNA test produces a birth record. There are artifacts, yes, online, but no, DNA only shows DNA- which connects to other DNA.

And yes, when I find my original record, the father's name will not be the actual father- I already know that. Another fun fact- millions of people all over the world who are not adopted have learned that their fathers were not actually their fathers, through DNA testing. It’s common, and it is called a non- parent event.

However I have known, through DNA, who the father actually was. I am not looking for my parents at all. I already know who they were. I am looking for my birthdate and place.

Regardless, the listed father deserves privacy. Is DC going to provide a redacted record?

No, no one involved with the birth, the relinquishing of the child, the legal names , or any other parties deserve privacy. The father on a record is usually there because he was married to the mother. In fact, it was illegal for a long period of time for the mother to list anyone else but the man she was married to as the father. True! And, the father didn't even have to be in the picture. Additionally, if the marriage dissolved, in the eyes of the court, he was still responsible for the child and considered the father.

And if she wanted to relinquish a child, she needed his permission, even if he wasn't the father, knew he wasn't the father, and/ or didn’t care one way or another. A father had to be listed. It was a way for society not to bastardize a child. Of course, we don't think that way anymore- a child being a bastard. We are past that, thankfully.
Again, there's zero privacy expected now with regards to a person's identity. The person's identity belongs to them, not other people who get to decide who this person will be. It's 2025 now, not 1962. We are long over that nonsense.

Yes, I already know who my father was, the name on the birth record at the time, who wasn't my father, and who the mother was. I just need my birthdate and place. That's not too much to ask.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am unclear why people are being so hostile to you. Of course you have a right to know this information about yourself. Even the justifications for sealing records pre-DNA was incentivizing people to give kids up for adoption rather than abort or kill them. No one really thinks adoptee children aren't entitled to all of the information available about themselves... at least I hope not!

Best of luck. Truly.

Thanks! People really just don't understand adoption, and some people are still very mired in ancient patriarchal stuff. There's so many misconceptions about all of it. Even now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you know your birth mother and roughly how old you are, you could hire a PI and they should be able to find a birth record for you.

Yeah, they would do it by petitioning DC courts to get it, like I have to, which can take up to 2 years and still be denied. Unless the law changes and it could,like other states.