Family Forum / Parenting / Adoption / June 2008

No, she is not a member of BN,

Marley

I have read most of the people you mention, I don't question their
points, that is not at issue.  The challenge is the brevity.

It is okay if you can't do it, it is actually very hard.

It is the distillation of the points, not the points themselves

Awwwww sounds like somebody got his widdle feelings hurt.

Kathy 1

  I have not had time to follow this particular thread but it sounds the
same old "discussion". The b-mom has made all the choices: the actions that
caused her to become pregnant and the decision not to keep the child and to
relinquish all rights to that child. The child through all of this has all
the legal rights of a mismatched handbag being returned for a refund. So,
why do I not have the right to know who I am? What crime or offense against
society have I committed?

There will never be any agreement between the various members of the triad
or the peripheral players on this issue.  That is more then seven words but
a few things need more then a bullet comment.

Raymond

On Jun 16, 4:29 am, Robin Harritt <fink_nottle@spam_me_senseless.xyz>
wrote:

Robin, that is exactly the kind of response I am looking for.

No, you are absolutely right.

But there are some significant differences between the UK, and the US

One of which, we pride ourselves on dissing the European Classism,
that all Americans are brought up with the idea of rugged
individualism, which is completely ignored in adoptee rights, how
abhorent it is to the American psyche that one would be descriminated
on circumstances of birth.

That is what I want to capatilize on.

No, I don't want to come off as anti-adoption.

But then what is adoption?  Was it necessary to change my identity?

No, the focus now is not to come off as a radical idea, but as an idea
that has been long over due

That is why I am looking for the small slogans, to be backed up by the
bigger arguments.

On Jun 16, 4:29 am, Robin Harritt <fink_nottle@spam_me_senseless.xyz>
wrote:

the responses are out of order but, I will try to follow yours.

Okay yes, smarter, but a little bit of funny will open up the veins,
ie. mothers don't seal records, state legislators does play upon an
old NRA sentiment.

The American public is VERY different than the UK public.  You have to
remember that we are raised on the idea that we are raised without
class, okay, that is not entirely true, but we believe in equal
rights, whether or not we practice them.

You also have to remember that the U.S. was founded on states rights,
until the civil war and the 14th ammendment it was all states rights,
then things changed, that is part of the reason the south lost the
civil war, as we all know it is much harder to fight of the invaders
than be the invaded.

But the south couldn't coalesce, they had no union rights, they were
all states rights, and therefore couldn't mobilize in the same way the
North could.  They couldn't call a national draft, and ergo, the
United States is as it is.  The U.S. civil war dictates the law as it
is now, states rights are always superceded by federal rights, i.e.
Gideon's Trumpet.

The average American, not only doesn't know how state rights and
federal rights relate, they have an aversion to what they consider
socialism of the UK.  The average American has no idea who Gideon is,
or why he is important.  The average American doesn't know how our own
laws work.

The average American is elected to legislation.

I dealt with CA's Lady Di as a teenager.  She was interested in being
rich.
same as Barbara Boxer, same as Lynn Woosley

Okay, I am off the hook, but for f.cks sake if someone with power
would listen to me, it is not a states issue if the feds supercede it,
if the 9th district falls, they all will, they all will, and read the
constitution, it IS on our side the codification isn't, but for God's
sake the truth is, the consitutuion is, and don't tell me I am too
emo, for God' sake the constituion talks about the right to HAPPINESS.

Okay, sorry, forgot where I was, must be drunk as Robyn offers, all
you specialists carry on, very brilliant.

oh, and Robyn, would love to hear your ideas for U.S. adoptee rights,
we do so struggle with being taken seriously, would love to hear your
serious ideas, if you can take a break from doing nothing.

On 17/6/08 21:55, in article 2s7g545cg0uq7quhmuibqfnhctg39hhlp4@4ax.com,

Well I don't suppose they see it as "stealing babies" but there are
obviously people in the United States who profit from adoption in ways that
no one in the United Kingdom could lawfully do. We have access to birth
records for adoptees, most of the United States does not, The reasons
usually given for keeping records closed there have little basis in fact,
experience elsewhere shows that to be so.

It's 2008 where I live, what year is it in the USA, 1960?

Yes, not really acceptable in any nation that has the slightest regard for
Human Rights

Maybe she is

Probably with something more than slogans is my only answer to that the
moment. Perhaps a read of the Houghton Report and various UK Hansards for
1974 / 75 would help, there were a lot people in opposition to openness in
England & Wales (probably still are, but they don't get their way)

Robin

*