Nova Scotia & Opening Adoption Records

Adoption reform overdue in N.S.
By CAROL TOOTON November 18, 2004 The Halifax Herald

November being National Adoption Month gives us cause to reflect once again onthe progress being made with regard to open adoption records.Ontario?s community services minister, Sandra Pupatello, got it right when shewrote in an opinion column for the Toronto Star recently: "When Ontario begansealing its adoption records 80 years ago, it was introducing a social policythat it felt was right for the times. But to be relevant, social policies mustchange as society changes. To be defensible, social policy must be based onexperience and evidence, not fear."It?s time to move Ontario?s social policy forward. Ontario?s adoptees andbirth parents don?t live in the 1920s. It?s time our adoption informationlaws didn?t either."We at Canadian Mental Health Association, Nova Scotia Division, applaud therecent legislation passed by the province of Ontario, which will truly openadoption records in that province. There is no right to veto disclosure ofinformation, and the law is made retroactive to 1927 when adoption records weresealed. At one stroke, Ontario has given all adoptees in that province equalrights with non-adopted Canadians: the right to know the names of their naturalparents plus the right to current family medical history.Privacy concerns are adequately addressed by providing the right to place ano-contact veto. Anyone who does not wish to meet a natural parent orbiological son or daughter may legally register that wish. There is a fine of$50,000 should that legally binding request not be honoured. This has beenproven to work in other countries. There is no reason why it should not work inCanada.We agree with Ontario?s view that it is time governments in Canada stoppedperpetuating the shame, the blame, the secrecy and the lies that for far toolong have been a part of the adoption situation. This is certainly true foradoptions which took place in the 1940s, ?50s and ?60s. While governmentsgenerally have provided a better scenario for more recent adoptions, it is morethan time that the overall physical and mental health of older adoptees andtheir natural parents be given due consideration.We also agree with the written recommendation to Canada (October 2003) by the UNCommission on the Rights of the Child, that release of personal information tothe immediate parties concerned (such information is never released to thepublic at large) is a "fundamental right necessary for the mental health" ofthe individual and "not inconsistent with the right to a private life."As Ms. Pupatello so eloquently stated: "Ontario?s adoptees and birth parentsdon?t live in the 1920s. It?s time our adoption information laws didn?teither."We at Canadian Mental Health, Nova Scotia Division, feel that adoption reform islong overdue in Nova Scotia. We urge the government to stop perpetuating thefear, secrecy and shame which, in former years, was attached to adoption. Onceand for all, it is time to put to rest the myths and the tired, untruearguments against opening adoption records.Carol Tooton is executive director, Canadian Mental Health Association, NovaScotia Division.
___________________________________________________
THE CHRONICLE HERALD

Nova Scotia should open adoption records

November 04, 2005
By MIKE SLAYTER

The idea of open adoption records may, for some, conjure up an image of a free-for-all shareware stampede to view long-held government secret files pertaining to adoption in this province. But rest assured, this is not what open-records legislation represents or would allow, contrary to the beliefs of at least some who steadfastly oppose the notion of allowing the adoption community entitlement to their own personal information and histories. The move to open-records legislation, as has been the worldwide trend for the past few decades, serves several purposes. Not only does it put to rest the mythology and innuendo surrounding adoption secrecy, it acknowledges the absolute need to revamp the discriminatory practice of concealing truth from the adoption community.The hundreds of studies undertaken worldwide respecting the rights of individuals impacted by adoption legislation that prevents individuals from accessing their own personal histories have all drawn the same conclusion: that, for adoptees, the continued practice of concealment of birth identity and unabridged family history only serves to further the psychological trauma and degradation felt by the vast majority who are caught in the veil of adoption secrecy.Similarly for birth parents, many of whom silently agonize over the *without choice* relinquishment of their children, the archaic policies of secrecy only exacerbate their ability to ever find peace and relief from what used to be a seemingly overzealous, judgmental and condemning society.Adding to their frustrations with the absolute control of information by Big Brother, the adoption community¢s protest of government¢s patronizing attitude and continued misleading of the public as to *who was promised what* respecting confidentiality is continually being dismissed and/or ignored. Thankfully, not every province is like Nova Scotia. With resolve and fortitude, the Ontario government recently passed its much-maligned Adoption Disclosure Bill 183, finally putting an end to years of rhetoric and mythology that have shrouded the truths of adoption secrecy¢s disastrous impact on adoptees and birth parents. Bill 183, touted to be the most progressive disclosure legislation in North America, is in line with what has already been in place for years in other jurisdictions around the world. The carefully crafted bill will attempt to eliminate 80 years of secrecy and denial of rights felt by so many within the adoption community.The move to openness by Ontario¢s government can only be seen as an acknowledgement that its outdated disclosure policies have been discriminatory and a contravention of the UN Charter. It is also a clear indication that the Ontario government has listened to the adoption community and has done its homework regarding its study of open-records legislation in other jurisdictions, both in and outside of Canada. There will be some opposition to the legislation. Undoubtedly, those opposed to openness will cry foul, launching into their usual misleading tirades about the *promise of confidentiality,* which they say was demanded and expected by birth mothers. The fact is that if such a promise had been given to any party to an adoption, it was unauthorized and was never penned in any legal contract or government act.The pleas and demands for openness have come from adoptees, birth parents and family members, as well as a very small contingent of adoptive parents.However, with their insistence that adoption records remain inaccessible or sealed, many adoptive parents have alienated themselves not only from the other two sides of the adoption triangle but, in many a case, from their own children.One might think that the successful passage of Ontario¢s Bill 183 would serve as an appropriate springboard for provinces which obviously are in need of an assisted launch into the 21st century. Unfortunately, it is evident that the Nova Scotia government refuses to overcome its mindless, draconian status quo. It is bittersweet for many of us in this province to witness the recent victory in Ontario, and what can only be described as a release from bondage for so many in that province. Their change has been made for all the right reasons. The Nova Scotia government¢s refusal to change, on the other hand, continues for all the wrong reasons. November is National Adoption Awareness Month. How fitting that the province of Ontario saw the light and passed its Adoption Disclosure Bill 183 on the first day of this month.Mike Slayter is an adoption rights advocate who lives in Dartmouth.
__________________________________

Families kept apart Despite a promise years ago to open adoption records, government has done nothing

By David Rodenhiser, The Halifax Daily News

Imagine waking up one morning, not knowing anything about your mother or father. Not their names, or even what they look like. Nothing.
For most of us, the very thought is frightening, and almost inconceivable. But thousands of Nova Scotians face every morning knowing nothing of their parents. They are adoptees, and the government refuses to allow them open access to information the rest of us take for granted.
It’s a fundamental unfairness that the Ontario government corrected for its citizens Tuesday, but which Premier John Hamm and his crew have allowed to persist in Nova Scotia, despite promising six years ago to open up adoption records.
“I’m so glad that at least one provincial government had the fortitude to do the right thing,” said Mike Slayter, who’s been fighting for more than a decade to make Nova Scotia’s system more open.
Effective 2007, Ontario adoptees who’ve reached the age of 18 will be able to access their birth certificates and adoption orders, which will provide them with their birth names and the names of their parents. Birth parents will be allowed to access the same information, once the child they gave up for adoption turns 19.
Birth parents and adult adoptees will be able to file a notice prohibiting direct or indirect contact, and the party requesting the birth certificate and adoption order will have to sign a form consenting to the no-contact provision. Violating that agreement will be punishable by fines of up to $50,000.
As well, disclosure prohibitions will be provided to birth parents and adoptees who can prove that disclosure would cause significant harm.
This is a sensible system that will give people information they have a fundamental right to know, while protecting others against contact from parents, children or siblings they don’t want to meet. In fact, it’s similar to the system the Hamm government proposed in legislation it tabled in 1999, but withdrew after some parents and adoptees complained about loss of privacy and the potential for unwanted contact.
No system is foolproof, but the 1999 bill offered far fewer risks than rewards.
Instead of being progressive, Nova Scotia bears the shame of being among the provinces a United Nations committee on children’s rights criticized two years ago for failing to “recognize the right of an adopted child to know, as far as possible, her/his biological parents.” British Columbia, Alberta and Newfoundland have open adoption records.
Slayter, 50, said finding his birth mother gave him a “full sense of self.”
“I never realized how big that piece was until I found it,” he said yesterday. “It made me feel real. It made me feel like an entire person — a whole person. I actually had some history that I could call my own.”
Slayter started searching for his mother in 1987, a few years after his adoptive parents died. He and his twin sister Wendy were adopted together as infants and had a happy, loving upbringing in Halifax and England. But he always wondered.
“A lot of my younger years were fraught with so much self-doubt,” Slayter said. “I would fantasize as a little boy, ‘What does my birth mom look like?’ And I envisioned this picture of her. For some reason, I thought that she would be a very plump woman, a great cook, living in Cape Breton. She was none of that.”
It took Slayter five years of detective work to track down his mother, a slight woman from Springh ill.They spoke on the phone for seven months before reuniting in 1993.

Even though it took me five years, I am so glad, and my daughters are glad and my birth mom is very, very happy. It’s just been tremendous.”
Sadly, Slayter’s joy is one that is still being denied to many Nova Scotians.

drodenhiser@hfxnews.ca
David Rodenhiser has no personal connection to adoption issues, other than profound empathy for people barred from knowing their own heritage. He lives in Dartmouth.
PROMISES, PROMISES
Promise No. 182 of John Hamm’s 253-pledge 1999 Blue Book campaign platform: “Introduce legislation that recognizes the right to identifying information for adult adoptees and birth parents.”
Result: It was introduced, but never passed