Access Rhode Island on Facebook!

Access Rhode Island, the sponsoring organization of clean HB 5453 now has a Facebook page. Please join. Help Rhode Island be Free State #7. No restrictions! No excuses! For more information on the Rhode Island bill, see blog directly below this.

RHODE ISLAND: Good News! Clean OBC Bill Introduced

While Indiana piddles along the road to adoptee serfdom (apologies to Friedrich Hayek!) Rhode Island activists tread the road to liberty. On February 16, Representatives Carnevale, Mattiello, Hearn,Ucci, and Marcello introduced H5453, a short and sweet bill to restore OBC access to all Rhode Island's adoptees with no restriction. The bill is backed by long-time Rhode Island activists, Rhode Island Access. RIA is not to be confused with the amateur muck-abouts who created last year's deformist debaclethat ended in the passage of the fox in the hen house H7877 which took the veto where no man has gone before, and consideration of S2759 which took man even further. Don't remember the details? Here's a refresher from my May 13 2010 blog:

The bill (H7877), framed in deformer NewSpeak as a records access and adoptee rights measure, creates a " do not release" option (a nice name for disclosure veto) for families of origin--in this case not only a parent, but a parent or sibling of a deceased parent-- to keep their Family Bastard de-identied and at bay. The Senate's close companion SB2759 extends the veto to the parent or sibling of a "permanently disabled " parent (no mention of proof or definition of "permanently disabled"). That is, to people who may have pressured the parent to surrender their shameful secret into the secret adoption mill to start with. Hen meet Fox.

Fortunately, the legislature ended before any more harm could be done.

You can read more about last year's clusterfuck here and here.

Longtime Rhode Island Access activist Nancy Horgan is optimistic about the H5453 passage. She wrote on Facebook:

We are very optimistic for 2011 House support. The 75 member RI House passed an unrestricted access bill in 2009 and we'll be seeking their continued support on this issue. Positive letters to our sponsor Rep-Carnevale@rilin.state.

The organization is currently looking for Senate sponsors.

In a legislative season overrun with compromise, mendacity, and gutlessness, we are delighted to find this gem of a bill that has a fighting chance to restore the Free State of Rhode Island.

Cross posted to Bastard Nation blog

INDIANA: SB 469 More Compromise

Currently, Indiana has two access bills in the hopper. HB 1201 is a convoluted, incomprehensible eye-burning mess that must have been written by a random bill generator. It seems to have something to do with access, but the several of us who have read it are not sure what. SB 469 is a different story. The bill seeks to expand backwards the state's OBC access law to cover pre-1994 adoptees. The only problem is that (1) the current law, although it allows many adoptees to access their OBCs, contains a disclosure veto, and (2) the new bill expands that veto backwards; thus, creating a significant pool of potential unworthies to be blacklisted by the state.

HB 469 is backed by the American Adoption Congress and other compromisers. Pam Kroskie, AAC Midwest Director wrote a glowing report on "our legislation," (HB 469) in the January 29, 2011 Bloomington Adoptive Families Examiner. She thanked deformers Adam Pertman (director, Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute), Mary Mason, Donnie Davis, Wendy Rowney (all AAC) and Judy Foster (president NJCares and AAC NJ State Rep) for their "terrific help." The February 2 Indiana Daily Student (Indiana University) included Kroskie and the AAC. AAC North Carolina State Rep Roberta McDonald, writing in the comments section, urged passage. Bastard Nation's Maya Lama, Toff Phillipo, and I urged defeat in the same section. On February 17, WTHR-TV (Indianapolis) broadcast a virtual commercial for adoption lawyer Steve Kirsch, who opposes HB 469, because it's not fair to "ruin one life." Kirsch, however, supports HB 1201 because is offers better "protection for all the parties"--though he doesnt explain how or why adoptees are protected from their their own information. For poor bastards unable to divvy up the $700 state CI fee, Kirsh generously offers to work pro bono and charge only the $140 court costs.

The Indiana Senate Judiciary Committee, on February 9, heard testimony on SB 469. Bastard Nation submitted testimony opposed to the bill, posted below. I decided not to post it until after the hearing because I did not want proponents to see what we had submitted before the hearing. According to Indiana Legislative Update, the bill is on hold until HB 1201 comes over from the House for a hearing.

Indiana Senate Judiciary Committee, February 9, 2011

SUBMITTED TESTIMONY

SB 469: access to identifying information

for adoptees original birth certificate access

OPPOSE

Privilege is the opposite of right

Bastard Nation: the Adoptee Rights Organization is the largest adoptee civil rights organization in the United States. We support full, unrestricted access for all adopted persons, upon request, of their own true, unaltered original birth certificates (OBC). We oppose HB 469.

Under current Indiana law, the original birth certificates* of those adopted before January 1, 1994 are sealed and cannot be released to the adoptee without a court order. Those adopted after that date can receive their OBCs without a court order-- unless a birthparent files a disclosure veto with the state. This disclosure veto carves out a special "right" for birthparents that no other parent has-- the "right" to bar the state from releasing the birth certificate to his or her own offspring.

This veto provision gives those birthparents who choose to use it, a vested right in state-guaranteed anonymity where none existed before and makes them immune from future changes in the law that would unseal all the state's OBCs.

This vested right for the few does not exist for pre-1994 birthparents. Unfortunately, HB 469 expands this onerous veto provision to cover pre-1994 adoptees whose records could be otherwise unsealed if this law passes. The bill does nothing to restore the absolute right of OBC access that Indiana adoptees, once enjoyed. Instead, the bill will continue to make adoptee access to their own birth certificates a state/birthparent conditioned privilege separate and unequal from the right enjoyed by Indiana's not adopted to receive their birth certificates without restriction. As long as a veto provision exists in Indiana law, Indiana adoptees will only receive favors, not rights.

For decades individuals and special interest groups opposed to adoptee OBC access have claimed that biological parents have been promised anonymity from their own offspring who were placed for adoption. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Courts have found that “birthparents do not have any legal expectation of anonymity.” (Doe v Sundquist, 943 F. Supp. 886, 893-94 (M.D. Tenn. 1996)) (06 F.3d 703, 705 (6th Cir. 1997)) (Does v Oregon, Summary Judgment Oregon State Court of Appeals) (Does v. State of Oregon, 164 Or.App. 543, 993 P.2d 833, 834 (1999)). Moreover, OBCs are sealed at the time of adoption finalization not surrender, and the birth certificate of any child not adopted is left unsealed and available to him or her. If an adoption is disrupted or overturned, the birth certificate is unsealed.

Adopted adults, especially since 9/11, are increasingly denied passports, drivers licenses, pensions, Social Security benefits, professional certifications, and security clearances due discrepancies on their amended birth certificates, and their inability to produce an original birth certificate to answer the problems. Indiana is one of 11 states currently considering a law to require presidential and vice-presidential candidates to present proof of citizenship through birth certificates. Indiana's proposal, SB 114, sponsored by Sen. Mike Delph and currently in the Elections Committee, requires that "a certified copy of each nominee's birth certificate, including any other documentation necessary to establish that the nominee meets qualifications" to appear on the ballot.

Kansas and Alaska have never sealed original birth certificates. Since 1999 four states have restored to adoptees the unrestricted right to records and identity access: Oregon through ballot initiative, and Alabama, New Hampshire, and Maine through legislation. No statistics are available for Kansas and Alaska, but approximately 17,000 OBCs in the latter four states have been released with no reported ill consequences.

Rights are for all citizens, not favors doled out to some Indiana does not segregate rights by religion, ethnicity, age, or gender. It should not segregate rights by birth, adoptive status, or parental preference.

Vote DO NOT PASS on SB 469. All of Indiana's adoptees must enjoy equal protection, due process, and dignity. Indiana adoptees deserve better than SB 469!

Submitted by Marley Greiner
Submitted February 8, 2011
Executive Chair
Bastard Nation: the adoptee rights organization

*We are unclear about the meaning of "adoption record" listed in SB 469. Bastard Nation supports to release of the OBC, adoption decree, and other court-held documents pertaining to the adoptee.

Bastard Nation is dedicated to the recognition of the full human and civil rights of adult adoptees. Toward that end, we advocate the opening to adoptees, upon request at age of majority, of those government documents which pertain to the adoptee's historical, genetic, and legal identity, including the unaltered original birth certificate and adoption decree. Bastard Nation asserts that it is the right of people everywhere to have their official original birth records unaltered and free from falsification, and that the adoptive status of any person should not prohibit him or her from choosing to exercise that right. We have reclaimed the badge of bastardy placed on us by those who would attempt to shame us; we see nothing shameful in having been born out of wedlock or in being adopted. Bastard Nation does not support mandated mutual consent registries or intermediary systems in place of unconditional open records, nor any other system that is less than access on demand to the adult adoptee, without condition, and without qualification.

Cross-posted to the Bastard Nation blog.

Oregon HB 2843 is Dead!: Measure 58 and Our Rights Prevail!

The best valentine ever!

Please spread the word!

Helen Hill posted this news about 5 minutes ago on Facebook:

UPDATE UPDATE! HUNTS OFFICE DROPPED THE BILL! IT"S OVER!

I just got a call from the LA McGlone who told me they are NOT pursuing this bill. They did their research and are DROPPING THIS BILL! They are circling around to the Judiciary Committee to give them the heads up. The JC will NOT proceed without prompting from Hunt's office. McGLone said he was VERY GRATEFUL they didn't get slammed with emails, he sensed we were telling folks to hold off. He said thank you thank you thank you. They just wanted a little breathing room to see what this bill really meant, ramifications, etc. the info I brought in did that. They don't want to touch a hair on the head of this excellent piece of legislation!!!

In the last couple minutes Helen has added two more posts, which I'm including here:

THANKS EVERYONE FOR YOUR VIGILANCE AND FERVOR! Thanks especially to Ron Morgan who broke the story!!!

Back to your wonderful lives!
GODSPEED!

Sincerely
Helen Hill

In the last couple minutes Helen posted two new entries , which I'm including here.

It was great to know there was an army of excellent, schooled foot soldiers out there ready to go if we needed it! Thanks to all of you for letting this play out relatively peacefully.

and

If any of you wish, you can send position papers, stats, opinions of judges, legal precedence history, editorials, anything you wish for the file. Mark clearly: Information in favor of leaving Oregon's 1998 Measure 58 unchanged, or something like that. (There was a new M58 about a year ago, so be sure and specify the 1998 M58).

******

Thank you, Helen! Thank you, Ron! And thank you, all our wonderful Bastards and friends who were willing to fight for Measure 58. Thank you all for your positive work in this momentary"crisis." In a year of horrible compromise legislation our rights prevail!

Important New Update on Oregon HB 2843: Clarification from Helen Hill.

Helen Hill has clarified what went down in Salem yesterday about HB 2843. (see blog directly below this). I'm quoting her entire post here so there are no questions:

TO BE CLEAR! I did not meet with Rep. Hunt... I had a very brief meeting with the outer office people, who told me Hunt (who is Speaker of the House, by the way) was floating this bill at the request of a constituent. Two of the office people said "you don't have to worry about this. it's not going anywhere" or something to that effect. I left some written info. I have a meeting at 1:45 this coming Tuesday with the legislative aid that is running with this. Ron Morgan is going to be there too, (YAY RON!) and any of you who are in the area and would like to come and discuss why this bill should be dropped, please do stop by Rep Hunt's office next Tuesday.

This is not the time for conspiracy theory. There is internet chatter that HB 2843 was induced by any number of factions: adoption agencies, intermediaries, searchers, churches, and money interests. Helen has been very clear that the bill, as far as she knows, came at the request, as do many bills, of a constituent.

Helen is the Measure 58 petitioner. Ron Morgan worked tirelessly on the ground during the M58 campaign. They know the political landscape well. Both are on the ground now to preserve our rights.

If you are an Oregon adoptee or have direct tie to Oregon feel free to contact Rep. Hunt and tell him how M58 has been good for you, your family, and for Oregon.

Rep.davehunt@state.or.us

You can make comments on the bill here:

Read the Oregon Adoptee Rights Blog and join the list

Mary Hunt Peret's blog on the history original birth certificates is here.

The history of the M58 campaign is here.

Photo: by Bastardette taken in Portland, March 31, 2008, when I ran into her on the train.

Oregon HB 2843: Hold Your Horses! Send Affirmative Letters

Earlier today we learned that Rep. Dave Hunt (D-Gladstone) recently introduced HB 2843 in the Oregon House. The bill essentially repeals the adoptee rights landmark Measure 58 ballot initiative, which in 1998 restored the right of OBC access there. This bill came out of nowhere.

Helen Hill, chief petitioner for Measure 58, met with with Rep. Hunt and his aides this morning. Helen reports that their talk was very fruitful and highly positive. Helen will be meeting with Rep. Hunt again on Tuesday and feels that any escalation at this time would not be useful. If more action is needed after that meeting, she will let us know.

In the meantime, Helen requests that no "angry letters" be sent to Rep. Hunt, but...if you are an Oregon adoptee please write a note to him affirming the positive results of M58.

Rep.davehunt@state.or.us

You can also make make comments on the bill here:

Read the Oregon Adoptee Rights Blog and join the list:

Mary Hunt Peret's blog on the history original birth certificates is here.

The history of the M58 campaign is here.

Well keep you updated!

Cognitive Dissonance: Bastards, Birthers, and Bad Bills

Adopted adults, especially since 9/11, have increasingly been denied passports, drivers licenses, pensions, Social Security benefits, professional certifications, and security clearances due to discrepancies on their fictive amended birth certificates produced by the state, and their inability to produce a true original birth certificate to respond to those discrepancies. Now, due to our lack of an OBC, we may not be allowed to run for president or vice president (or other offices) if some states have their way.

Currently, 11 state legislatures are looking at bills to force presidential/vp candidates to divvy up their birth certificates to prove citizenship and that they are who they say they are. If these measures pass, the birth certificate requirement will no doubt seep down to all elective offices from city council and county commission to state and federal legislatures and courts. Although voters are already required to show proof of citizenship when they register to vote, I don't think it's beyond reason that more stringent requirements will be mandated; thus potentially disenfranchising millions of the country's adopted adults due to lack of their "real" birth certificates. The highly unpopular Real ID,which about two dozen states have refused to implement. and other Draconian "security measures" are just the beginning of how Class Bastard will be disenfranchised as our OBCs continue to be sealed.

You will note that none of the pushers of these bills (and what may follow) ever gave a rat's ass about fake birth certificates before the current president took office, nor have they considered how their pathological hatred and energetic persecution of Barack Obama affects Class Bastard. Or as their ilk prefers to think of us, cute, cuddly, and grateful abortion saves. These same politicians and their cronies back home, in fact, promote secret adoption through government generated fake (amended) birth certificates (for us), oppose OBC access (for us), and spend an inordinate amount of time fussing over what 6 million bastards will do with their own birth certificates they have a right to while they scheme obsessively to get their hands of one stranger's birth certificate they have no right to.

Ironically--or should I say comically?--five legislatures where presidential birth certificate bills are pending, are also debating bad OBC access laws: Arizona, Connecticut, Indiana, Missouri, and Texas. In addition, Pennsylvania, reportedly up for a clean bill later this year, will also be debating a birther bill.

I thought it would be fun to post summaries of bad OBC bills with their birther bill counterparts.

COGNITIVE DISSONANCE 1

ARIZONA
OBC Bill SB 1595. Allows an adult adoptee to obtain a copy of his or her certified OBC if the adoptee provides the name of the biological mother, the adoptee's date and place of birth, and the applicable fee.

Birther Bill HB 2544. Requires presidential/vp candidates to present an original long form birth certificate that includes date and place of birth, the names of the hospital and attending physician, and the signatures of witnesses in attendance.

CONNECTICUT
OBC Bill: HB 890. Prospective bill that authorizes those 21 and older, whose adoption are finalized on or after October 1, 2012, to receive their OBC. All other OBCs remain sealed except through court order or written consent of the natural parent(s).

Birther Bill: SB 391 An Act Concerning Qualifications to Appear as a Candidate for President or Vice-President on a Ballot in this State. Requires "that candidates for president and vice-president provide their original birth certificates in order to be placed on the ballot,and to show that the candidate "is a natural born United States citizen, prior to certifying that the candidate is qualified to appear on the ballot."

INDIANA
OBC Bill HB 469. Provides that beginning July 1, 2012, identifying adoption information may be released unless a "nonrelease form" (disclosure veto) is on file, regardless of when the adoption was filed. Retains vetoes for post-1994 adoptions already filed.

OBC Bill HB 1201. Long convoluted bill that includes: "Requires the department of child services, a county office of family and children, a licensed child placing agency, a professional health care provider, an attorney, and a court to send a copy of a written consent, any signed writing that withdraws or modifies a consent to the release of identifying information, and a written nonrelease form to the state registrar. Requires the department of child services to provide, at least one time each month, to the state department of health a list of names of all children who are less than 21 years of age and whose birth parent had the birth parent's parental right terminated while a child in need of services proceeding concerning the child was pending. Prohibits the state registrar, the department of child services, a county office of family and children, a licensed child placing agency, a professional health care provider, an attorney, and a court from releasing identifying information if the request involves an adoptee who is less than 21 years of age and whose name is on the list provided to the state department of health from the department of child services. Repeals a provision that allows an individual who submits a request for the release of identifying information to request the state registrar to search the death certificates for an adoptee or birth parent."

Birther Bill SB 114: Requires that a certified copy of each presidential and vice presidential nominee's birth certificate, including any other documentation necessary to establish that the nominee meets the qualifications, accompany the state chairman's certification. Provides that the election division may not certify the name of a nominee for president or vice president of the United States unless the election division has received a nominee's certification and documentation.

MISSOURI
OBC Bill HB 427. Prospective bill that authorizes those 18 and older whose adoptions are finalized after August 28, 2011 to receive their OBC upon request unless a disclosure veto is on file. Parents will fill out form as part of relinquishment. (2) Authorizes those 18 or older whose adoptions are finalized on or before August 28, 2011 to receive their OBC upon request unless a disclosure veto is on file. In both cases, if a veto is filed the adoptee can, for a fee, request the state/placing agency/court to search out the "birthparent" to revoke the DV and sign consent. OBC remains sealed if parent(s) refuses to revoke. Lineal descendants can apply in cases of deceased adoptees.

Birther Bill: HB 283. Requires that certification for candidates "shall include proof of identity and proof of United States citizenship."

TEXAS:
OBC Bill: SB 287. Permits an adoptee to obtain a copy of his/her original birth certificate, without court order, if he/she can produce the names of both "birthparents."

Birther Bill: HB 295. Requires candidates' documentation of citizenship; adds to the state election code the provision: "The secretary of state may not certify the name of a candidate for president or vice-president unless the candidate has presented the candidate's original birth certificate indicating that the person is a natural-born United States citizen."

PENNSYLVANIA:

OBC bill: Reportedly a clean OBC bill will be introduced this year.

Birther Bill: In November, World Net Daily reported that Rep. Daryl Metcalfe planned to introduce legislation this session mandating documentation that presidential candidates meet the Constitution's requirements for age, residency and being a "natural born citizen." Metcalfe introduced similar legislation in 2008. While I usually do not consider WND a credible source of information, I'll accept it based on Metcalfle's history. The bill hasn't been filed yet.

FEDERAL

Birther Bill. HR 1503. Requires the principal campaign committee of a candidate for election to the office of President to include with the committee's statement of organization a copy of the candidate's birth certificate and other related documents. Bill currently languishes untouched in the House Committee on House Administration.

COGNITIVE DISSONANCE 2

I have twice written about birthers. (here and here). You can also read some of my tete-a-tete on uber birther Phil Berg's forum. I've written on other forums and blogs, but didn't save my comments.

When I respond to birthers, I always tell them (even if I don't mean it) that I'd be more impressed with their claim on Obama's birth certificate if they demanded the same "right" for us as they claim for themselves. I remind them (to no avail) that we have a right to our own birth certificates; they don't have a right to somebody else's. From that, I've gotten only two responses. One writer admitted that she was aware of the sealed OBC problem and thought it should be fixed (somehow). The other acknowledged that an adopted presidential candidate with a sealed OBC would be an "interesting" problem. Oh, and another suggested that if birthers could get Obama's birth certificate, then we no doubt could get ours.

This is the bottom line for Class Bastard in the coming months and years: the government rejects the fake birth certificate that it created for us and demands we present the original, non-faked birth certificate it created for us previously, which this same government won't let us have. It's sort of the Catch-22 an adoptee I know found herself in when her request for the OBC was rejected in Virgina: you gave up your right to that birth certificate when you agreed to be adopted.

This documentary absurdity with the current spate of birther bills running counterpoint to bad OBC bills in state legislatures should be hammered to our advantage. Some legislators might even do irony. And do they really want to pass a bad OBC bill which could result in a political colleague being forced to ask his or her mother's "permission" to run for office?

Use this cheat sheet when working on clean bills and fighting bad bills. If you're fighting birther bills, feel free to use as well! Tell your leggies that Bastards under the current sealed records system, have not only lost the right to their own birth records but are in the process of losing their right to run for public office, travel freely, work in their chosen professions, and retire. At some point, we may even be barred from voting. Your leggies have only to look as far as their own statehouse to see what's going on.

Thanks to Justin Mitchell Bennett for tipping us to this!

Connecticut: Bastard Nation Letter in Opposition to HB 890

Connecticut currently has two OBC access bills in the hopper. The first, HB 65 is a placeholder which has yet to be written. The second is HB 890 which would open OBCs prospectively for adoptees 21 years old and older adopted after January 2, 2012 contains a disclosure veto. HB 890 is scheduled for a hearing tomorrow before the legislature's Select Committee on Children. We sent this letter opposing the bill to committee members this afternoon:

Bastard Nation: the Adoptee Rights Organization, is the largest adoptee civil rights organization in the United States. We support full, unrestricted access for all adopted persons, upon request, of their own true, unaltered original birth certificates (OBC). We oppose HB 890, a bill that would prospectively the OBC to adoptees, with disclosure veto restrictions, to persons 21 years of age or older, whose adoptions were finalized on or after October 12, 2012.

This bill is scheduled to be heard tomorrow, February 8, 2011 by the Select Committee on Children.

Bastard Nation. opposes HB 890, and urges you to vote Do Not Pass.

HB 890 creates a nonsensical tiered discriminatory system of OBC access for Connecticut adoptees based on their date of birth, date of their adoption finalization,and their birthparent consent.

HB 890 ignores thousands of the state's adopted population who will still be unable to acquire their OBC, while at the same time creates a new class of adoptees not even born yet, who can acquire their OBCs unless their birthparent(s) object.

HB 890 creates a prospective new special "right" for birthparents that enables them to bar their adult offspring from acquiring their own birth certificates, a right that no other parent has.

In sum, HB 890 reinforces out-dated adoption secrecy. It does nothing to restore the right of unrestricted OBC access that all Connecticut adoptees enjoyed until 1974. It makes adoptee access to their own birth certificates a state/birthparent conditioned privilege separate and unequal from the right enjoyed by Connecticut's not adopted who can acquire their own birth certificates unhindered.

Please vote DO NOT PASS on HB 890, and support a bill that mandates equal OBC access, without conditions, to all Connecticut adoptees, past, present, and future.

Sincerely yours,

Marley E. Greiner

Executive Chair

Bastard Nation: the Adoptee Rights Organization

HuffPo Continues to Censor Bastardette: TRAs aren't all happy dappy!

I'm working on some Russian updates. What were once simple and straightforward reviews of cases have turned into tales of Tolstoyan proportion.

Meanwhile, yesterday I was censored again by Huffington Post. This time over daring to suggest that international adoption isn't white bread. My comments came under Adam Pertman's new blog entry, Lessons in Adoption from BJ Lifton, Harvard, and Oprah. I'll post some comments on that in a separate blog and try to get it on HuffPo as well, but I may be expelled to the Bad Bastard's corner unless I limit myself to commentary on Kim Kardasian, Melissa Etheridge, and the decline of the American Left.

Part of my comment to HuffPo was cross-posted to Facebook, but due to size restrictions FB won't carry the whole thing. Left off were comments from the Transracial Abductee site that I included.

Here's how it played out.

Poster Jack Grissom wrote in part:

One of the issues people bring up is adopted children being raised by parents that are of a different biological ethnic background than their own. All I can say is, I don't think that I've ever heard an adult who was adopted as a child wish that they hadn't been adopted just because their parents were of a different race. Just ask famous musician Michael Franti.

Gaye Tannenbaum responded in part (her post is still up):
You haven't been talking to enough adoptees at any depth. I know several Korean adoptees who grew up either thinking that they were white or wishing that they were white. I even know adoptees who shared racial characteristics with their adoptive family but not ethnicity. If they "wished" they hadn't been adopted, it wasn't "just because" of the racial or ethnic difference. It goes far deeper than that but certainly includes racial and ethnic differences.

I followed with:
I agree, Gaye. Racism, fetish, neo-coloni­alism, imperialism­ is a huge issue amongst the transracia­lly adopted. Over the years I've been continuall­y impressed by the work done by the Transracia­l Abductees and what has come out of them later. The best political critique of adoption I've seen anywhere. From the TRA page:

Why Abduction?
Abduction is the word we like better than adoption. "Adoption" conceals the unequal power between abductors and abductees, and in the abduction industry in general.

Who Can Be An Abductor?
White people, white governments, the abduction industry.

Why Talk About This?
It's important to talk about this because nothing else we've seen out there is politicized in this way. Transracial abduction is secretive, silencing, and abusive, and it's really hard for transracial abductees to speak out against this racist system of forced assimilation and brainwashing. We wanted to create a forum where abductees can talk about our experiences and share our analysis of them.

I know my comment was posted. I saw it a few minutes after I sent it and at least an hour later. Today, when I went back it was gone, and it does not appear on my "activity" page. If I were kind, I'd say that maybe there's a rule I don't know about regarding cutting and pasting or linking, but I've see both posted in other comments. I can only conclude than that the HuffPods were, in fact, silencing the Transracial Abductees and me for upsetting Ariannia's happy dappy cart. Whatever, happened, I'm in good company.