Marie Tasy, executive director of New Jersey Right to Life, said she and a coalition of other opponents would continue to fight the legislation. “This is not a compassionate choice at all.”
I ran across this quote on nj.com this morning while I was searching for articles regarding opening records for New Jersey adoptees.
I am writing to ask for some clarification. What exactly is not “a compassionate choice at all”? The choice of allowing adoptees the right to know their heritage and medical history? I find it amazing that an organization, such as yours, can make broad based conclusions such as that. Your mission, dedication to protecting and fostering human life, apparently ends with birth.
I am a 38 year old woman who was adopted in New Jersey in 1969. Over the last 38 years of my life, I have been fortunate enough to be relatively healthy. I get migraines, I have difficult monthly cycles, I am very near sighted. I also have a thyroid condition. All of these issues are easily managed with the help of physicians, medications, and contact lenses. They are not life threatening nor earth shattering illnesses.
In 1998, my son was born with a thyroid condition more serious than my own. His father and I spent several anxious weeks with specialists, watching our tiny newborn son go through blood draw after blood draw to figure out what was wrong with him. I was urged time and time again to find out my medical history – the doctors were sure with my history of thyroid illness that something genetic was occurring. Eventually, his condition was diagnosed, even without a medical history. We were lucky.
What right do you have to tell me I can’t know my medical history? What right do you have to tell my children they can’t know their medical history? Organizations struggled so hard to bring me into this world (RIGHT TO LIFE! ABORTION IS MURDER!), handed me an “amended” birth certificate, and now say “Sorry, you can’t know any of your history”.
The bill presented in the New Jersey legislature has conditions that allow for birth mothers to retain their anonymity. Yes, they will have to provide a medical history in lieu of an original birth certificate being issued. Is that really so much to ask? I for one, (along with many others, I am sure), would be happy just to have that piece of history. I would like to know what I might face, medically, in the future. I also want my children to have access to that same information.
I know you are worried about the birth mothers who bore children out of violent circumstances then gave them up for adoption. They want to forget that period of their life. I would be interested to know what the exact percentage is of children adopted under those conditions. Because, truly, being born in 1969…after the 1968 Summer of Love, Woodstock, and thousands of young men being shipped off to Vietnam, I doubt I, or too many others, were born of violent circumstance. Maybe those birth mothers regret that time in their life, but that does not mean I should be denied my rights now.
I have a right to life. Just no rights beyond that.
NJ adoptee, 1969