Question about rights?

I got thinking.... if one group (like adoptees) is unjustly denied certain rights (access to their BIrth Certificate) it's a bad thing.. I think we could all agree..

But, would it make it "all better" if the law was changed so that people who were NOT adopted would also be denied access to their Birth Certificate?

Would that fix the problem and make wrongs right?

Or should we leave the non-adoptees access to their OBC and fight for adoptees to gain right to theirs?
Additional Details
Laurie.... I certainly do NOT agree with blocking access for all... I was asking a question to make a point...

Does the fact that one group is unjustly denied certain rights, mean that the way to "make it fair" is to deny those rights to all? Is that what we should be doing... or should we be fighting for those to get the rights they are denied.. so that ALL have their fundamental rights.

I thought the answer would be clear, but apparently there are those who believe that because first mothers are unfairly denied right to the BC of the child they gave birth to, that Aparents should also be denied access to those BC

seeing some people feel this way made me ask this question, as I said.. I thought it woudl be a "given" that the answer to fixing injustice is to get the rights for those who have them denied... Not to deny those who have those rights... just because others don't have them..

LaurieDB

I think you'd be hard pressed to get access blocked for all. Copies of birth records are used for all sorts of activities, from enrolling in school to getting a driver's license to applying for a passport.

Further, this document records the facts of something very basic -- a person's birth. The government would have no reason to deny such a document to the masses.

Although I fully agree with your stance on open records and, in fact, your stance on eradicating amended birth certificates, I think that the idea of getting rid of access for all in order to keep equality (and the truth) from others, is flawed. Instead of granting women the right to vote, should the vote have been taken from all? Should we have changed the way we assign leadership just to keep women from getting the vote, but at the same time forming "equality?"

By the way, some years back the organized opposition to open records did suggest that perhaps we do away with birth certificates altogether.

ETA:

Shelly, whoa...I never even suggested that YOU believe in blocking access for all. I'm simply stating that the idea, as thrown out there, doesn't work well. I know you don't feel that way. If my response came across otherwise, it was certainly not meant to do so, and I apologize. Please don't take me wrong. I even pointed out in my original answer that I know, and agree with, your stance on open records. I was just going with the idea and expounding, particularly since an anti-rights group actually did make such a suggestion in reality at one point.

Clearly, equality by granting all people the same rights is the answer.

ETA 2:
For the poster who thinks the records are sealed for "birthparent privacy," read the law. The records don't seal when a child is given up for adoption. They remain quite unsealed. In fact, when a child is given up for adoption, the original birth certificate remains the child's only legal birth certificate. It is only if an adoption finalizes that a new certificate is issued and the other sealed. In some states, it is the choice of the adoptive parents (NOT the birthparents) as to whether or not a new certificate is issued. (Read Ohio's law and California's law. They are both sealed records states that give the AP's the option.) Sealing the records is about the adoption, not the relinquishment.

Independ"ant"

Why not just allow everyone to gain access to their own birth certificates and not allow them to be amended at all.

Problem solved for the two people involved in childbirth...the mother and her child.

I think the people preventing this are being selfish and self centered as well as going against nature.

What would baby jesus think of this mess created by anti nature activists.

As far as aparents are concerned they can get an honorary adoption certificate awarded to them.

IDK!!

You read my mind.

Zeena

It's basically about privacy.

To protect the birth parents identity.*Some* birth parents never want to meet the children they gave up for adoption.Very sad and unfortunately true.

That is why they make a new birth certificate as if that was the original copy with the adopting parents' names.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: