March 22, 2016
"...we also need to recognize how much we share. Because in many ways, the United States and Cuba are like two brothers that have been estranged for many years, even as we share the same blood." -President Barack Obama, Cuba, 2016Dear Mr. President;
In today's historic speech from Cuba you chose to invoke the metaphor of two brothers separated from each other, Separated from their kin, Their blood. Their family. This tugs at the core of human emotions. For most people this imagery conjures up feelings of the family they know and love; those blood relatives present in their lives. They envision being separated from them and they are gripped with emotion. The heartache. The longing. The loss. It's all there. So vivid, so real, so identifiable. It is the reason, Mr. President you chose to use this powerful metaphor. It is visceral and compelling. One could almost say it is an inevitable choice of words given the speech's intent, to bring home an important point, the reuniting of two estranged countries.
Americans across all political persuasions have the freedom to identify with your metaphor without guilt, without inner conflict. It is the right of every American, of every human to long for and have a connection with family. Isn't it?
For 2% of the United States population, listening to this speech conjures up different emotions, different visions. You see, adopted people have not been given permission or the right to freely imagine knowing our "blood" family that we "have been estranged from" without feeling guilt or that we are being selfish. If we allow ourselves to even dream of a reunion we have been conditioned by those around us to deaden those feelings, to squash our curiosity, or to feel ashamed of the wanting. The conventional adoption community still places guilt on the curious adoptee who longs to know their original family and discourages us from searching.
If that wasn't a strong enough message, in the majority of states, the government places undue burden and heavy restrictions on adoptees who want to know their families of origin, their brothers, their sisters, their parents if still living, by denying the adult adopted person a copy of their own original birth certificate. Adoptees are not trying to replace the families who have raised them, but for many, there is a longing to know those with whom we share the same blood. It is at the heart of all humans, but adoptees are made to feel shame for wanting that information. For those of us who push past the shame and guilt, it is usually an expensive, time consuming, emotionally draining process to attempt find our original families, using expensive DNA testing, private searchers, and social media outlets in an attempt to connect.
Although the United States Government does not recognize an adoptee's right to know their origins as a civil right, other entities do. The United Nations outlines identity continuity, as well as maintaining family connections, as the rights a child is entitled to under the Convention on the Rights of the Child, ratified in 1989.*
To hear my country's president include this kinship metaphor in a speech meant to speak to the entire nation only emphasizes a citizen's right to have access to their kin, and underlines the injustice that adoptees do not have the right to this information. How can we confidently assert our voice in U.S. civic life if we are unsure of who we are and where we come from? If our government passively condones the message that we are considered unworthy of the same rights and considerations under U.S. law as our peers? Without that right to know who we are, our other rights feel hollow.
The only other group in the U.S. denied access to their original birth certificates are those entering into the witness protection program, a path they chose for themselves, having been given full disclosure of what rights they are gaining and losing. Access to our original birth certificates is taken from adoptees with no disclosure, no choice on the part of the citizen it effects most. We are stripped of a right without waiving our right. This is quite traumatizing if you are the one experiencing this discrimination, though seemingly easily dismissed by everyone else not effected.
The irony is that the strength in your metaphor is what illustrates it's connection to the fundamental guarantees of our nation; life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I wonder if you have used this metaphor unaware that your own country denies this very right to a full 1% of it's population. When you do the math this calculates out to millions of Americans.
I suppose it is easy for many to dismiss 2% of the population and deny us our complete identities, our full compliment of constitutional guarantees. I have more faith in you than in most other people, Mr. President. But for anyone else reading, here is a snapshot of who adopted people are:
We are the 3 month old little boy enduring the initial trauma of separation.
We are the 16 year old still grappling to make sense of the separation that happened sometime in our childhood and wondering how exactly we fit into the world.
We are the 30 year old father holding our precious newborn, overcome with emotion as we meet a blood relative for the first time.
We are the 35 year old woman miscarrying again, as our hope of seeing ourselves reflected back in someone else's face diminishes.
We are the college student, once adopted, then returned and adopted again, only to be abused by our second family, left as adults with nowhere to go for the holidays.
We are the people our government repeatedly tells you are not worthy to have our own original identity. The laws send the message, this is not your right, this is only a luxury to be enjoyed by some, but not by all, and certainly not by you, the adoptee. But we are also the resilient, we are the determined, and we will not stop asking for our identity until we have it in every state, for every adoptee.
Thank you Mr. President for reminding adoptees that the desire for a basic human connection with a blood relative is a normal, natural thing. That we need feel no shame in our desire to search and connect. I invite you, no, I implore you to weigh in on this issue that affects millions of tax paying, adult American adopted citizens. Please join the effort to rectify this situation so the United States can say we are a nation whose laws grant equal rights to 100% of its people.
In gratitude for your service.
Sincerely,
Marci Purcell
Marci Purcell
Board President
Adoption Knowledge Affiliates
www.adoptionknowledge.org
&
Technical Writer
Texas Adoptee Rights
Convention on the Rights of the Child
Article 7
1. The child shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have the right from birth to a name, the right to acquire a nationality and. as far as possible, the right to know and be cared for by his or her parents.
2. States Parties shall ensure the implementation of these rights in accordance with their national law and their obligations under the relevant international instruments in this field, in particular where the child would otherwise be stateless.
Article 8
1. States Parties undertake to respect the right of the child to preserve his or her identity, including nationality, name and family relations as recognized by law without unlawful interference.
2. Where a child is illegally deprived of some or all of the elements of his or her identity, States Parties shall provide appropriate assistance and protection, with a view to re-establishing speedily his or her identity.
Article 9
1. States Parties shall ensure that a child shall not be separated from his or her parents against their will, except when competent authorities subject to judicial review determine, in accordance with applicable law and procedures, that such separation is necessary for the best interests of the child. Such determination may be necessary in a particular case such as one involving abuse or neglect of the child by the parents, or one where the parents are living separately and a decision must be made as to the child's place of residence.
2. In any proceedings pursuant to paragraph 1 of the present article, all interested parties shall be given an opportunity to participate in the proceedings and make their views known.
3. States Parties shall respect the right of the child who is separated from one or both parents to maintain personal relations and direct contact with both parents on a regular basis, except if it is contrary to the child's best interests.
4. Where such separation results from any action initiated by a State Party, such as the detention, imprisonment, exile, deportation or death (including death arising from any cause while the person is in the custody of the State) of one or both parents or of the child, that State Party shall, upon request, provide the parents, the child or, if appropriate, another member of the family with the essential information concerning the whereabouts of the absent member(s) of the family unless the provision of the information would be detrimental to the well-being of the child. States Parties shall further ensure that the submission of such a request shall of itself entail no adverse consequences for the person(s) concerned.
Article 10
1. In accordance with the obligation of States Parties under article 9, paragraph 1, applications by a child or his or her parents to enter or leave a State Party for the purpose of family reunification shall be dealt with by States Parties in a positive, humane and expeditious manner. States Parties shall further ensure that the submission of such a request shall entail no adverse consequences for the applicants and for the members of their family.
2. A child whose parents reside in different States shall have the right to maintain on a regular basis, save in exceptional circumstances personal relations and direct contacts with both parents. Towards that end and in accordance with the obligation of States Parties under article 9, paragraph 1, States Parties shall respect the right of the child and his or her parents to leave any country, including their own, and to enter their own country. The right to leave any country shall be subject only to such restrictions as are prescribed by law and which are necessary to protect the national security, public order (ordre public), public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others and are consistent with the other rights recognized in the present Convention.
Copyright 2016 Marci Purcell: All rights reserved; may be used freely with citation by non-profits and educational institutions.
Copyright 2016 Marci Purcell: All rights reserved; may be used freely with citation by non-profits and educational institutions.
