Yes it’s true that…
… part of the reissued birth certificate thing was about protecting adoptees from their “bastard” status and to allow adoptive parents to pass as birth parents. But at the heart of it is — in my opinion — the belief that one set of parents cancels the other out. I like what Lisa was saying about her daughter’s family tree (read the comments in the entry below this one).
I wish there was simply an adoption certificate that looked just like a birth certificate but didn’t negate the original. I take issue with me being on Madison’s birth certificate because I didn’t give birth to her.
It sounds like semantics but of course it’s much more complicated than that. In any case, I’m very very happy that Madison has an original copy of her original birth certificate.
Can’t guys put themselves on the birth certificate with the mother’s permission, even if they’re not genetically related to the child, or married to the mother?
Birth certificates are weird things.
IME the state just wants to have two names on a certificate so that somebody–preferably two people–are financially responsible for the child. It may just as well be called a “parentage certificate” because I think that’s what it stands for more than anything. On the other hand, if an adoptive family doesn’t want to draw attention to the fact that their child is adopted (for instance, presenting the certificate during school registration and risking comments by some stranger), an adoption certificate might not be a great choice either.
You are SO RIGHT about the birth certificate. It’s absolutely ridiculous that the state issues an “amended” (e.g., fake) birth certificate–particularly when the adopted person becomes an adult and is prohibited by law from getting her own birth certificate.
Why not have all relevant names on the real birth certificate? Should be easy to indicate custodial/responsible parents. And since adoption is nothing to be ashamed of, who cares if some stranger makes comments. As an adopted person, I can tell you that people make comments about adoption and adoptees whether or not they know you are adopted. It doesn’t happen very often, either.
Have you been to http://www.bastards.org? You probably have, since you’re clearly a superior researcher, but I thought I should mention it.
Just want to clarify–I in no way think that adoption is something to be ashamed of! But I can still think of circumstances under which parents might not want to have a separate certificate. For instance, adoptions aren’t always transferring a child to a new set of parents. Sometimes it’s just one parent, say a stepfather adopting a child. Particularly if the mother plans to have more children with the stepfather, I can see why they might find it valuable to have his name on the actual birth certificate, rather than issuing a new adoption certificate.
I can really see it both ways, honestly.
Mine says: “Sara E. S., the child of D.M.C. and J.T.S, was born on”. If I was adopted, would that make it wrong? It’s just saying whose child I am.
I don’t know what Madison’s says, but the ones I’ve seen don’t say “Was born to”. In that case, re-doing it would be fraud.
The purpose of a birth certificate, at least when a kid is young, is to establish who the parents are. You and B. are the ones in charge of parenting Madison.
If it were called “Parenting Certificate”, you’d have no problem with the new one negating the original, right? It’s just the name of it which implies that the people listed are the birth parents.
Of course, if it were called parenting cert. then later in life it would be kind of funny when it’s used in an entirely different way.
I’m still not sure why my employer needs to know who my parents are.