Adoption Reform Case Study

The passage of measure 58 in 1998 was a milestone in adoption reform in

Oregon. E. Wayne Carp recites the tale from its inception all the way to the

electoral campaign and court battles. It was for the first time in the history of the

United States that a grassroots initiative restored the legal rights to obtain

original birth certificate for adopted adults. The efforts of Bastard Nation in

passing this landmark initiative is immense. With opposition as powerful as

government officials, religious organizations, news media and adoption agencies,

many people and a lot of resources were required to reach this monumental

decision. The question that arises in ones mind is: what’s more important, a birth

mothers right to privacy? Or an adult

At first, under the 1864 act, the policy was that the adoptive

parent could request for a name change in the form of a petition and a county

court would mandate it. A 1919 statue gave way to sealing adoption records at

the judges’ discretion. The criteria essentially took away the right to identifying

information for any adopted person. At the time, there was a social stigma

around adoption. It was looked down upon and Carp believed that the laws

intention was to protect the lives of children who would be exposed as adopted.

In 1921, the state stopped publishing name changes. In 1941, Oregon joined

many other states in issuing a new birth certificate using the new name of the

adopted child and parents.

Although having adopted this way, the legislators had no intention to restrict

adopted adults’ access to their birth certificates. It was only in 1950 that the

movement to seal records from the adoption triad members gained importance.

In 1957, Oregon amended the law and only allowed adopted adults access to

their birth records upon order from a competent court. It started off as twenty-

nine states not giving access to birth records to adopted adults in the 1960s