When researching
adoption law, I was reading about one of the most important cases to adoptees
in the fight to have our own birth records. There are others; however, I believe the
Judges in this case really “got it” so I’ve dedicated this blog to the case of Doe
v. Sundquist.
From 1951 to
1996, sealed adoption records were available in Tennessee only upon court order
that disclosure was “in the best interest of the child or of the public.”
Tenn.Code Ann. § 36–1–131 (repealed).
The following statute went into
effect July 1, 1996:
(A) All adoption
records shall be made available to the following eligible persons:
(i) An adopted
person ․ who is twenty-one (21) years of age or older
(ii) The legal
representative of [such] a person․
(B) Information ․ shall be released ․ only to the
parents, siblings, lineal descendants, or lineal ancestors, of the adopted
person ․, and only with the express written consent [of] the adopted
person․
Several days
before this law was to go into effect, Plaintiffs (birth parent, adoptive
parents and adoption agency) filed a lawsuit and requested an injunction (to
stop the law from taking effect). The
Plaintiffs stated they had a right to privacy and that the new Tennessee law
violated that right. The Court disagreed and stated:
“A birth is
simultaneously an intimate occasion and a public event — the government has
long kept records of when, where, and by whom babies are born. Such records
have myriad purposes, such as furthering the interest of children in knowing
the circumstances of their birth.”
–6th
Circuit Court
The expectation
of privacy after you give birth (in a public hospital), around many witnesses
(doctors, nurses, family, social workers) sign a legal document (a birth
certificate) attesting that you are the mother of this newborn, does not
entitle somebody to a form of privacy (any different than any other citizen’s
right) . Signing surrender papers after birth does not change the facts of the
birth. A finalization of an adoption (6 months to potentially years in the
future) does not change the reality of that original birth event or the
paperwork legally documenting that event.
The Court goes
on to say:
“There simply has never been an absolute guarantee or even a
reasonable expectation by the birth parent or any other party that adoption
records were permanently sealed. In fact, reviewing the history of adoption
statutes in this state reveals just the opposite”
-6th
Circuit Court
The Court has always had the discretion to open records whether in a sealed or open birth certificate state. The very act of voluntarily entering into an adoption itself provides privacy and confidentiality from the general public as part of adoption law. The public cannot access adoption files through on-line Court websites or request those files at the Clerk’s Office as is the case with most other files that are public record. However, the law does not provide any special right to privacy for birth parents from their biological child.
The Court
states:
"We conclude that the disclosure of adoption records as
provided in 1995 Tenn. Pub. Acts, ch. 523, codified at Tenn.Code Ann.
§ 36-1-127(c), does not impair the plaintiffs' vested rights in violation of
article I, section 20 of the Tennessee Constitution and does not violate the
plaintiffs' right to privacy under the Tennessee Constitution.”
As this case has
shown, the best interest of the child (now adult) is to have accurate
information on his or her own certificate of birth and the information
contained within his own adoption file.
And the 6th
Circuit Court agrees.
“In sum, we believe
that these new methods and standards for disclosure are procedural in nature
and reflect the legislature's effort to create legislation that advances the
best interest of adopted persons and the public.”
For more
specifics on the Plaintiffs and the application of law, go here:
http://www.americanadoptioncongress.org/pdf/Doe_vSundquistDecisionUS_CA6thCir.pdf
