• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
Adoptee Rights Law Center

Adoptee Rights Law Center

Legal representation and advocacy for adult adopted people

  • Adoptee Rights Law Center
  • Birth Records
    • FAQ
    • Laws
    • Legislation
    • Maps
  • Citizenship
    • FAQ
    • Legislation
  • Latest
  • About
    • Press
    • Contact
  • Show Search
Hide Search

American Baby and the Punishing Secrecy of Adoption

First published on February 15, 2021 • Last updated on May 11, 2022

Adoption stories typically focus on an idealized promise of adoption. If not about the glorification, benefits, and hardships of adopting a child—typically told through the eyes of adoptive parents—today’s dominant adoption narratives often stick to a theme of reunion, beginning with a cryptic past, a “journey” of longing and sacrifice that moves toward discovery, and a final narrative path that seeks to resolve an underlying mystery, typically a reveal at the end with a reunion between biological kin.

While Gabrielle Glaser, in her new book American Baby: A Mother, A Child, and the Shadow History of Adoption, treads loosely on familiar narrative paths, she does so with a keen and exquisite eye for the long unseen and buried details that run under and through all that we are taught about adoption and—for the many of us who have lived it—what it means when unquestioning narratives do not match our own complicated histories and experiences.

American Baby is a woven tale of two people: Margaret Katz, a young Jewish woman from New York who becomes pregnant in 1961, and her son Stephen, whom the adoption agency Louise Wise Services placed for adoption, despite heartbreaking attempts by Margaret and her boyfriend George (who later became her husband) to keep and raise him. Margaret is rebuffed at every chance to prove she and George can care for their child. While they plan for a future with him, the adoption agency does whatever it can to separate Stephen from her, permanently and for adoption. Ultimately, threatened with jail under New York’s wayward minors code if she did not give in, she signs the documents necessary to release her son for adoption, and Louise Wise Services subsequently places her son with a couple in Queens, though in a final needless lie told to Margaret, the agency said that he was going to a family whose father was a diplomat, not to a middle-class family whose father was a cantor at a local synagogue.

American Baby is also the story of Stephen, who after his adoption became David Rosenberg. To accomplish his transformation from illegitimate child to adopted person, his original birth certificate, which indicated that he was born to Margaret Erle (she later became Katz when she married George), is sealed and restricted from release by court order. In its place, the New York City Department of Health issues an amended record indicating that, instead of being born to Margaret, he is instead born to Ephraim and Esther Rosenberg, who lived in the Bronx and only ten blocks away from Margaret at the time. Born out-of-wedlock and legally deemed a bastard in many states, including New York, he is legitimated through adoption and raised as if he is no different than any other human.

An exploration of the sociological and economic machinery used to control Margaret and to transform white children like David is the powerful third narrative weaving its way through American Baby. It is what Glaser refers to in her title as the “shadow history” of adoption, a thread that lays bare what many participants in adoption have known, have experienced, and have lived with for decades: punitive secret practices, policies that exalt adoption over family preservation, and the powerful and controlling myths of what it means to be a “fit” mother as well as a “good” and ultimately grateful adoptee.

At its core, American Baby is a story of U.S. adoption in the second half of the twentieth-century when women—white single women in particular—were punished for being pregnant, and shamed and coerced into relinquishing their children to adoption, generally as a means to redeem their reputations and to resolve their transgressive nonconformity. One strategy of redemption, they were told, was to forget it all and move on. Severing yourself from your own child—and separating that child from you—was considered a win-win for everyone. You redeemed your reputation and your child gained more deserving parents, whom for whatever reason could not have biological children of their own.

Where the child fell into this sociological framework has largely been mysterious, generally because it is so secretive. Infants who are on a path to adoption first enter a liminal state: relinquished but not adopted, parentless but not considered orphans. This state could last for several days or, as was more common in the past, could last several months to a year. As Glaser recounts in American Baby, adoption agencies and adoption professionals moved into that liminal space and asserted control over the future of these children, generally guided by “best interest” standards that were supposed to keep the child’s welfare at the forefront of all considerations. In many cases, however, the adoption professionals, social workers, and judges (one of whom in American Baby was centrally involved in Louise Wise Services, the agency that placed David) used complete control over pre-adoptive children, taking advantage of that power and the secrecy to hide highly questionable if not unethical and illegal actions. American Baby sheds light on that liminal space and the people who controlled those within it, including the involvement of powerful and well-known figures in U.S. medicine, law, sociology, and anthropology.

Other works and stories have explored this period of American adoption, roughly the mid-1940s to the mid 1970s, which is generally known in the United States as the Baby Scoop Era. E. Wayne Carp’s book, Family Matters, sets out the history of making birth records secret in adoptions, which in most states even today prevents them from ever seeing their own records again. Similarly, Elizabeth Samuel’s legal scholarship has debunked the long-accepted but false notion that adoption agencies promised “anonymity” to birthmothers, when in fact they used such false promises to secure the relinquishment of desired children. That secrecy, however, continues to be used today to deny adoptees information about their own births, even when they are adults.

Rickie Solinger’s early work explored the racism that defined Black and white women and pregnancy, and, correspondingly, the impact of race in adoption. Her book, Wake Up Little Susie: Single Pregnancy and Race Before Roe v. Wade, adds a critical framework (which Glaser readily acknowledges that American Baby cannot adequately cover) and how the design to feed the demand for birthmothers with “adoptable” babies did not extend to Black women or women of color. Rather, American Baby, and the term “Baby Scoop Era” as used in the United States, is largely about women like Margaret Katz: white, generally aspiring to the middle class, whose biggest transgression was failing to conform to the predominant post-war notion that the white nuclear family was all that mattered.

Adoptee and birthparent memoirs have also told more powerful and personal stories, if not doleful, profound, and occasionally humorous. Ann Fessler, an adopted person, produced a powerful set of oral histories in which women described how they were shamed into relinquishing their children during the Baby Scoop Era, all under the rubric that they were doing what society wanted and demanded of them: retaining the ability to marry so you can later produce children “more appropriately.” Numerous birthmothers have added their voices and memories, some compiling history and research along with their own stories in an effort to provide context into what compelled them to relinquish a child. And transracial and intercountry adoptees have brought important and necessary context to adoption, especially when the dominant fiction of “as if born to” is impossible to pull off.

While scholars bring needed gravity and expertise to the issue, their stories do not often speak to the details of those who have lived adoption, particularly adopted people and birthparents, the two participants in adoption who are compelled to concede the most. But memoirs by birthparents and adopted people are often dismissed as too personal or, frequently, as not adequately hewing to a dominant narrative that adoption is a “win-win” for everyone and a beautiful solution needing only the addition of love. Authors of memoirs that provide a truthful and critical eye on adoption and its practices may be dismissed as malcontents or, more likely, not widely read beyond readers who can understand the complexities of adoption without having a reactionary response. Some first-person accounts may even be wholly disbelieved, particularly if the narrative arc does not adhere to the unrealistic and rosy picture of adoption, whatever its emotional cost (the financial costs of adoption are a wholly different topic and one of the few negative impacts that adoptive parents face).

Glaser builds on these scholarly and narrative resources and weaves her own meticulous research into the story, but she moves a step further than many other narratives to include more startling revelations involving secret and federally-funded experimentation on children in the 1950s, 1960s, and even into the 1970s. This is the most chilling part of the book, where in excruciating detail she lays out experiments and “assessment” tools that are used to determine how best to “match” children with future adoptive parents, whether that match relates to intelligence, religion, race, skin color, or any number of factors social workers deemed appropriate.

One such experiment involved using a wooden gun to shoot rubber bands at infants to make them cry out in pain, with the stated purpose of determining the infant’s intelligence from his or her crying. The premise was that smarter babies cried longer and more forcefully and, as such, should go to more intelligent adoptive parents. If Dr. Samuel Karelitz and his associates—who received federal funding in part from the National Institute of Health for this and other studies—could predict intelligence in an infant, it would simplify how to ultimately match the child with a similarly “intelligent” family. To assess a cry, however, you had to induce the baby’s crying. As Glaser recounts in the book:

Image from “Relation of Crying Activity in Early Infancy to Speech and Intellectual Development at Age Three Years,” Samuel Karelitz, Vincent R. Fisichelli, Joan Costa, Ruth Karelitz and Laura Rosenfeld; Child Development, Vol. 35, No. 3 (Sep., 1964), pp. 769-777.

Researchers placed the infants on an examining table and commanded, ‘Down.’ Then they said, ‘Pick up foot,’ and ‘Touch,’ as they aimed the gun, which had stretched a fresh, seven-centimeter rubber band to three times its original size, at the center of the baby’s bare sole. Next they said, “One,’ shot the newborn’s foot and recorded the child’s cry. If the baby didn’t react, the researchers took a ten-second break before they repeated the procedure as many as seven times to produce at least a sustained 60 seconds of crying.

American Baby also explores the notorious triplet and twins studies, made famous by the recent documentary “Three Identical Strangers.” That study, also involving Louise Wise Services, remains secret to this day: its records sit dormant at Yale University, sealed and unavailable until 2065. And Glaser recounts how, in order to determine the “race” of a child and thus enforce racial divisions in adoption, noted anthropologist Harry Shapiro used his instinct “as well as the nineteenth-century principles of physiognomy, the practice of assessing a person’s personality and character from his or her features.” All of these experiments—and certainly others that have never been uncovered—-were made possible by the extreme secrecy that shrouded, and continues to shroud, the identities and details of adopted people’s early lives.

Our Secret Lives and Identities

I’m considered a lucky adoptee, not because where I was placed for adoption or how I ultimately meshed with my adoptive family, but because I have, over the course of twenty years, been able to punch through the punishing secrecy that surrounds my origins, ending up with all of my adoption agency and court records as well as my own unredacted original birth certificate that, for the first time for me at age 54, verified the identities of the two people responsible for connecting me to this earth. That twenty years, however, included two court petitions, a court of appeals case, and a five-year process at the end that effectively humiliated me by compelling me to provide permission slips from my adoptive parents, an affidavit from a biological aunt, and a question from a social worker that brought me to my knees:

Do you have any supporting documents that can verify that you had a relationship with your birth mother?

Most adopted people have not been lucky enough to secure their own documents, though luck in many cases is generally disguised as learned resilience. Other adopted people face the same humiliations as I did when they seek their own birth records, a resistance that not only comes from bureaucrats in control of our records but also comes from within their own families. How do you think that will make your adoptive parents feel? is a common question, interpreted, at least internally to many of us, that our curiosity is unnatural, strange, disappointing and, yes, shameful, despite a parallel multi-billion dollar genealogy industry that is built upon that identical curiosity: to know who your people are.

When adopted people as adults request their own original birth records they face discriminatory laws that divide them into deserving and undeserving piles. Born in Minnesota? Pay $1,000 to participate in a complex search-and-find operation that usually gets you a single-page document stating, “sorry, your mom has not given us permission to release your own record.” Adopted at any time in California or Iowa or Texas or nearly twenty other states? Good luck, unless you are near death and need a kidney from a biological relative to save you. Even then, a court may say that retaining one of your two kidneys may be good enough, as a court once stated that “one eye is good enough” to an adoptee I know who needed a corneal transplant.

David Rosenberg, Margaret’s son in American Baby, actually needed a kidney transplant, but New York’s draconian law at the time made it impossible to identify anyone related to him. Thus, the laws that created his relationship with one set of parents punished him for seeking information about his other set of parents, those who ultimately had the genetic keys to his immediate health. State secrecy laws gave him zero help at the time, though advocates have since won a major victory in New York in changing that law, and are working on other states. But most heartbreaking of all were Margaret Katz’s continued efforts to find out more information about David and to pass on essential information to Louise Wise. For that, she was cruelly treated, psychologically manipulated, and ultimately so worn down that she surrendered a second time years later and, out of pure self-preservation, worked to do what adoption had asked of her decades before: put it all behind her.

Secrecy, when embedded into the facts of a person’s own origins, is a divisive force. It works to to pit “deserving” adoptees against “undeserving” adoptees, birthparents and adoptive parents against their own children, and the government against the person whose very birth is certified and recorded in that government’s files. Adoption agencies, attorneys, and professionals often seek to mediate these issues, but in nearly every case of professional involvement they have placed their fingers heavily on the scale in favor of securing and increasing adoptions by assuring that the dominant narrative—controlled openness, a win-win solution for everyone, perpetual secrecy for already shamed birthparents—is the narrative that continues. That’s why, as Glaser recounts, people like Margaret Katz are ultimately worn down, humiliated, and demeaned, to the point that Louise Wise Services wouldn’t let her through the front office door to drop off a letter, ultimately threatening to call the police and arrest her for trespass.

American Baby is a compelling and rich story, and parts of it nearly brought me to tears, especially in Glaser’s retelling of David’s discovery of his birth name, recitating “Stephen Erle” to himself and somewhat mystically asking “what do we do now?” It is also a story of adoption that hews to history, told truthfully through the eyes of what it is like to live adoption and not what it is like to mythologize it. It is a compelling and heartbreaking story of how hundreds of thousands of (primarily) white women relinquished their children in the middle of the twentieth century, not as a true choice but as a compelled decision. And it is a story of the impact and reach of secrecy on adoptees throughout the United States, a punishing secrecy that continues to this day.

Adoption remains an unfinished if not perpetually broken promise. In return for relinquishing a child, birthparents are assured that it is the best thing they could do for themselves, the child, and the world around them. That they will move on largely unaffected in their lives. That promise, even in today’s more “open” adoptions, is almost always oversold, if not immediately broken. To suggest that a woman will forget that she gave birth to a child is absurd. Recognizing the absurdity of that today, the marketing of adoption to birthparents has moved away from punishing secrecy and instead relies on the mythology of being brave and heroic by surrendering a child for a different life. Yet in all but a few states secrecy over a person’s own identity remains a core component, and the financial inequities between birthparents and adoptive parents have never failed to be at the center of the adoptive transaction, particularly those involving infants.

For the adopted person, the unfinished promise sticks to a lie that you are “as if born” to your new adoptive parents. All history and documentation of your birth is erased and packed away, sealed under penalty of law and made unavailable to you and to millions of other adopted people, no matter their ages. You are reborn to new parents and are expected to set aside the curiosity about your past, lest you disappoint your parents and the world around you, who—through the ongoing secrecy surrounding your birth—question why you even need to know. David struggled with this in American Baby, and it was telling that he did not actively seek to know who he was until after his adoptive parents had passed away. That too is typical of many adopted people.

American Baby weaves truth into the adoptions that predominated the second half of the twentieth century, a time of locked down records, secret transactions, and scandals every few years involving baby brokers, secret experiments, and the trafficking of children. That adoption is still mired in corruption today is not news to many of us, but it may have shifted instead to a different market. Just this month the Netherlands halted all intercountry adoptions into the country, citing continuing abuses in all countries, not just the five countries it specifically studied. The commission investigating the issue concluded in part that:

Regardless of the different contexts, it has been shown that abuses related to intercountry adoption continue to occur to this day, all over the world. The most important factors that maintain this situation are the demand for children and the international adoption market, which is driven by financial incentives and where socioeconomic inequality, poverty[,] and the act of transforming children into commodities come together.

Filed Under: Essays Tagged With: American Baby, Gabrielle Glaser

About Gregory D. Luce

I am a Minnesota lawyer, born and adopted in the District of Columbia, and the founder of Adoptee Rights Law Center PLLC. I've been practicing law in Minnesota state and federal courts since 1993, and have been the executive director of Adoptees United Inc. since 2021. I also have a sense of humor.

Get Involved with Adoptees United Inc.

Logo of Adoptees United Inc.Did you find this post interesting? Then get involved nationally with Adoptees United Inc., a national tax-exempt non-profit organization dedicated to securing equality for all adult adopted people in the US. Find out more here, and join me and others in working for equality.

Did I Miss Something?

I work hard to get the laws and facts straight in every state---and to keep them regularly updated. If you see something that's not quite right or doesn't fit your experience, let me know with either a quick comment or an email.

 

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Julia Bolton Holloway says

    February 16, 2021 at 1:00 pm

    I help a Romanian Roma couple who seven years ago had all four of their children taken from them unjustly by the State in Florence. They have won their case in Italy’s Supreme Court to at least see their children but this is also being blocked, the children believing the lies told them by Social Assistance and thinking they were maltreated by their parents when it was the child trafficker who first bribed the parents with the promise of work and a villa for their family, paid for their tickets and passports from Romania, then maltreated the whole family, creating and documenting about them a false theatre of neglect and filth, removing their passports from them so they could not escape, housing them in a van on the street in winter, then writing an unsigned calumnatory letter to the judges against the parents, telling them to take the children from them. The younger two are adopted, the older two children in an orphanage. Taking the case to Strasbourg — another five years — won’t get the children back to their real family, only result in damages paid to them.

    Reply
  2. Maggie Wilkinson says

    February 16, 2021 at 3:34 pm

    A world wide crime, based on cruel judgement and an agenda of erasing the Mother and playing god by “giving” a child to the more entitled (married). A patriarchal thought process based on heredity of wealth and the ongoing ‘sin’ of a woman. Power, control and abuse that societies bought into …from the pulpit, a brainwashing that taught that the sinner gave birth to her sinner child, unless the child was ‘rescued’ (taken) and given to the married. How to describe this terrible crime against humanity in a few words? how to describe the pain and grief of a lifetime in this single box?

    Reply
  3. Suzanne says

    February 19, 2021 at 11:41 am

    I recently found out i have 3 sisters and a brother through dna testing at ancestry.com. I’m trying to put pieces together of stories told to each of us. I am the oldest. The next sister down was also adopted and the brother and two younger sisters were raised by the birth parents. Why am i so detached, you wonder??? I’m 72 years old and we only found each other 2 and 1/2 years ago.

    Reply
  4. TM says

    March 4, 2021 at 11:03 pm

    I just finished reading Gabrielle Glaser’s book, and was left stunned, sad, and angered at the corrupt system that was allowed to flourish for so long. Seems the more I learn, the worse I feel. I was adopted out of Louise Wise back in the latter 1950s, and in recent years I’ve thought more and more about my origins — something I chose to marginalize and sweep under the rug for decades — and wonder how I ended up where I did. Was I the subject of experiments? Were my birth parents coerced or strong-armed into letting me go? What lies or deceits were fed to my beloved (and long gone) birth parents? I’m not haunted by these questions, but when my son started becoming interested in DNA testing, I did, too, by extension. And through an analysis of his DNA, I have learned that I have several brothers and many very close “cousins” out there. By doing a little quiet digging on 23and me and Ancestry, Linked in, as well as social media, I pieced together a number of the pieces. But the biggest ones remain, and I debate within myself whether to even attempt to take my curiosity further. It’s a strange feeling after all these years, and wonder whether another chapter will be written.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

  • Bluesky
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Adoptee Rights Law Center

The Adoptee Rights Law Center PLLC is an adoptee-driven law firm founded by Gregory Luce, a Minnesota lawyer who was also born and adopted in the District of Columbia.

Contact Me

Legal representation limited to issues involving Minnesota law and federal immigration law.

Latest Posts

  • Name Changes and an N-565
  • Q&A: US Citizenship and Immigration Issues for Intercountry Adoptees
  • Thank You! Funds Raised for a Filing Fee for Intercountry Adoptee
  • It’s My Birthday. Let’s Celebrate.
  • Ask an Adoptee Rights Lawyer

Contact Info

Adoptee Rights Law Center PLLC
Minneapolis Minnesota 55419
T: (612) 221-3947
E: [email protected]

Legal representation limited to issues involving Minnesota law and federal immigration law.

The OBC: Maps

Alabama. Adult adoptees have the unrestricted right to request and obtain their own original birth certificates, beginning at age 19. Read more.
Alaska. Adult adoptees have an unrestricted right to request and obtain their original birth certificates, beginning at age 18. Read More.
Arizona. Arizona implemented a "donut hole" provision in a new law, which became effective on January 1, 2022. It allows only some adoptees to request the OBC--- based on their date of birth---but denies the right to obtain the OBC to the vast majority of Arizona-born adopted people. Read more.
Arkansas.While Arkansas law allows adult adoptees to request their adoption files, the request is subject to a birthparent's ability to redact their names on the original birth certificates. A FAQ with information about the law and its requirements and discriminatory limitations is here.
California. Adult adoptees do not have a right to request and obtain their own original birth certificates, except by court order. Adoptees must petition the court and show “good and compelling cause” in order to obtain a copy of their own original birth record. Read more.
Colorado. Colorado-born adult adopted people have a right to request and obtain their own original birth certificates. An adopted person who is at least 18 years of age may apply for and receive a non-certified copy of their original birth certificate through the Colorado Department of Health and Environment. Read more.
Connecticut. Connecticut-born adult adopted people have an unrestricted right to request and obtain their own original birth certificates. The right also extends to the adult children and grandchildren of the adopted person. Read more.
Delaware. While Delaware-born adopted people who are at least 21 years of age may request a copy of their OBCs, birthparents may legally veto their release, otherwise known as a "disclosure veto." Read more.
District of Columbia. District of Columbia courts control all aspects of releasing an OBC or any identifying information, whether from court records or from vital records. A court order is required and, depending on the date of adoption, may involve federal court or the D.C. Superior Court. Read more.
Florida. While Florida-born adult adopted people may apply for a copy of the original birth record, it takes signed affidavits of consent from birthparents---or death certificates showing that birthparents are deceased---to compel release of the OBC. Otherwise, release is allowed only by court order. Read More.
Georgia. Georgia-born adult adopted people must secure a court order to obtain a copy of their original birth certificates. Read more.
Hawaii. Adopted people born born in Hawaii do not have an unrestricted right to obtain their own original birth certificates. People adopted in Hawaii may request and obtain their court adoption records, which may include an original birth certificate. The law does not apply to people born in Hawaii but adopted in a different state. Read more.
Idaho. An OBC is available only by court order or conditionally through a state-operated “voluntary adoption registry.” Disclosure of an original birth certificate through the registry is subject to consent of the parties and may require the consent of both birth parents. Additional rights through the registry are available to people adopted on or after July 1, 2022, but those adoptees must also be at least 18 years of age. Read more.
Illinois. The state has implemented a complex tiered date-based system to request and obtain a birth record, using the adoption registry to facilitate release of OBCs and other information. The date of birth of an Illinois-born adopted person determines who has a right to an OBC or who may be subject to a birthparent’s request to redact identifying information on the OBC. Read more.
Indiana. The state has a complex and discriminatory framework that may allow release of specifically defined "identifying information," but a birthparent may prohibit release of that information at any time, even after the parent's death. Read more.
Iowa. While Iowa-born adopted peoole who are at least 18 years of age may apply for a copy of their own original birth certificates, release of the record is subject birthparent redaction requests. Read More.
Kansas. While original birth certificates may be sealed after an adoption, Kansas-born adult adoptees who are at least 18 years of age have always had an unrestricted right to request and obtain their own original birth certificates. Read more.
Kentucky. A court order is required for an Kentucky-born adult adopted person to secure a copy of their own original birth certificate. Read more.
Louisiana. All Louisiana-born adopted people, at age 24, have an unrestricted right to request and obtain a copy of their own original birth certificates. Read more.
Maine. Adult adoptees have the unrestricted right to request and obtain their own original birth certificates. Maine-born adopted people must be at least 18 years of age before requesting the OBC. Read more.
Maryland. For all practical purposes, Maryland should be defined as a "restricted" state: there are so few current Maryland-born adult adopted  people who may qualify under its law, which gives preference to adoptions finalized on or after January 1, 2000. Because the adopted person must also be at least 21 years of age to request the OBC under the date-based qualification, the law effectively applies only to those adopted people who are recently turning 21 (or were older at the time of their adoption). In addition, birthparents under current law may at any time veto disclosure of birth records or identifying information. Maryland-born adopted people whose adoptions were finalized before January 1, 2000, must secure a court order to obtain a copy of their own original birth records. Read more.
Massachusetts. The Bay State in 2022 became the 12th state in the U.S. to affirm or restore the right of all Massachusetts-born adult adopted people to request and obtain a copy of their own original birth certificates. Read more.
Michigan. Michigan requires the use of a “Central Adoption Registry” to process information and to determine whether an adoptee should or should not get “identifying information,” which does not initially include an original birth certificate. Depending on the date of terminatuion of a birthparent's parent rights, a birthparent may deny access to identifying information or withhold access by saying nothing. In most cases (those in the donut hole years) no identifying information---or the OBC---may be released to the adoptee, except by court order or if the birthparent is deceased. Read more.
Minnesota. All Minnesota-born adult adopted people have a right obtain a copy of their own original birth records. This also applies to the spouse, children, and grandchildren of the adopted person if the person is deceased. Read more.
Mississippi. Mississippi-born adult adopted people do not have an unrestricted right to request and obtain their own original birth certificates. It takes a court order to obtain the record. Read more.
Missouri. The state has a complex framework that makes the original birth certificate subject to birth parent disclosure vetoes, some of which may extend beyond the death of the parent. Read more.
Montana. Montana maintains a somewhat complex tiered system that uses an adoptee’s date of adoption as the determinant of whether an adopted person may obtain their own original birth certificate. While an original birth certificate may be available more easily to adoptees who are at least 30 years of age, court orders may be required for younger adoptees. In all cases, if a birthparent requests that a court order be required, the OBC will not be released without a court order. Read more.
Nebraska. Nebraska law is incredibly complex and confusing. Generally, any right of a Nebraska-born adult adopted person to obtain a copy of their own OBC depends on the date of an adoptee’s relinquishment and also whether a birth parent—and in some cases an adoptive parent—has affirmatively consented to disclosure or has filed a “nonconsent” form objecting to the OBC’s release. Read more.
Nevada. Nevada-born adult adopted people must secure a court order to obtain a copy of their own original birth certificate. Read more.
New Hampshire. Adoptees who are at least 18 years of age have an unrestricted right to request and obtain their own original birth certificates. The state also allows birth parents to file a contact preference form and/or health history questionnaire, neither of which will restrict the right of adult adoptees to obtain their OBCs. Read more.
New Jersey is best described as a "limited time redaction" state, as the law in 2016 provided birthparents a limited amount of time to request redaction of their information from the adoptee's original birth certificate. Thus, while most New Jersey-born adult adopted people now have a right to obtain their own original birth certificates, approximately 560 birthparents filed redaction requests, leading to redaction of the parents’ identifying information on the OBC. Those 560 adoptees have no right to obtain an unredacted original birth certificate except through a court order. Read more.
New Mexico. A New Mexico-born adult adopted person must demonstrate good cause to convince a court to release a copy of the adoptee's own original birth certificate. Read more.
New York. Since 2020, adult adopted persons and their descendants have an unrestricted right to request and obtain a certified copy of the adopted person's own original birth certificate. Read more.
North Carolina. A court order is required for the release of any identifying information, including an OBC. A North Carolina-born adult adopted person must specifically request the OBC in a court action that seeks the release of identifying information. Read more.
North Dakota. Adult adopted people who were born in North Dakota do not have a right to request and obtain a copy of their own original birth certificates. It takes a court order to release it. Read more.
Ohio. Not all Ohip-born adult adopted people are treated equally. While legislative reforms in the last decade removed a number of discriminatory provisions, significant restrictions remain, including birthparent redaction and disclosure vetoes. Read more.
Oklahoma. Currently, nearly all Oklahoma-born adult adopted must obtain a court order and show good cause for release of the OBC. While Oklahoma-born adopted people whose adoptions were finalized after November 1, 1997, do not require a court order, requests for such OBCs are subject to birth parent disclosure vetoes and redaction. Read more.
Oregon. Oregon-born adopted people who are at least 21 years of age have an unrestricted right to obtain a copy of their own original birth certificates. Oregon law also allows adoptees at age 18 to obtain specific records in the court adoption proceedings. Read more.
Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania-born adopted people who are at least 18 years of age—and who must be high school graduates, possess a GED, or are legally withdrawn from school— may request "summary information" from their original birth record (but not a copy of the original record itself). Birthparents, however may redact identifying information on the OBC by filing a “name redaction request.” Redaction requests may be filed or withdrawn at any time and do not extend beyond a filing parent’s death. Read more.
Rhode Island. Adult adopted people and their descendants have an unrestricted right to request and obtain the adopted person's own original birth certificate at age 18. Read more.
South Carolina. South Carolina-born adult adopted people must either obtain a court order or birthparent permission to obtain an unredacted original birth record. Read more.
South Dakota. South Dakota-born adult adopted people have an unrestricted right to request and obtain a copy of their own original birth certificate directly from the state's vital records department or from the local register of deeds. In July 2023, South Dakota became the fourteenth state to affirm or restore such a right. Read more.
Tennessee. Nearly all adoptees who are 21 years of age have a right to request and obtain their their own “adoption records,” which typically include original birth certificates. The only exception to this right is for an adult adoptee whose birth parent was a victim of rape or incest—in such cases the written consent of the birth parent is required for release of records. Read more.
Texas. Release of the OBC to a Texas-born adult adopted person requires a court order, with one significant exception: adoptees who are at least 18 years of age and who know the names of their birthparents listed on the record may obtain a non-certified copy of their own original birth certificate upon request. Read more.
Utah. Adult adoptees do not have an unrestricted right to request and obtain their own original birth certificates. While adoptees 18 years of age or older may request their birth records, release depends on participating in a voluntary registry as well as obtaining the consent of birthparents, unless a birthparent is dead. Read more.
Vermont. Vermont-born adult adopted people and their descendants have an unrestricted right to request and obtain a copy of the adopted person's own original birth certificate directly from the state's vital records department. In July 2023, Vermont became the thirteenth state to affirm or restore such a right. Read more.
Virginia. Release of an OBC to a Virginia-born adult adopted person requires either a) a state agency’s decision, upon good cause shown, to release identifying information from the adoption records; or b) a court order upon good cause shown. Read more.
Washington. Adult adoptees do not have an unrestricted right to obtain their own original birth certificates. An OBC is available through the Department of Health but release is subject to birth parent disclosure vetoes as well as to corrupt contact preference forms that allow birthparents to deny release of the OBC. Disclosure vetoes and contact preference forms expire on the death of the birth parent. Read more.
West Virginia. Adult adoptees do not have an unrestricted right to obtain their own original birth certificates. A court order, requiring good cause, is required before the release of an OBC. Read more.

Wisconsin. The original birth record is only available by court order or through successful completion of a complex and lengthy "adoption records search" process, which depends upon consent or death of the parties to release any records or information. For these reasons, it is considered a "Restricted State." Read more.

Wyoming. Adult adoptees do not have an unrestricted right to obtain their original birth certificates. It takes a court order for release of an OBC, with no specific standards or procedures outlined in seeking such an order. Read more.
US OBC Rights 2024 Placeholder
US OBC Rights 2024
Alabama. Adult adoptees have the unrestricted right to request and obtain their own original birth certificates, beginning at age 19. Read more.
Alaska. Adult adoptees have an unrestricted right to request and obtain their original birth certificates, beginning at age 18. Read More.
Arizona. Arizona implemented a "donut hole" provision in a new law, which became effective on January 1, 2022. It allows only some adoptees to request the OBC--- based on their date of birth---but denies the right to obtain the OBC to the vast majority of Arizona-born adopted people. Read more.
Arkansas.While Arkansas law allows adult adoptees to request their adoption files, the request is subject to a birthparent's ability to redact their names on the original birth certificates. A FAQ with information about the law and its requirements and discriminatory limitations is here.
California. Adult adoptees do not have a right to request and obtain their own original birth certificates, except by court order. Adoptees must petition the court and show “good and compelling cause” in order to obtain a copy of their own original birth record. Read more.
Colorado. Colorado-born adult adopted people have a right to request and obtain their own original birth certificates. An adopted person who is at least 18 years of age may apply for and receive a non-certified copy of their original birth certificate through the Colorado Department of Health and Environment. Read more.
Connecticut. Connecticut-born adult adopted people have an unrestricted right to request and obtain their own original birth certificates. The right also extends to the adult children and grandchildren of the adopted person. Read more.
Delaware. While Delaware-born adopted people who are at least 21 years of age may request a copy of their OBCs, birthparents may legally veto their release, otherwise known as a "disclosure veto." Read more.
District of Columbia. District of Columbia courts control all aspects of releasing an OBC or any identifying information, whether from court records or from vital records. A court order is required and, depending on the date of adoption, may involve federal court or the D.C. Superior Court. Read more.
Florida. While Florida-born adult adopted people may apply for a copy of the original birth record, it takes signed affidavits of consent from birthparents---or death certificates showing that birthparents are deceased---to compel release of the OBC. Otherwise, release is allowed only by court order. Read More.
Georgia. Georgia-born adult adopted people must secure a court order to obtain a copy of their original birth certificates. Read more.
Hawaii. Adopted people born born in Hawaii do not have an unrestricted right to obtain their own original birth certificates. People adopted in Hawaii may request and obtain their court adoption records, which may include an original birth certificate. The law does not apply to people born in Hawaii but adopted in a different state. Read more.
Idaho. An OBC is available only by court order or conditionally through a state-operated “voluntary adoption registry.” Disclosure of an original birth certificate through the registry is subject to consent of the parties and may require the consent of both birth parents. Additional rights through the registry are available to people adopted on or after July 1, 2022, but those adoptees must also be at least 18 years of age. Read more.
Illinois. The state has implemented a complex tiered date-based system to request and obtain a birth record, using the adoption registry to facilitate release of OBCs and other information. The date of birth of an Illinois-born adopted person determines who has a right to an OBC or who may be subject to a birthparent’s request to redact identifying information on the OBC. Read more.
Indiana. The state has a complex and discriminatory framework that may allow release of specifically defined "identifying information," but a birthparent may prohibit release of that information at any time, even after the parent's death. Read more.
Iowa. While Iowa-born adopted peoole who are at least 18 years of age may apply for a copy of their own original birth certificates, release of the record is subject birthparent redaction requests. Read More.
Kansas. While original birth certificates may be sealed after an adoption, Kansas-born adult adoptees who are at least 18 years of age have always had an unrestricted right to request and obtain their own original birth certificates. Read more.
Kentucky. A court order is required for an Kentucky-born adult adopted person to secure a copy of their own original birth certificate. Read more.
Louisiana. All Louisiana-born adopted people, at age 24, have an unrestricted right to request and obtain a copy of their own original birth certificates. Read more.
Maine. Adult adoptees have the unrestricted right to request and obtain their own original birth certificates. Maine-born adopted people must be at least 18 years of age before requesting the OBC. Read more.
Maryland. For all practical purposes, Maryland should be defined as a "restricted" state: there are so few current Maryland-born adult adopted  people who may qualify under its law, which gives preference to adoptions finalized on or after January 1, 2000. Because the adopted person must also be at least 21 years of age to request the OBC under the date-based qualification, the law effectively applies only to those adopted people who are recently turning 21 (or were older at the time of their adoption). In addition, birthparents under current law may at any time veto disclosure of birth records or identifying information. Maryland-born adopted people whose adoptions were finalized before January 1, 2000, must secure a court order to obtain a copy of their own original birth records. Read more.
Massachusetts. The Bay State in 2022 became the 12th state in the U.S. to affirm or restore the right of all Massachusetts-born adult adopted people to request and obtain a copy of their own original birth certificates. Read more.
Michigan. Michigan requires the use of a “Central Adoption Registry” to process information and to determine whether an adoptee should or should not get “identifying information,” which does not initially include an original birth certificate. Depending on the date of terminatuion of a birthparent's parent rights, a birthparent may deny access to identifying information or withhold access by saying nothing. In most cases (those in the donut hole years) no identifying information---or the OBC---may be released to the adoptee, except by court order or if the birthparent is deceased. Read more.
Minnesota. All Minnesota-born adult adopted people have a right obtain a copy of their own original birth records. This also applies to the spouse, children, and grandchildren of the adopted person if the person is deceased. Read more.
Mississippi. Mississippi-born adult adopted people do not have an unrestricted right to request and obtain their own original birth certificates. It takes a court order to obtain the record. Read more.
Missouri. The state has a complex framework that makes the original birth certificate subject to birth parent disclosure vetoes, some of which may extend beyond the death of the parent. Read more.
Montana. Montana maintains a somewhat complex tiered system that uses an adoptee’s date of adoption as the determinant of whether an adopted person may obtain their own original birth certificate. While an original birth certificate may be available more easily to adoptees who are at least 30 years of age, court orders may be required for younger adoptees. In all cases, if a birthparent requests that a court order be required, the OBC will not be released without a court order. Read more.
Nebraska. Nebraska law is incredibly complex and confusing. Generally, any right of a Nebraska-born adult adopted person to obtain a copy of their own OBC depends on the date of an adoptee’s relinquishment and also whether a birth parent—and in some cases an adoptive parent—has affirmatively consented to disclosure or has filed a “nonconsent” form objecting to the OBC’s release. Read more.
Nevada. Nevada-born adult adopted people must secure a court order to obtain a copy of their own original birth certificate. Read more.
New Hampshire. Adoptees who are at least 18 years of age have an unrestricted right to request and obtain their own original birth certificates. The state also allows birth parents to file a contact preference form and/or health history questionnaire, neither of which will restrict the right of adult adoptees to obtain their OBCs. Read more.
New Jersey is best described as a "limited time redaction" state, as the law in 2016 provided birthparents a limited amount of time to request redaction of their information from the adoptee's original birth certificate. Thus, while most New Jersey-born adult adopted people now have a right to obtain their own original birth certificates, approximately 560 birthparents filed redaction requests, leading to redaction of the parents’ identifying information on the OBC. Those 560 adoptees have no right to obtain an unredacted original birth certificate except through a court order. Read more.
New Mexico. A New Mexico-born adult adopted person must demonstrate good cause to convince a court to release a copy of the adoptee's own original birth certificate. Read more.
New York. Since 2020, adult adopted persons and their descendants have an unrestricted right to request and obtain a certified copy of the adopted person's own original birth certificate. Read more.
North Carolina. A court order is required for the release of any identifying information, including an OBC. A North Carolina-born adult adopted person must specifically request the OBC in a court action that seeks the release of identifying information. Read more.
North Dakota. Adult adopted people who were born in North Dakota do not have a right to request and obtain a copy of their own original birth certificates. It takes a court order to release it. Read more.
Ohio. Not all Ohip-born adult adopted people are treated equally. While legislative reforms in the last decade removed a number of discriminatory provisions, significant restrictions remain, including birthparent redaction and disclosure vetoes. Read more.
Oklahoma. Currently, nearly all Oklahoma-born adult adopted must obtain a court order and show good cause for release of the OBC. While Oklahoma-born adopted people whose adoptions were finalized after November 1, 1997, do not require a court order, requests for such OBCs are subject to birth parent disclosure vetoes and redaction. Read more.
Oregon. Oregon-born adopted people who are at least 21 years of age have an unrestricted right to obtain a copy of their own original birth certificates. Oregon law also allows adoptees at age 18 to obtain specific records in the court adoption proceedings. Read more.
Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania-born adopted people who are at least 18 years of age—and who must be high school graduates, possess a GED, or are legally withdrawn from school— may request "summary information" from their original birth record (but not a copy of the original record itself). Birthparents, however may redact identifying information on the OBC by filing a “name redaction request.” Redaction requests may be filed or withdrawn at any time and do not extend beyond a filing parent’s death. Read more.
Rhode Island. Adult adopted people and their descendants have an unrestricted right to request and obtain the adopted person's own original birth certificate at age 18. Read more.
South Carolina. South Carolina-born adult adopted people must either obtain a court order or birthparent permission to obtain an unredacted original birth record. Read more.
South Dakota. South Dakota-born adult adopted people have an unrestricted right to request and obtain a copy of their own original birth certificate directly from the state's vital records department or from the local register of deeds. In July 2023, South Dakota became the fourteenth state to affirm or restore such a right. Read more.
Tennessee. Nearly all adoptees who are 21 years of age have a right to request and obtain their their own “adoption records,” which typically include original birth certificates. The only exception to this right is for an adult adoptee whose birth parent was a victim of rape or incest—in such cases the written consent of the birth parent is required for release of records. Read more.
Texas. Release of the OBC to a Texas-born adult adopted person requires a court order, with one significant exception: adoptees who are at least 18 years of age and who know the names of their birthparents listed on the record may obtain a non-certified copy of their own original birth certificate upon request. Read more.
Utah. Adult adoptees do not have an unrestricted right to request and obtain their own original birth certificates. While adoptees 18 years of age or older may request their birth records, release depends on participating in a voluntary registry as well as obtaining the consent of birthparents, unless a birthparent is dead. Read more.
Vermont. Vermont-born adult adopted people and their descendants have an unrestricted right to request and obtain a copy of the adopted person's own original birth certificate directly from the state's vital records department. In July 2023, Vermont became the thirteenth state to affirm or restore such a right. Read more.
Virginia. Release of an OBC to a Virginia-born adult adopted person requires either a) a state agency’s decision, upon good cause shown, to release identifying information from the adoption records; or b) a court order upon good cause shown. Read more.
Washington. Adult adoptees do not have an unrestricted right to obtain their own original birth certificates. An OBC is available through the Department of Health but release is subject to birth parent disclosure vetoes as well as to corrupt contact preference forms that allow birthparents to deny release of the OBC. Disclosure vetoes and contact preference forms expire on the death of the birth parent. Read more.
West Virginia. Adult adoptees do not have an unrestricted right to obtain their own original birth certificates. A court order, requiring good cause, is required before the release of an OBC. Read more.

Wisconsin. The original birth record is only available by court order or through successful completion of a complex and lengthy "adoption records search" process, which depends upon consent or death of the parties to release any records or information. For these reasons, it is considered a "Restricted State." Read more.

Wyoming. Adult adoptees do not have an unrestricted right to obtain their original birth certificates. It takes a court order for release of an OBC, with no specific standards or procedures outlined in seeking such an order. Read more.

View More Maps

OBC: State Status & Numbers

15 UNRESTRICTED
19 COMPROMISED
17 RESTRICTED
51 VIEW ALL
What do these mean? Some maps and an explanation.</>

Legislative Tracking


 
I also monitor federal legislation related to intercountry adoptees.

Adoptee Rights Law Center

Copyright © 2025 · Adoptee Rights Law Center PLLC · Home · About · Contact