Legislation, News March 18, 2023

California AB1302: Already restrictive adds more restrictions and massive burreaucracy. Act Now!

by Marley Greiner

If you have not already done so, go to the California AB 1302 Action Alert sent by CalOpen Partners that Bastard Nation posted few days ago, and contact the California House Judiciary Committee and tell them NO PASS on this bill. If you already sent a letter, go back and send another one or make a call telling the committee that this new amendment, under no circumstances, is acceptable. This is especially important if you are a California adoptee or resident–and if you are, say so!

 

____________

Just when you think California AB1302 can’t get any worse along comes author’s Amendment 1, filed Thursday (March 16), to muck up (1) the current mucked-up OBC access system even more (2) and the horrible AB1302 even more. It’s a sinkhole of adopteephobia and mythology. Redactions, courts, and now with the amendment, a new massive bureaucracy, all to keep the state’s little nosy bastards in their place. The only thing that needs to be added is the peculiar West Virginia kink that adoptees must be high school graduates or hold a GED to get their OBCs.  Amendment 1 reads (n part (the 2nd part mirrors the first but it is for people adopted after he effective date):

 

SEC. 2.

Section 102706 is added to the Health and Safety Code, to read:

102706.

 (a) Notwithstanding any other law, beginning January 1, 2025, a superior court shall grant a petition and direct the State Registrar to initiate the process in subdivision (b) upon receipt of a verified petition filed by an adopted person who is 18 years of age or older and who was the subject of an adoption occurring before January 1, 2025.
______
(b) (1) Upon receipt of a valid court order pursuant to subdivision (a), the State Registrar shall provide notice to each birth parent named on the original birth certificate, informing the birth parent or parents that the adopted person has required the original and unredacted birth certificate.
______
(2) The notice shall be sent to the best available address for each birth parent listed on the original birth certificate. The notice shall be sent by certified or registered mail, restricted delivery, and return receipt requested and shall do both of the following:
______
(A) The notice shall advise the birth parent regarding the change in the law pursuant to this section.
______
(B) The notice shall include a form on which the birth parent may indicate that they authorize a copy of the original and unredacted birth certificate to be provided to the adopted person.
______
(3) The State Registrar shall provide a subsequent reminder notice to each birth parent five months or 150 days after the delivery date of the notice sent pursuant to paragraph (2), whichever is sooner. The reminder notice shall be sent by certified or registered mail, restricted delivery, and return receipt requested. The reminder notice shall include a form on which the birth parent may indicate that they authorize a copy of the original and unredacted birth certificate to be provided to the adopted person.
______
(4) The State Registrar shall not provide a birth certificate pursuant to this subdivision if either of the following apply:
______
(A) Either notice provided pursuant to paragraph (1) or (3) was not received by each birth parent listed on the birth certificate, as indicated by the fact that the State Registrar has not received the return receipt acknowledgment. If two birth parents are listed on the birth certificate and only one birth parent has not received the notice, the State Registrar may release a copy of the birth certificate with information identifying and pertaining to that birth parent redacted, if the remaining birth parent authorizes release of the original and unredacted birth certificate.
______
(B) Each birth parent listed on the certificate has failed to return the form included with the notice. If two birth parents are listed on the birth certificate and only one birth parent has failed to sign the notice, the State Registrar shall release a copy of the birth certificate with information identifying and pertaining to the nonresponsive parent redacted, if the remaining birth parent authorizes the release of the original and unredacted birth certificate.
______
     In other words, in order to protect the “privacy” (don’t they mean anonymity?)  of biological parents from their own offspring, the State of California, upon receipt of an adoptee request for their OBC, would send to the parents at “the best available address” a  Registered or Certified letter with restricted receipt requiring a signature, enclosing a notice of the request and a birthparent permission slip. A “reminder notice” will be sent 150 days later, if the original letter generates no response.
     Why not just send a snippy social worker in person on Christmas Day–the popular time for adoptees to show up at the door unannounced according to popular anti–adoptee propaganda. This is crazy! Obviously, nobody working on this bill asked an adoptee how this all works in real life. Of course, Hollywood is located in California, and who knows more about adoption than Hollywood?
     Under the bill, three things can happen:
  • release of the OBC if all parents on the document agree in writing;
  • redaction of one of two listed birthparents if only one parent agrees in writing; (Hey! why not fine or jail the agreeable parent if they spill the beans on the other parent?)
  • no one responds to the letter =  no release
     What if the “best available address,”isn’t? What about Incapacitated parents? Dead parents?  Tough Patoottie, little bastard!
     I believe that California ranks as the highest adoptee birth state in the country. I can’t find a figure right now, but I’m thinking it’s about 1 million. I can’t even contemplate the massive bureaucracy this bill will create. Is this a job-creation project for deadbeat nepos? If it passes, I’want thousands of California adoptees to apply for their OBCs and shut down the system.
     Where is this bill coming from and why now?
Who is pushing the bill?  Rumpelstiltskin?  J Edgar Hoover? Did Krampus come early this year?
     AB1302 would hardly have been acceptable in 1973, but today we have 13 states on the books that acknowledge and support the right of all their adopted people to obtain their own birth records. Two, perhaps three more, are on the cusp–and it’s only mid-March.  (Who would believe until now that Georgia and South Dakota would be more adoptee- friendly than “progressive” California?)  Yet certain politicians want to take us back 50 years.
California here we come
                                   Right back where we started from

          Greg Luice, from the AdoptionRighs Law Center has published a new video on the bill :

Bastard Nation’s original opposition letter went into the legislative analysis.  We are sending a second letter and will post it here.

 

Leave a comment

*

*

Share This!