Comments on: Why I Still Lobby by Carolyn Evaine Counterman http://bastards.org/why-i-still-lobby-by-carolyn-evaine-counterman/ The Adoptee Rights Organization Tue, 26 May 2015 07:03:48 +0000 hourly 1 By: Mary Cannon http://bastards.org/why-i-still-lobby-by-carolyn-evaine-counterman/#comment-789 Tue, 26 May 2015 07:03:48 +0000 http://www.bastards.org/?p=5198#comment-789 Thank you for sharing your inception and life with Mama. Seems like you are on a different journey to date but I can’t understand why you would not support HB 984 – you home state? The CPF from was inserted to give rights to all parties and seems fair to me. Good luck on your personal journey and self-help.

]]>
By: Mary Cannon http://bastards.org/why-i-still-lobby-by-carolyn-evaine-counterman/#comment-788 Tue, 26 May 2015 06:55:34 +0000 http://www.bastards.org/?p=5198#comment-788 In reply to Wendy Ganza.

Ms. Counterman,

Thank you for sharing your story of inception, growth and your relationship with Mama. Not certain why you would not support your own state’s adoption reform bill? HB984 will help over 540,000 adult adoptees gain access to OBC and medical history and last time I checked on HB 984, nobody will be left behind.

Your arguments never went outside your own personal scope of being an adoptee and seems like you have more to work through? HB984 wants to free adoptees from the legal, social and psychological chains of legislation. Sorry you don’t want the ‘same thing’.

Best-

]]>
By: Carolyn Counterman http://bastards.org/why-i-still-lobby-by-carolyn-evaine-counterman/#comment-787 Tue, 26 May 2015 03:45:32 +0000 http://www.bastards.org/?p=5198#comment-787 In reply to Wendy Ganza.

Marley, I sure wish I still looked like that photo from 1998, even if I had to keep wearing the bandages. 🙂

Here are some more thoughts on how I feel about HB 984:

It is possible that my constitutional right to be free from prior restraint is about to be violated. If someone wants to get a restraining order against you, they have to show cause of why the order is necessary and you get a chance to respond in court. If both of you attend the same gym and church and bar, then the other person is going to have to convince the judge with proof that he should prevent you from being in that gym or church or bar whenever the other person is present. Your free movement cannot be restricted without proof that it is necessary.

There are group of loosely affiliated people who think that I need to be restrained, even though I have done nothing illegal. In fact, the people who want me restrained are not the same people that they say I will harm in some way. But because the common bond between me and the person I might hurt is supposedly so delicate and volatile all at the same time, there needs to be some legislation that will prevent me from this relation-induced psychosis. It is a fascinating theory that cannot be backed up. What is more, the legislation proposed does have a provision for restraining the other person from harming me or my family. It seems that I am the only one in the situation that will lose control.

What am I talking about? I am talking about being adopted. I am talking about some people thinking that if I find out who my birthmother is (too late, guys) that I will become crazed and do vile and strange things to her. Yet the woman who relinquished me – by force, coercion, or will – is completely okay now and will not seek to hurt me or the family who adopted me after the relinquishment. It is only me. I’m the one who needs to be restrained.

For those of you who know little or nothing about adoption, please consider this story of mine. It really happened and it was not an isolated incident. In 1997, I was going to school full time and also lobbying in Austin for a bill that would give adult adoptees access to their original birth certificate. That was all the bill said. I would drive up to Austin once or twice a week and make the rounds of legislator’s offices. I would tell anyone who would talk to me about the reasons that it mattered that adoptees have access to their own information. I got some strange reactions, but this one was all too common.

I was in the office of a senator. Senator West? I’m about 85% sure it was him. The conversation started with him reminding me what a good thing adoption is – a baby gets parents and parents get a baby. Yea! I made some polite “mmm-hmmms” and told him that I was not wanting to abolish or change adoption laws. I know he was wondering since I said that I was representing Bastard Nation (and proudly so), so I let him establish that we were not negotiating anti-adoption anything. I was explaining about secrecy and rights and all these things that I was very passionate about. And then he asked me The Question: [paraphrased out of my memory] “Well, if I give you your original birth certificate, what’s to say that your aren’t going to find your birthmother and harm her in some way?” Think that through, now. So I politely said to him, “Senator West, you just told me that adoption is a good thing, especially for the child involved. Now you are telling me that being given up for adoption is such a horrible thing that you think it would incite me to violence against the woman who gave birth to me. Do you think being adopted causes some type of mental or emotional imbalance? You really can’t have it both ways, sir. Is adoption good for the child or damaging to the child? And just so you know, I have already found my birthmother without the aid of an original birth certificate. She decided she cannot handle having a relationship with me, so I have backed off – without the aid of legislation or law enforcement. People tell other people to stay away all the time and quite frequently do not need a restraining order, but you want to restrain me ahead of time, just in case. Is that right?” He sputtered for a moment and then had a committee meeting that he had to get to.

The conversation about whether or not I will try to harm my birthfamily in some way if I find out who they are has happened so many times in my life. All kinds of people propose that scenario to me, not just legislators. It seems there are quite a few non-adopted people who find the thought of being adopted so mind bending that they feel like it would cause an extreme reaction. They think that if they find out right now that they are adopted, they would go off the deep end and maybe even hurt somebody. They are surprised I haven’t flipped out and hurt somebody. And then they turn around and tell me how adoption is such a good thing and I am sure lucky that there were some parents that wanted me. How can a person say those two things and not realize that those two things are pretty much mutually exclusive? A good adoption and adoption-induced psychosis don’t sit at the same table, folks.

So having a provision in a bill that lets someone tell me to stay away is pretty insulting. Is there a law in place that prevents you from contacting someone? I am not aware of one. Evidently that is a Constitutional rights issue that people usually shy away from. Except for adoptees. Now the bill I am currently talking about, HB 984, is a poorly written bill. It is not clear if an adoptee contacting a birthmother who filed a “No Contact” preference would be a felony or misdemeanor. Or it could just be the equivalent of Janie running down to Jimmy’s locker to tell him I like him. Jimmy says he doesn’t like me and to tell me to stay away. Janie runs back with this news. I cry. Janie gets to participate in some drama. Jimmy doesn’t have to tell me himself. And I am forever trapped in a scene from any given day of junior high.

This might sound strange to you, but it is my life every single day. This is why I went from being a bastard to a Bastard. It is good to have friends who understand, yes?

]]>
By: Carolyn Counterman http://bastards.org/why-i-still-lobby-by-carolyn-evaine-counterman/#comment-786 Tue, 26 May 2015 03:43:14 +0000 http://www.bastards.org/?p=5198#comment-786 In reply to Wendy Ganza.

Okay, everyone take a deep breath. And another. Okay?

Wendy, I did not say that HB 984 was no good for searchers. I said the bill that let me get an OBC *IF* I already knew the names was no good for searchers. I was out of the loop when that got added to adoption law (sometime after 1997, when I was lobbying in full force), but it reads like it a bone that gone thrown out to adoption activists to keep us quiet for awhile. Whoever said, “Yes, we will take it,” did not do you any favors.

Also, Wendy, you seem very offended that I am not in agreement with you. I am sorry for that. I was not trying to offend anyone. I’m not even sure that I was trying to not agree. I just don’t, that’s all. If you will go back the first paragraph of my “rant”, you will see that I said:

“However, I think that it is time for us to possibly deal openly with the fact that we don’t always want the same things. And we need to deal with the fact that we are all in different spaces as it relates to what we are willing to do to get what we want and what we are not willing to do.”

I said that for a reason. Because I am not in the same place you are. I should not be expected to be in the same place. Whether or not my search was easy or hard, it is done. Once I got past that VERY important step in dealing with my adoption on my terms, I was left to see that many of the things that hurt me most over the years were not fixable with legislation. I had so hoped that I would feel differently, but I didn’t. I was still very much “other” in my world. That is why I was surprised that you said, “There are so many things that the author rants about that a law can’t address.” Yes, that was my point. I did not write the essay to tell you of all of the reasons I was rooting for this bill to pass so you could get your OBC right away. I was writing the essay to talk about what is important to me with regards to adoption legislation and reform. I was being honest in telling why I still even bother. I know you want that OBC so badly you can taste the ink of the printer down at Vital Statistics that pops out those bad boys. I was there, too, and so I respect that is what is most important to you. I do wish that you could respect where I am at, but you might not have that in you right now.

As for your comment, “Please get informed on issues before you take a stand on them,” that is hardly fair. That does not reflect reality at all. I have been taking a stand on the issues of sealed adoption records for at least 22 years. I have used every opportunity that has been given to me to educate people on the fact that adoptees have been treated badly and with unfavorable bias in so many more ways than just an amended birth certificate. I can promise you, if HB 984 passes, there will be some adoptees who will get their OBC and take off without a backward glance. But I will still be here fighting to change all of the other ways that adoptees – including you – are treated as “less than.”

I feel like your intense reaction to me was driven by you feeling that something you want/need/desire on a cellular level is being threatened. I am not going to say something cliche like, “This will hurt me more than it hurts you.” It won’t. If HB 984 does not pass, I will still know my birth family and have a copy of my OBC. I won’t pretend that I will feel anything like you will. But when the bill I lobbied for in 1997 died a spectacular, fiery death, I did not lash out in anger against my fellow adoptees. I did not lash out at the people who said, “there is more to it than just this, so focus elsewhere.” I told them they were right and I would catch up to them when I could. I did not lash out at the people who would have supported the bill if it had a contact veto. Most of them had very well-thought-out reasons for their positions, and none of them were trying to hurt anyone. We just didn’t agree. One of the things I got out of lobbying was being able to peacefully exist around people who do not agree with me. I did not sign up for the process to learn that particular lesson, but I got it anyway. It has been very helpful in so many ways.

Wendy, I hope the dark cloud that is over you moves on quickly.

carolyn evaine

]]>
By: Wendy Ganza http://bastards.org/why-i-still-lobby-by-carolyn-evaine-counterman/#comment-785 Mon, 25 May 2015 18:55:06 +0000 http://www.bastards.org/?p=5198#comment-785 I am trying to understand this point of view, I really am, but I can’t wrap my head around it. I can’t get my OBC – no matter what the author says – because I have spent ten years looking for my birth parent’s names with zero success. Without the name, the “…some law here in Texas” that she refers to is utterly useless. To say that HB984 is no good for searchers is beyond misinformed. There are so many things that the author rants about that a law can’t address. The fact that the father isn’t on there is a distraction, as is the fact that adoptees are stigmatized. That isn’t what we’re attempting to solve here. I just want to know who I am. To be able to get to my own family health history. To learn if I have any family that does want contact with me. To be able to move on without this dark cloud over me, caused by uncertainty.

I love my adopted family, and I know that my adoptive parents would encourage this search if they were still alive. Please get informed on issues before you take a stand on them. “Some bill in Texas” indeed. It took me ten seconds (years ago!) to understand what that bill was about and how it would NEVER help me and others like me. I just want to know who I am.

]]>