- Adoptees are the only citizens who do not have access to their original birth certificates. This is unequal treatment under the law.
- Birth parents had no legal promise of anonymity. The files were sealed upon adoption not relinquishment, and adoptees could always petition a court to open them. Also adopting parents could choose not to amend and seal the birth certificate, therefore according to the statute the birth parent never controlled release of her or his identity. RCW 26.33.330;RCW 70.58.230; 26.33.
- State law did not legally support promises of anonymity made to birth parents and therefore the state is not bound by those promises. See Does v. State of Oregon, 164 Or. App. 543, 993 P.2d 833, 834 (1999)
- Birth parents will be able to file a form to indicate their preference for or against contact. They will also be able to fill out a medical history form, both of which will be filed with the original birth certificate.
- No reports of Contact Preference form violations have been filed in other jurisdictions and less than 1 percent of birth parents have requested no contact. For the Records II, Evan B. Donalson Adoption Institute
History: Prior to 1943, Washington adoptees had access to their original birth certificates and adoption records. The records were sealed due to concern for the social stigma of adoption with respect to adoptee and birth mother; the psychological concept that a baby was a blank slate; and the theory that both mother and baby would be able to sever the tie without negative consequences. This theory has since been proven false. Mothers did not easily recover from the loss of their relinquished children and babies were also affected by the loss of both their original families and their identity information. Though a sealed identity might be necessary in some cases while adoptees are children, there is no excuse for a state to deny access to one’s own birth documents from an adult, merely based on the way they entered their family.
WA-CARE's Blog 
Based on WA-CARE recent and on-going interaction with various WA State Legislators…can the group create a page on this blog site that lists where each of our legislative representatives stand on the issue? I’ve discovered through my own personal interactions that the majority of legislators do not want to take a stand one way or the other.
We all know WA State Senator Jim Hargrove (D) 24th Legislative District has publicly and specifically stated on record that he is biased on the issue and he is the Chair of the Senate Human Services and Corrections Committee where any bill related to adoptee rights will not see another hearing.
I’m under the distinct impression that Washington State will remain an adoptee-rights segregated state until we either change who legislatively represents citizens or we run an initiative process through the state and let voters decide.
Lori,
Yes, Sen. Hargrove has been against any retroactive change in the adoptee access law, but we haven’t given up hope that if we get enough support on this issue, he might be persuaded to at least give a future bill a chance. I agree, most legislators won’t take a firm position one way or the other. Many don’t care enough to take a stand against a powerful Chair. But I think that’s mostly because they haven’t heard from enough people often enough. If people keep contacting them and educating them on the history and the reality that adopted adults are being discriminated against, I believe they will change their minds. That’s why we haven’t given up! 🙂