The move to open adoption records is currently underway in several states. For the past 3 years or so, I have been following the attempts fairly closely. Since I am on several different adoption list and news groups, I receive posts from different sources about open records legislation in the news.

I began to notice that some of my emails sought to enlist my support for legislation in certain states and others were against the same legislation. At first I was puzzled until I realized that there is a divide amongst open records proponents.

Some backers of open records legislation will support only totally “clean” legislation without limiting restrictions. The largest adoptees’ right group in America, Bastard Nation is one such group. Other supporters are flexible about restrictive amendments being added. They believe that improving the situation for access for some, and compromise are acceptable.

“Clean” proposed open records laws are those which grant access with no limitations such as contact vetoes or other measures which limit access. Another way to limit proposed access bills is to not make access retroactive, but, only for future adoptees. A current bill under consideration in Connecticut will give adoptees born after October 2006 access to their original birth certificates when they reach the age of twenty-one. Unfortunately, that leaves adoptees already seeking their records out in the cold.

Most states that have current pending legislation pending, have made several previous attempts and failed in those attempts. California has made several attempts to open records, but has not yet succeeded. So much time, energy and education the public is involved with these grass roots' efforts.

Often the law which is originally submitted is not passed without any amendments. I discussed this with one of the chief supporters in a state that recently passed legislation to increase access. I knew that many open records advocates were not pleased with the legislation that passed. She explained the long history of previous attempts in her state. Her thought was that though the bill that passed was not as “clean” as they had wished, it would be better than the current laws on access. While the new bill did have some restrictions, it would allow many to access their original birth certificates. She felt that after her involvement in several failed attempts, a partial victory was better than having the laws remain status quo.

The largest adoptees' right group, Bastard Nation ("BN") has concerns that compromise bills sully the waters for attempts in other state to pass “clean” bills. As a group BN does not support anything less than full unrestricted access. The Oregon law which they backed did offer complete access with no restrictions. Oregon and New Hampshire which both now have unrestricted access for adoptees are models to be studied for other states. So far, none of the dire predictions of those who are against access for adoptees have occurred or come to light.

It is somewhat of a dilemma and a difficult choice whether to open accept complete access or to instead accept a compromise. Many more states will be facing this issue as efforts to try to change restrictive laws which block those adopted from accessing their records continue.