You can now read the whole story of how they did this in the cover story of the latest AAC Decree, Vol. 26, No 3 "Adoption Disclosure the Canadian Way" available as a PDF file by request. Drop me an email and Ill send it as I cannot attach PDF files here. :-(
The genesis of the article was related in my post of April 28, 2009, entitled: The AAC Part II: Rekindling Long Standing Issues...Whose Rights? where I describe having been called a communist for even suggesting that we change our language from the rights of adult adoptees to the rights of persons separated by adoption.
Many at the AAC were outraged for my suggestion and when I brought up Canada as an example of having accomplished it, I was attacked by the misbelief that it was because of going after rights for both parties to the adoption that caused there to be a veto added to the Ontario legislation. Not so retorted Michael Grand, a Canadian LDA and member of CCNM and Karen Lynn who perused the issue with the AAC and were thus given the opportunity to explain it all in the Decree.
The Canadian law goes far further than i have ever thought to suggest. I was speaking about equal access to the ORIGINAL BC. They have gotten equal access to both the original and amended!
While in Toronto recently and able to spend time with Karen Lynn, president of CCNM, we discussed at length why this was possible there and why we re hot so hard here with the lie that mothers were promised anonymity (which is why they have they the veto as we do in many states here as well without attempting anything at all for mothers who are also party to the OBC).
Karen believes it lies in the difference between civil rights and human rights. She pointe dout that civil rights is a very American concept. The rest of the world thinks in terms of human rights and n thus mothers are humans to! What a concept!! Imagine that!
I, of course, being American and far more cynical, believe it is just one more aspect of the over-reaching greed of unregulated capitalism running as it does, out of control, and the power of lobbyists such as the NCFA - the perpetuated of the anonymity promise myth.
In any case it is an important read. As more and more mothers claim their empowerment, I hope that we stand together and demand this human right -- not to the amended, but to the OBC and that we stop allowing adoptees to use us to aid THEIR fight for THEIR rights while absolutely refusing to see that we have any rights whatsoever to papers that came into existence prior to any adoption and that are as much ours as theirs as we are BOTH parties to the document...and also that they are shreds of evidential proof that tie us to our children...other than stretch marks, painful memories and grief. The OBC is ours just as much as the OBC of any other child we bore is ours.
Human rights begins with US recognizing OUR humanness!