Tuesday, November 26, 2013

Ohio HB 307: "Adoption reform" language used to promote reactionary adoption legislation


The Ohio House Health and Aging Committee heard proponent testimony Wednesday on House Bill 307 which I  wrote about earlier. The bill would cut  the  time f that an adoption can be challenged after finalization from one year to 60 days, lessen already paltry putative father rights, and expand the state adoption tax credit from $1500 to 10,000 to be spread out over a period of time.  The Ohio House Health and Aging Committee heard proponent testimony Wednesday on House Bill 307 which I

These points, and others, Ohio Right to Life and proponents claim, will "encourage" adoption and lessen the the stress on paps living in fear than a parent may come back and claim "my child." The bill is promoted as an "adoption reform" package. with, no input from actual adoption reformers.

 This appropriation of  "reform" language is akin to racist and sexist appropriation of language.  In the topsy-turvey world of American politics African-Americans, for instance, who support black candidates for office are racists; women who support abortion rights hate women (and children.) During the baby dump campaign a few years ago, Bastard Nation, and myself in particular, were called "anti--adoptee,"  with  an implication  of self-loathing..  "Do you want to see adoptees in little white coffins? the Morriseys  liked to hector. (not that that question even makes any sense), but the meaning was clear.  I'd rather see newborns die than be adopted out of the "safe haven" program, and that's what they spread around legislatures. Appropriation is the desperate cry of elites losing their grip and having no idea how to frame their own decrepit, discredited arguments.  In a country where victimization is worn as  a badge of honor, the the progenitor of victimization is now the victim.  It's the cry of the sore winner.  Whenever you hear it you know you're getting somewhere

 Adoption Circle used to have a pretty good reputation, but after this testimony, it doesn't. I can't cut and paste as I had planned originally, so I'm linking it. 

Lucie Blumenthal HB 307 testimony001 (2) 

 Blumenthal  lays out  the horror of "waiting" for a newborn to be free of its biological parents and into a permanent  "secure" adoptive environment.  The funny part of this is that she sabotages her own arguments. Blumenthal says that in her 28 years of adoption work she has never known of a parent to come back after finalization to challenge. That's because Ohio has a year finalization timeframe. Gut that to 60 days and watch the lawsuits fly. I really didn't want to testify on this bill, but I'm going to have to. Join me on 

2 comments:

  1. James Michael HamiltonNovember 26, 2013 at 10:20 PM

    I've yet to read the bill, but if this testimony provides an accurate summary, it's criminal. Give a biological father a mere 7 days after the birth of the child to register? How many parents, I wonder, has Ms. Blumenthal seen come forward to challenge an adoption after 60 but less than 365 days after finalization? That's the important number here. You know my thoughts on adoption tax credits for all adoptions, bad public policy which ultimately serves only the industry by increasing competition and what the market will bear.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The whole thing is a joke. I"m not sue if I"ll testify or not but probably. I'm covering the bill for the Columbus Free Press, but I think it is OK to do that. I wrote an 1800 word article for the FP but it's twice as long as it was supposed to be, so I don't know if it will get published. I"ll send it do you via regular email in a few minutes. You're in the article btw.. ORTL is way over their head with this one.

    ReplyDelete