Most people regard birth certificates as they do social security numbers. You’re issued one at birth and that’s it. End of story. Anything else would be criminal.
Or would it?
Nearly all of us were issued a birth certificate and social security number at, or shortly after, birth. However, if you’ve been adopted, yours could be a different story. You might very well be an exception to the rule. This isn’t true for all adoptees, but it does ring true for most.
Let me explain by giving you a personal example.
My husband and I adopted our son. We were at the hospital when he was born. We fed him his first bottle. Hospital staff even accommodated us with our own room for a couple of days while our son’s birth mother rested nearby in her own room.
Our son was issued a birth certificate. For him, an adoptee, it’s called an original birth certificate. His birth mother is listed on his original birth certificate, on which he is simply called “Baby Boy (birth mother’s last name)”.
Fast forward to his adoption in which he was issued a revised birth certificate, known as an amended birth certificate. On this document, I am listed as his mother, my husband is listed as his father, and he is called by the first, middle, and last name we gave him.
All the other details on the birth certificates match such as our son’s weight, length, date of birth, time of birth, name of hospital, name of doctor, etc.
So my son, who happens to be adopted, has two birth certificates. His access to the original document is dependent upon the state in which he was born. Lucky for him, he was born in Kansas where adoption laws state that he can legally access his original birth certificate when he turns 18 years old. Not all states follow suit. Some states will put an original birth certificate in the hands of an adult adoptee, but with all identifying information about the birth parents redacted. There are other states who don’t even allow an adoptee access to their original birth certificate under any circumstances.
Everyone seems to have an opinion regarding the common practice of amending a birth certificate. Some are for it and others are against it. Similarly, opinions abound as to the access or non-access adoptees have to their original birth certificates.
Those who support amended birth certificates cite the importance for an adopted child to have a birth certificate that reflects their family unit - Their mom is their mom, their dad is their dad, and their birth certificate should reflect as such. Many adoptive parents support amended birth certificates because they are their child’s parents, regardless of biology. Even some birth parents support the amended certificate because they don’t want their name and information readily available to the child they placed for adoption.
However, many adult adoptees and others are against amended birth certificates because the amended certificates don’t reflect the truth. The waters get muddied further when an adoptee is denied access to their own original birth certificate, citing privacy issues to protect the birth parents.
Since I’m an adoptive mom, I’m going to weigh in with my own opinion. In a perfect world, no one is placed for adoption, so this argument would disappear. However, it is not lost on me that, without adoption, I would not be a mother. That cuts. Without adoption, my son would be the apple of someone else’s eye. That cuts even deeper.
I see both sides of the coin. I support placing adoptive parents’ names on a birth certificate. I also support what I feel is an inherent right of adoptees to know their biological history, including the identities of their biological parents. I don’t believe that inherent right extends to a relationship with their biological parents without the consent of all parties involved.
Whether you personally support the use of more than one birth certificate or the access or non-access afforded to adoptees, now you know that strange things are not necessarily afoot when you come across an individual with two birth certificates.