Legislators in Minnesota are the latest to fall for birth certificates for the never born.
Yes, that’s right. Under pressure from parents who have lost children at birth and fetus fetishizing “right to life” parasites who glom on to anybody’s grief to make the world safe for the preborn, unborn, and never born, the Minnesota House Health and Human Services Policy Committee recently unanimously endorsed a bill that would authorize the state to issue birth certificates for stillborns.
“Infant loss advocates” (whatever that means–to my untrained ear they sound like housewives who promote the death of babies) claim that birth certificates give “validation to the child” or a “chance to mourn” or “a name” or “closure”….or my personal favorite, to be a “memento.” Apparently people don’t exist unless they’ve been certified and stamped by the state–an odd concept in itself–but one that adopted persons are well aware of. After all, we don’t exist legally except through our own state-constructed identity papers.
Far be it for Bastardette to criticize parents who have tragically lost a much wanted child at birth (or before). But there is something really ironic about bleeding heart politicians rushing to push birth certificates for the never lived as they continue to deny to thousands of their own residents –alive-and-well adopted adults–the right to their own original birth certificates and identities. Don’t our births deserve acknowledgement and respect? Don’t adoptees deserve a name, too? Or at least a “memento”?
Dermoid cysts will be getting them next….
As a resident of the fair state of Minnesota, I’d like to defend this legislation as evidence of compassionate conservatism in action. But what I would like to do and what I can do are often worlds apart, as is the case here.
This legislation is simply another front in the abortion wars, in support of the broader reactionary agenda of the Christian right. (Senate sponsor Michelle Bachman happens to be the leader of those pushing for amendment of the state constitution to bar gay marriage or the creation of any equivalent legal status for gays.) Their intent is to extend some form of legal recognition to the fetus on every possible front.
Issuing a birth certificate for a stillborn child may be emotionally satisfying for some, but it makes little sense,logically or legally.
Ironically, open records legislation also is pending in Minnesota. If enacted, that legislation will open birth records prospectively to all adopted after December 31, 2005. It will be of little benefit to the thousands adopted in Minnesota since records were closed here almost 90 years ago, however.
Mr. J.
How dare you suggest that adoptees deserve the same right as something that’s never breathed on its own. Your crude insensitity is appalling, and frankly, you should be more grateful. I’ve never understood why all of you adopted children are so bloody ungrateful.
Doesn’t fit. Simple. Live birth, which is boldly imprinted on each birth certificate, doesn’t occur for the “never born.” How incredibly ridiculous.
I agree with mr.j. This whole endeavour would seem to be founded on the backs of the Christian right.
The answer can only be that a certificate of still birth is recorded and issued to the grieving parent(s).
Duchess of Cornwall
Doesn’t fit. Simple. Live birth, which is boldly imprinted on each birth certificate, doesn’t occur for the “never born.” How incredibly ridiculous.
I agree with mr.j. This whole endeavour would seem to be founded on the backs of the Christian right.
The answer can only be that a certificate of still birth is recorded and issued to the grieving parent(s).
Duchess of Cornwall
So what is to prevent them from stealing the identities of the never-born, or rigging elections?
Noting as far as I can see. Yet some opponents of OBC access will wine that we might have 2 identities and steal the election. ha!