==================BEGIN FORWARDED MESSAGE==================
>Date: Mon, 02 Feb 1998
>To: neil.reimer@lass.gov.bc.ca
>Cc: jkelly@lightspeed.bc.ca, jhall@wpog.childhosp.bc.ca
>Subject:  Legislative Review of Freedom of Information
>    and Protection of Privacy Act

To: Mr. Neil Reimer
     Committee Clerk
     Legislative Review of the B.C. Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
     Room 224, Parliament Buildings
     Victoria, B.C.   V8V 1X4

     Phone: 250-356-6318
     Fax:     250-356-8172
     E-mail: neil.reimer@lass.gov.bc.ca

From:
Dr. Michael F. Whitfield, Pediatrician,
Associate Professor, Department of Pediatrics, University of British Columbia.
Neonatologist and Director, Neonatal Follow-Up Programme BC Children's Hospital,
Former participant in the workshops and consultative groups for the
Adoption Act and formulation of the Regulations.
mwhitfield@wpog.childhosp.bc.ca
Tel: 604-875-2135

Freedom of Information and Adoption.

Freedom of information is of particular significance in relation to adoption,
in particular birth family information as it relates to adoptees.  There are
both medical and social dimensions.

MEDICAL:
a) Biological family history of potentially inheritable diseases (e.g.
Huntington's Disease, inheritable breast cancer etc.)  This is a very
actively expanding area of medical expertise and an ability to closer
connect biological family genetic health issues will become increasingly
important as the pattern of health care delivery changes as a result of the
changes in the specialty of genetics.  Dr. Judith Hall could speak in more
detail about the projected developments in genetics in the next 5 years.
(jhall@wpog.childhosp.bc.ca).


b) Medical history of the pregnancy of adoptees (e.g. fetal alcohol
exposure, drugs, maternal illnesses of significance to the pregnancy
e.g. diabetes, thyroid disease, collagen diseases etc.)  In the detailed
discussions surrounding the information to be collected on the adoption
forms for the new adoption act, there was extensive medical history
information about the parents and the pregnancy.  There is a case that
much of that information is "third party" information  with respect to the
adoptee because it relates to the mother and family.  However, there is
also a case that this information should be considered as much the
property of the adoptee since:

1. The fetus (adoptee) is the individual likely to be most affected by such
factors

2. Although the medical record is retained in the name of the biological
mother, there are actually two people whom that medical information
relates to; the biological mother and the fetus (soon to be infant adoptee).


Access to such medical information is critically important for good quality
clinical care for the  infant adoptee and in the adoption placement decision
making with the principal of openness applied to the potential adoptive
parents.  Clinically this has repeatedly been a problem for our patients who
are adopted through the "old" system.  It is critically important that in the
application of FOIPP they system is sensitive to this issue and gives the
rights of the adoptee sufficient weight, while  reasonably protecting the
rights of the biological mother.  If not, then the adoptee is legislated a
lesser quality of health care compared to non-adopted children to add to
the other biological and social risks of being adopted.


SOCIAL:
Getting to know "who you are" is a fundamental component of growth
and maturation to and into adult life.  The challenges of adolescence
revolve to a large extent around this issue.  Adoptive status is a major
complication of adolescence (evidenced by the high incidence of adoption
disruption and adoptive family dysfunction  in the adolescent years).
Adolescence and Adoption are both about "who you are", where you
come from", "what your values are", "where you belong".   Information
about your birth family and the circumstances surrounding the decision
your biological mother made to give you up for adoption are fundamental
parts of trying to put the "who you are" puzzle together for many
adoptees.  Inability to put this puzzle together have long term
psychological and social impacts on the individual and costs to society
(e.g. psychiatric care, dysfunctional behaviour, drug use etc.)

Although the focus of FOIPP and the Adoption Act have both been
openness, in practice there has been a collision of ideologies in practice
with the Freedom of Information legislation being used as a means of in
some instances preventing adoptees having access to what is, in effect,
their OWN information relating to their roots and who they are.

The Review Committee in my opinion needs to give serious
consideration how the needs of adoptees can best be met
within the FOIPP framework. Adoption is a very special challenge for
the FOIPP process being in many ways an exception to many of the
primary principles.  My thesis is that the pendulum needs to swing much
further in favour of the adoptee if we are to provide adoptees with the
kind of information to meet their developmental social and medical needs.
Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy needs to function so
that both freedom of information and protection of privacy apply to the
members of the adoption circle.

I would be happy to amplify any of the opinions expressed above at the
request of the committee.

Michael F. Whitfield, MD.



===================END FORWARDED MESSAGE===================