Intoduction
Traditionnally, groups claiming rights for persons that have been the object of a adoption consent that they have been adopted or not and rights for birth parents whose child was hand over for adoption, insist on an access to the adoption records, without condition. This approach was rarely successful. As for ourselves, we are advocate of the "disclosure veto" compromise which was adopted the first time in 1986 (this formula was proposed by Keith C. GRIFFITH, see his book New Zealand: History and Practice, Social and Legal, 1840-1996, 1997.) and was adopted in British-Columbia in 1996. Let's recall that this compromise permits persons to obtain identifying information on the person sought after unless that latest person has fill a disclosure veto forbidding such access.
This site is intended to persons that have been the object of a adoption consent that they have been adopted or not and to birth parents whose child was hand over to public authorities or to the privates for adoption.
In Quebec, one medical file in seven is either incomplete or false as a direct consequence of the confidentiality imposed by Quebec adoption laws. There is of the order of a hundred surgical operations carried out each day in Quebec that are based on these flawed records. This surely results in many human tragedies. The President of the Quebec College of Physicians, the Justice Minister and the Health and Welfare Minister know these facts and yet remain silent. How is it possible that a democratic state undermines the integrity of medical files, one of the pillars of modern medicine? Could a parallel be drawn between this and the tainted blood scandal?
In a democracy, the voters give their government the mandate to act in their name and, therefore, the government must inform these voters of any facts which have a direct bearing on their lives. To know if one was adopted or not is certainly one of those facts.
Furthermore, the government has probably exceeded its mandate when it promised birth mothers to keep adoption files confidential since it used the power of the state to hide forever the truth to a future group of voters that were, at the time of their adoption, unable to defend their rights. In practice, new adoption laws in British-Columbia have shown that less than five percent of birth mothers wish to maintain adoption records confidential.
To limit the rights of an adopted person on the basis of his or her civil status is discriminatory and violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Convention on the Rights of Children and other national and international texts dealing with individual rights and freedoms.
This site present all of our woks. In 1996, we have presented to the government of Quebec a Bill of Law Proposal. In 1998, we have presented to the government a memoir for the Committee Simard's works( Travaux du Comité Simard). Our memoir, present not only our Bill of Law Proposal, but also correspondance, our 1995's works, entitled "Adoption: the Right to know" and miscellaneous documents.
This site is dedicated to those who have passed away without knowing the identity of the sought after person.