Wouldn’t it be an adoption certificate not a birth certificate?
NO. Adoptees BIRTH CERTIFICATES are amended to reflect the adoptive parents as their BIOLOGICAL PARENTS with no indication on the form that the child is adopted. Adoptees (in most states) are not even allowed access to their original birth certificates, much less see our Adoption Certificates...
Another angle on this — do you want a special class of citizens walking around that instead of their Birth Certificate they have to show “special identification” that identifies them as an adoptee? This is part of the reason Birth Records were sealed beginning in the 1930s (IIRC). Before that there was no sealing of the records.
Lots of issues surrounding this... And, NONE of them are easy to rationalize either. These laws, IMHO, are a violation of MY rights as an adopted child to know the TRUTH about my origins (where was I really born? what name did my birth parents give me, etc... etc...). As I mentioned these records laws also make it possible for an adoptive parent to outright lie to the child resulting in possible serious health issues (giving an adoptive family history as YOUR personal health history).
Granted nowadays most adoptive parents know better than to lie, and this doesn’t happen nearly as often as it used to even when I was born (1972 - and I didn’t find out I was adopted till 1989). BUT, it DOES still happen! I’ve personally spoken with women and men in their 60s that didn’t learn they were adopted till their parent died and they found the papers tucked away...
Perhaps this will cause an overhaul as to how adoption, and birth records are handled. That would be a great thing, IMHO - as long as the rights of the CHILD (who eventually becomes an ADULT) are considered instead of just the interests of the adoptive or birth parents...
So how does *MOM* fit into this equation????
Or is MOM just an egg and oven donor?
No wonder our world is going to hell in a *Gay Hand Basket*