Michigan Adoptee Rights

Advocates and allied organizations supporting equal rights for all adopted people in Michigan

Current Bills

How a Legislator’s Proposed Voting Restrictions Will Disenfranchise Adopted People

by

A Michigan legislator’s effort to enact strict proof-of-citizenship voting requirements will disenfranchise thousands of eligible Michigan voters. It will also disproportionately impact adopted people in the state, particularly intercountry adoptees who may not have readily available proof of US citizenship. It also impacts US-born adoptees, who frequently have problems in obtaining critical identity documents, typically because of issues with post-adoption birth records and US passports.

We have collected stories from some of the adopted people that have faced problems in securing birth records, identity documents, and—ultimately— proof of US citizenship.

Kenneth

Intercountry adopted person

This firefighter was abandoned as a newborn in central Russia. After spending almost two years in an orphanage, he was adopted by US citizen parents and brought to the United States. Current law, known as the Child Citizenship Act of 2000, granted him automatic citizenship after his adoption. However, nearly 22 years later, this first responder must obtain proof of his citizenship by applying for a certificate of citizenship. Despite the Child Citizenship Act, certificates of citizenship were not automatically issued to thousands of intercountry adoptees who arrived in the United States prior to 2004. Today, tens of thousands of intercountry adoptees like Kenneth lack certificates of citizenship, which make it difficult to obtain a US passport. In addition, applying for a certificate of citizenship may require an immigration attorney as well as time: it can take 6 to 8 months to obtain a certificate of citizenship.

    Annissa

    Michigan-born adopted person

    Annissa needed a US passport to travel for her partner’s job. She sent the passport agency her amended post-adoption birth certificate, which she had been using without issue for most of her life. After waiting a month, she received a letter from the US Department of State informing her that her post-adoption birth certificate was not valid for securing a US passport, as it had information on it that had been redacted. Fortunately, Annissa had reunited with her biological parents and had access to critical information on her original birth record that she would not normally be able to obtain without a court order. With that help, and additional fees, she was able to contact the correct governmental entity who in turn contacted the US passport agency. Despite paying extra for expediting processing of her US passport—which should have taken four weeks—it instead took four months. She had no prior knowledge or warning that this would be the case.

      Katie

      Intercountry Adopted Person

      Katie is an international adoptee from Colombia who was adopted by a Michigan family in Washtenaw County in 1978. She is a naturalized US citizen. When she tried to get a US passport so that she could travel, however, she was told she needed her birth certificate, which had her birth name on it from Colombia, and the pictures on her naturalization papers showed her as a five year old. Katie had to locate and obtain her certificate of adoption and reapply for a replacement naturalization certificate. It cost her over $350 and delayed her plans for more than six months. 

        Pamela

        Michigan-born Adopted Person

        Pamela needed valid government-issued identification. State officials told her she would need to apply online for a new post-adoption birth certificate, which she had lost. She contacted the vital records office in Lansing and, in order to apply online, one of the mandatory questions was “what city were you born in?” Her pre-adoption non-identifying information—which the state must provide to adoptees upon request— provided only her county of birth, not the city of birth. Accordingly, she was being asked to provide information to the state that the state had denied to her. Pamela made an educated guess of the city and happened to be correct. Had she been wrong, she would have continued to have difficulty obtaining a driver’s license or a US passport.

          Christine

          Michigan-born adopted person

          Christine is a Michigan born adopted person. When Christine tried to obtain her Real ID from the Secretary of State she was told that her amended post-adoption birth certificate would not suffice because it was allegedly not issued “by an acceptable government agency.” It took her 18 months to dispute this, which included involvement of her state representative, in order to finally obtain her Real ID. 

            Rebecca

            Michigan-born adopted person

            After waiting two hours at the Secretary of State’s office to get Real ID, Rebecca was told that “no one with that name was born in that city on that day” and was denied the card. She was 44, and had used her amended post-adoption birth certificate without issue whenever identification was required. After three weeks of phone calls to various agencies, Rebecca was finally told to order a new copy of her post-adoption birth certificate due to problems in Michigan’s record keeping system that matched pre-adoption and post-adoption birth records. She ultimately had to pay to replace her birth record, a document she had been using without incident for most of her life. For Rebecca, the entire experience was extremely distressing and invalidating, and it caused her to avoid the Secretary of State’s office for six years. Only recently was she finally approved for a Real ID.

              Jill

              Michigan-born adopted person

              Born in 1954, Jill can attest to having problems with her identity documents her entire life. She used a certificate of birth registration to enroll in school in place of an amended post-adoption birth certificate because she did not have an amended record. Jill later used her court order of adoption to prove her identity. She had difficulty getting a Michigan driver’s license, and had requests for a passport returned multiple times, despite sending in her certified order of adoption that had been signed by a Michigan judge.

                Monique

                Michigan-born adopted person

                Monique was born in 1956, relinquished at the William Booth Hospital in Detroit, and placed in the Methodist Children’s Home. She later went into foster care, and her foster parents adopted her at the age of seven. Shortly after the adoption, her new parents went to court to get her paperwork, but the judge had retired and the records could not be located. Monique did not have a birth certificate until she was 18 years old. She was able to register for school because she continued to get immunizations through the Methodist Children’s Home, and the school was willing to accept her immunization records. Not having a birth certificate impacted her ability to learn to drive as well as apply for college. At 18, she went to Lansing to obtain a copy of her order of adoption and her amended birth certificate, but she was required to pay more than what a non-adopted person would pay. Monique is still trying to get her records, which were ultimately found in the home of the judge who had finalized her adoption.

                  Anna

                  Intercountry adopted person

                  Anna is an international, transracially adopted person from Saratov, Russia. Anna came to the United States as an infant in 1998, and it took her adoptive mother four years to get Anna’s proof of US citizenship. As an adult, Anna reconnected with her biological family, and she changed her last name to her birth name as a way of reconnecting with her own identity. Despite being a US citizen, Anna would have a difficult time voting under the proposal due to multiple factors, including her name change not matching her certificate of citizenship. Getting a new certificate of citizenship would cost $505, potential attorney fees, and months of waiting for issuance of the certificate.

                    Ruth

                    Michigan-born adopted person

                    Ruth is a retired registered nurse. She was born in 1954 and adopted in 1957 through the probate court in Mecosta County. Her amended post-adoption birth certificate has been questioned her entire life due to having four different dates on it. She was initially told by the state’s Central Adoption Registry that they had no record of her, but vital records in Lansing told her it did have her information—but she could not have it. She has petitioned the court for her original birth certificate, and was told by the judge that her reasons were not compelling enough for her to have the record. If the SAVE Act is passed it could lead to denying her right to vote. She is still trying to obtain a US passport. Republican Representative Pat Outman sponsored a bill to help Ruth, but that effort was unsuccessful. Ruth’s story is unfortunately not unique to adopted people in Michigan.

                      Ande

                      Intercountry adopted person

                      Ande was adopted from foster care in the United Kingdom in 1967 by parents who were temporarily stationed there through the U.S. Air Force. She has lived in the United States for 56 years. She was denied Real ID for 19 of those years despite having a birth certificate, an amended birth certificate, a copy of the adoption decree, a marriage certificate, proof of residence, and a valid driver’s license. Officials repeatedly told Ande that her identity documents were insufficient. She was unable to secure a passport or a Real ID until her adoptive mother died in 2020, after which she inherited a file that contained her original US passport from childhood. Had her mother not passed away, or had her original passport been lost, Ande would still be trying to get a Real ID and a US passport today.

                        MARC Pauses Support for the Bills

                        by

                        As a coalition we have decided to pause our support for HB5148/HB5149. This action is being taken to protect the bills from potential damaging and discriminatory amendments and to reassess the opposition. Our sponsors are in full support of our decision, and we will publicly share more details when we can.

                        There will be a time soon where we can meet and discuss the issues we are facing and our organizing strategy. We will always share as much as we are able. For that we are thankful for your trust. Hang in there, and we will too.

                        House Passage!

                        by

                        The Michigan House of Representatives passed HB5148/HB5149 on November 9, 2023, by a vote of 99-8-3. Our hard work is paying off, and all eyes are now on the Michigan Senate, where the bills will be considered next.

                        In resounding victory for adoptee rights, the Michigan House of Representatives overwhelming passed our equal rights bill package, with minimal opposition. The bills have now been transmitted to the Senate, where they are assigned to the Civil Rights, Judiciary, and Public Safety Committee.

                        Michigan House of Representatives vote on HB5148, approved by a 99-8 vote. The bill moves on to the Senate.

                        The vote came just before the House adjourned for the year. The Senate also adjourned shortly afterward, and the legislature will convene again in January 2024 (the exact date is not yet available). That means we are working now to build the same overwhelming support in the Senate.

                        What Can I Do Right Now?

                        Our best advice? Hang tight. Legislators are on a much needed break (as we are too). It’s generally ineffective to lobby legislators publicly between now and January, but we will be reaching out to key members and leaders of the Senate to to get eyes on our bills. That work will be during December and early January. We will reach out to you and our supporters over the next few weeks to provide any updates, though we expect that little will happen publicly during this interim time. If you have not already signed up for email updates (and, importantly, told us your Michigan representatives), you can do so here.

                        Michigan, We Have Liftoff

                        by

                        Michigan legislators have introduced a bi-partisan legislative package that does one thing: restores the birth record rights of all Michigan-born adopted people. The hard work of enacting the bills is now in play.

                        HB5148: Deborah’s Law

                        HB5148, carried by Rep. Kristian Grant (D) amends Michigan vital records law so that all Michigan-born adult adopted persons and their descendants may request and obtain a copy of the adopted person’s original birth record. The requests will be made and fulfilled directly through the state registrar, without the need to involve the court or Michigan’s notoriously slow and ineffective Central Adoption Registry (CAR). The bill is called “Deborah’s Law” in honor of Rep. Grant’s mother, who is a Michigan-born adoptee. It has been referred to the Family, Children and Seniors Committee.

                        HB5149

                        HB5149, carried by Rep. Pat Outman (R) severs the the state’s Central Adoption Registry from controlling the release of pre-adoption birth records, while at the same time repealing the differential treatment of adoptees based on the date that parental rights had been terminated. While HB5149 has been referred initially to the Transportation, Mobility and Infrastructure Committee, it is believed it will be re-reffered to the correct committee, which is Children, Family and Seniors.

                        The bill package reflects a long grassroots process to assure bipartisan support for an unrestricted equal rights bill. It also reflects the patient leadership and commitment of Rep. Grant and Rep. Outman.

                        To keep up to date or to get involved in the effort sign up here.

                        Resources and Information

                        FAQ: Michigan’s Adoptee Rights Bills

                        by

                        Michigan legislators have introduced two bills that, if enacted, would restore the right of all Michigan-born adopted people to request and obtain their own original birth certificates (OBC), without discriminatory restrictions or conditions. Here’s what to know about those bills.

                        What are the bills and bill numbers?

                        There are two bills. HB5148 relates to vital records and, if enacted, will be known as “Deborah’s Law,” named after Rep. Kristian Grant’s mother, who is a Michigan-born adoptee.

                        HB5149 relates to the Michigan probate code, which deals with adoption law, courts, and the Central Adoption Registry.

                        What do these bills do?

                        Basically, the bills do two things:

                        1. HB5148 amends Michigan vital records law so that all adult adopted persons and their descendants may request and obtain a copy of the adopted person’s original birth record. No restrictions control the request other than 1) the requestor must be an adult who is at least 18 years of age; 2) the requestor must be an adoptee or the descendant or personal representative of an adoptee; and 3) the proper vital records fee is paid. While the bill also creates a contact preference form available for birthparents to file, it is an optional form that does not control or affect the release of adopted person’s birth record.
                        2. HB5149 eliminates court and Central Adoption Registry control over the release of an adopted person’s own vital record. In doing so it also eliminates Michigan’s notorious “donut hole” restriction that differentiates the rights of adopted people based on the date the court terminated their birthparent’s rights. While the bill retains birthparent denial requests for release of identifying information (not birth records), those denials cannot be filed after July 1, 2024. Further any denials already on file do “not restrict an individual from obtaining an unredacted copy of an original certificate of live birth . . . .”

                        Is this a bi-partisan effort?

                        Yes. Each bill has either a Democrat (Rep. Kristian Grant) or a Republican (Rep. Pat Outman) as primary sponsors.

                        These are “tie-bar” bills. What is a “tie-bar” bill?

                        Michigan allows introduction of two “tie-bar” bills. Tie-bar bills are connected and neither bill will be enacted if only one bill passes the legislature. The bills are “tied” together. For example, the bill language for HB5148 specifically states “This amendatory act does not take effect unless . . . House Bill No. 5149 (request no. 03439’23) of the 102nd Legislature is enacted into law.”

                        I heard that vital records may have trouble matching the amended birth record to the original birth record. Does this bill address that issue?

                        Yes. When vital records encounters an issue in matching the amended record information with the original birth record information, the department can request information from the courts to secure that match. The courts must respond to that request within 14 days. The relevant provision in HB5149 states:

                        Within 14 days after a request from the department of health and human services, the court that entered the order of adoption must provide the information necessary for the department of health and human services to locate and identify the original certificate of live birth of the adopted individual.

                        What is the contact preference form in the bill? and how does that affect the release of the original birth certificate?

                        A genuine contact preference form allows a birthparent listed on the original birth record to express a preference for any contact with the adopted person or the adopted person’s descendants. The forms typically have three choices, and none of the choices will impact the release of the original birth record. Those three choices in the bill include a wish for no contact, for direct contact, or contact through an intermediary.

                        Does the contact preference form affect the release of the original birth certificate?

                        No. The contact preference form does not affect the release of the OBC. It is considered advisory only and simply allows a birthparent to express a preference for contact. A completed and filed contact preference form does not prevent the release of the adopted person’s OBC in any way.

                        Will any information on the original birth record be changed or removed?

                        No. The bills do not allow for changing or removing (redacting) information on the original birth record.

                        Who else can apply for the OBC other than the adopted person?

                        A descendant or legal representative of the adopted person may also apply for a copy of the adopted person’s original birth record.

                        What are the next steps for these bills?

                        The bills passed the House 99-8 in November 2023 and are now in the senate, where they were heard by the Senate Committee on Civil Rights, Judiciary, and Public Safety. The committee has not yet voted on whether to report the bill out for consideration by the full senate.

                        Who is in the Michigan Adoptee Rights Coalition?

                        The three core partners of MARC are Adoptee Advocates of Michigan; Michigan Adoptee Collaborative; and the Adoptee Rights Law Center. You can read more about each one here.

                        Where can I read the text of the bills?

                        You can find the bills listed on the Michigan legislature bill page:

                        We also have a more thorough overview of each bill here.

                        Will you be updating this FAQ when necessary?

                        Of course. This FAQ will be updated as things develop or change. It was last updated on March 2, 2024.

                        HB5148 and HB5149: An Overview

                        by

                        Michigan House Bills 5148 and 5149, introduced on October 17, are tie-bar bills that repeal and simplify Michigan’s overly complex and inequitable system that currently restricts adult adopted persons from requesting and obtaining their own vital records. The two bills together reflect current reality, where social media, genetics, genealogical records, and societal norms have rendered human secrecy impossible, impractical, and specifically discriminatory against adopted people.

                        Here’s what each bill does.

                        HB5148: Vital Records

                        • HB5148 amends Michigan vital records law so that all adult adopted persons and their descendants may request and obtain a copy of the adopted person’s original birth record. Such requests are made and fulfilled directly through the state registrar, without the need to involve additional state agencies or the court.
                        • Provides birthparents the option to file contact preference forms that inform adult adopted persons of the birth parents’ wishes concerning contact, whether contact directly,  through an intermediary, or a preference for no contact. Birthparents may revise their preferences for contact at any time by filing a new contact preference form with the Department of Health. The contact preference form, if filed, accompanies any copy of the original certificate of live birth provided to the adult adopted person or the adult adopted person’s descendant.
                        • Provides a notice along with the copy of the original birth record informing the requestor of the existence of the central adoption registry and the potential availability of identifying information through use of the registry.
                        • Allows adult heirs and legal representatives of the adopted person to request a copy of the original birth record on behalf of the adoptee if the adoptee is deceased. 

                        HB5149: Identifying Information and the Central Adoption Registry

                        • Consistent with similar state laws across the country, HB5149 separates the operation of the state’s Central Adoption Registry, which facilitates sharing of contact and identifying information between birth family members, from the vital records office’s core function to provide birth and other vital records to qualified requestors and registrants. 
                        • Makes release of identifying information through the Central Adoption Registry equal for all adult adoptees, no matter the date their birthparents terminated parental rights. This eliminates a current “donut hole” in the law that discriminates against adult adoptees whose birthparents’ parental rights were terminated on or after May 28, 1945, and before September 12, 1980. 
                        • Concentrates on the core function of the Central Adoption Registry. CAR facilitates release of contact and reunion-related identifying information, specifically the most recent address of birthparents. Such identifying information, known as “contact information,” is provided only if it is available and it is not subject to a previously filed denial of release. It is not the same information that appears on an original birth record.
                        • Preserves current denials of release for any denials filed prior to July 1, 2024. A denial of release, however, will not interfere with the adult adopted person’s ability to request and obtain a copy of their own original certificate of live birth through the separate vital records bill.
                        • Requires courts, if necessary, to respond within 14 days to requests from the vital records office to assist in matching amended birth records with original birth records.
                        • Makes adoption records public 100 years after the adopted person’s date of birth.
                        • Requires the Department of Health and Human Services to make reasonable efforts to notify members of the public who may be affected by changes in the law, not only governing the release of identifying and non-identifying information but also an adoptee’s ability to request and obtain a copy of their own original certificate of live birth.

                        More Information and Resources