A bill has been stuck in the Rhode Island Senate (S-0779) that would, among other things, give adult adopted children (18 and older) access to their birth certificates, a right that everyone else has. This would thus ease the way for adoptees to seek to obtain needed health information.

Currently, an adoptee’s original birth certificate is sealed after the adoption is finalized, preventing the adoptee from accessing it, even years later.

Under the proposed law, the process for those obtaining the certificate would be identical to that for non-adopted Rhode Island citizens.

The bill should be released from bondage, passed by the legislature and signed by the governor.

There are two major reasons. One seems to us simple, basic justice: Adoptees have the right to know who their biological parents are. What they do with this information is up to them.

The other reason is a matter of individual and public health: Given the genetic aspects of many health problems, it is only fair that children (and, eventually, their children) have access to information on which they can act to protect their health. For instance, heart disease, some cancers, some mental illnesses, propensity for alcoholism, etc., have very strong genetic aspects. People should know their genetic vulnerability so that they can take preventive measures.

Foes of allowing adult adoptees access to their birth certificates have often cited privacy issues, which we think are easily trumped by health concerns and the elemental right to such basic self-knowledge. Foes also cite the fear of embarrassment associated with the revelation that a child was born out of wedlock. But concerns about illegitimacy seem rather quaint these days, when more than a third of births are out of wedlock, and the number is much higher in some places –– especially inner cities and rural areas.

There have been concerns, too, that abortion rates would rise, adoption rates would fall and that various family members would complain if it became known that such birth certificates were accessible. But in the eight states (which include Massachusetts) that have laws similar to the one proposed for Rhode Island, there have been few if any problems.

Senate Bill 0779 deserves to be put into law: It is the just and practical thing to do. The current system is archaic and unfair.