An Act amending Title 23 (Domestic Relations) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, in decrees and records, further providing for definitions and for original birth record.
Summary
HB536 would amend Pennsylvania’s adoption records law in Title 23 to change how an adoptee may obtain a noncertified copy of the original birth record. The bill removes the current age-and-education conditions that apply to adoptees seeking the record, so that any adoptee age 18 or older, or the descendants of a deceased adoptee, may apply to the Department of Health for the record. It also simplifies the definition of a “noncertified copy of original birth record” to mean a photocopy of the original birth record that is clearly marked as not certified.
The bill also strikes the existing provisions that allowed a birth parent to file a redaction request to have the parent’s name omitted from the copy issued to the adoptee. Under the bill, the Department of Health would still be required to issue the noncertified copy within 45 days if the application meets statutory requirements, but the redaction mechanism for birth parents would be eliminated. The act would take effect 60 days after enactment.
Impact
HB536 would directly amend sections 2911 and 2937 of Title 23 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, changing the legal process for access to original birth records in adoption cases. The practical effect is to broaden access for adult adoptees and descendants of deceased adoptees while removing a statutory privacy safeguard that currently allows birth parents to request redaction of their names from the record copy provided to adoptees. The Department of Health would continue to administer the process and issue the noncertified copy, but with fewer eligibility restrictions and no redaction-request procedure.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes, the measure appears to be framed as an access-and-transparency bill for adoptees rather than a contested procedural change. The sponsors’ names and the removal of the education-based eligibility requirement suggest support for expanding access to birth records. Because no transcripts or roll-call votes are provided, there is no documented public opposition or support in the supplied materials, but the policy change itself implies likely sympathy from adoptee-rights advocates and concern from privacy-focused stakeholders.
Contention
The main point of contention is the elimination of the birth-parent redaction request process. Supporters of broader access would likely view that change as necessary to ensure adoptees can obtain accurate original birth information without additional barriers, while opponents may argue it reduces privacy protections for birth parents who previously could shield their names from disclosure. A second issue is the removal of the prior requirement that adoptees be high school graduates, GED recipients, or legally withdrawn from school, which reflects a policy choice to make access based on age alone. No committee testimony or votes are available to show which of these concerns was emphasized in legislative discussion.