Matter of Raymond E.E.T.
Annotate this CaseDecided on June 22, 2005
Surrogate's Court, Nassau County
In the Matter of the Adoption of Raymond E.E.T., Anonymous.
276A
John B. Riordan, J.
This is an application by an adult adoptive child to unseal adoption records, based upon alleged medical necessity. The adoptive child has not submitted any supporting documentation from physicians, however, he avers that he recently lost consciousness and was taken to a hospital where he was unable to provide medical history which might have assisted the doctors with their diagnosis. In addition, the adoptive child is concerned that his lack of knowledge of his medical history will present similar difficulties for his children and grandchildren.
The adoptive child made a previous application to the court requesting the same relief. By decision dated February 15, 1990, the court appointed Joseph Carrieri, Esq. as guardian ad litem to take reasonable steps to locate the whereabouts of the biological parents and to review any and all medical records and family history in the court's file. The adoptive child avers that a private investigator was hired to assist in the search, but his efforts were unsuccessful and the biological parents were not located. The adoptive parents are now both deceased.
Domestic Relations Law §114 requires that adoption records be sealed. The purpose is to protect and ensure confidentiality which is "vital to the adoption process" (Matter of Hayden, 106 Misc 2d 849 [1981]). The confidential nature of the adoption process serves many purposes - to foster a stable and secure home for the adoptive child, to ensure that the biological parents will be able to start a new life without fear of the past intruding on their ability to do so, conversely, to allow the adoptive parents to go on without fear that the biological parents will intrude into their lives, and to shield the adoptive child from possibly disturbing facts regarding his birth or background (Golan v Louise Wise Services, 69 NY2d 343 [1987]; Matter of Walker, 64 NY2d 354 [1985]; Matter of Linda F.M., 52 NY2d 236 [1981], appeal dismissed 454 US 806 [1981]; Matter of Hayden, 106 Misc 2d 849 [1981]). The statutory sealing requirements have been held to be constitutional and do not violate the adoptive child's 14th amendment right to equal protection (Matter of Linda F.M., 52 NY2d 236 [1981], appeal dismissed 454 US 806 [1981]; Matter of Romano, 109 Misc 2d 99 [1981]).
Despite the strong policy in favor of confidentiality, the courts and the legislature have recognized that, under certain circumstances, an adoptive child may need information concerning his or her medical background (Matter of Chattman, 57 AD2d 618 [1977]; Juman v Louise Wise Services, 159 Misc 2d 314 [1994], affd 211 AD2d 446 [1995]; Matter of Harrington, NYLJ,
Mar. 31, 1993, at 25). Nevertheless, "[a] rule which automatically gave full disclosure to any adopted person confronted with a medical problem with some genetic implications would swallow New York's strong policy against disclosure. . ." (Golan v Louise Wise Services, 69 [*2]NY2d 343, 349 [1987]). Thus, the courts and the legislature have attempted to strike a balance between the conflicting interests of the biological parents to maintain anonymity and the interests of adopted children and their adoptive parents in having access to medical information (Domestic Relations Law §114; see Matter of Marino, 291 AD2d 849 [2002]). The legislature, recognizing the adoptive child's need for such information, in 1983 enacted Social Services Law §373-a which requires certain information, including information on medical histories, to be provided by the biological parents.
Based on the same rationale, Domestic Relations Law §114 (2) provides that adoption records may be unsealed upon a showing of "good cause." A prima facie case of good cause on medical grounds may be established under Domestic Relations Law §114 (4). Domestic Relations Law §114 (4) provides as follows:
"4. Good cause for disclosure or access to and inspection of sealed adoption records and orders and any index thereof, hereinafter the 'adoption records,' under this section may be established on medical grounds as provided herein. Certification from a physician licensed to practice medicine in the State of New York that relief under this subdivision is required to address a serious physical or mental illness shall be prima facie evidence of good cause."
The certification must also identify the information required to address such illness. Moreover, in order to maintain the anonymity of the biological parents, Domestic Relations Law §114 requires the appointment of a guardian ad litem to review the records or, if the records are insufficient, to contact the biological parents.
The type of certification required under Domestic Relations Law §114 (4) was found to exist in Matter of Howard (NYLJ, Dec. 28, 1998, at 27). There, the adoptive child had medical problems, which according to his doctors, were inherited. The doctor averred that information concerning both parents' medical history, as well as the medical condition of the adoptive child at birth, was necessary to provide proper medical care to the adoptive child and his issue. Pursuant to the procedure set out in Domestic Relations Law §114 (4), the court appointed a guardian ad litem to review the records and to contact the biological parents if the record was insufficient. The court held that the biological parents, if located, should be given the option to disclose the information sought by the adoptive child as well as the option to consent to the examination of his or her medical records.
Here, the adoptive child has not submitted the type of certification to establish prima facie "good cause" under Domestic Relations Law §114 (4) for the inspection of sealed adoption records on medical grounds. An adoptee who does not meet the requirements of Domestic Relations Law §114(4) may, nevertheless, pursue his application under Domestic Relations Law §114(2). Domestic Relations Law §114(2) provides for the unsealing of adoption records on good cause shown and on due notice to the adoptive parents and to such additional persons as the court may direct. Here, the only assertion made in support of the application is that of the adoptive child who claims that such medical information would be helpful. The adoptive child has not submitted any supporting doctor's affidavit. While the court recognizes that both adoptive parents are deceased, the court must still consider the harm that might be caused to the biological parents (Matter of Donald, NYLJ, Sept. 5, 1991 at 23, col.1) and finds that the adoptive child's unsupported assertions are insufficient to meet his initial burden to establish good cause on medical grounds under Domestic Relations Law §114(2). [*3]
The adoptive child has also failed to establish good cause under Domestic Relations Law §114(2) , (4) to learn the identity of his adoptive parents (see Matter of Rubin, NYLJ, Mar. 26, 1999, at 31). "Mere curiosity or desire to learn the identity of one's biological parents does not alone constitute good cause" (Matter of Rubin, NYLJ, Mar. 26, 1999, at 31). To establish good cause to allow identification of biological parents the adoptive child must show that he suffers from "concrete psychological problems . . .specifically connected to the lack of knowledge about ancestry . . . ." (Matter of Linda F.M. v Dept. of Health, 52 NY2d 236 [1981], appeal dismissed 454 US 806 [1981], see also, Matter of Donald, NYLJ, Sept. 5, 1991, at 23, col. 1; Matter of Romano, 109 Misc 2d 99 [1981]). The adoptive child has not met this burden. His application is accordingly denied.
This constitutes the decision of the court.
Dated: June 22, 2005
John B. Riordan
Judge of the
Surrogate's Court
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
