Existing law prohibits an agency from disclosing personal information that would link the information to the individual unless, among other things, the information is provided to a governmental entity by law, or the disclosure is to the individual to whom the information pertains. Existing law makes vital records related to adoptions, other than a newly issued birth certificate, available only upon the order of the superior court of the county of residence of the adopted child or of the county granting the order of adoption.

This bill would authorize, beginning on July 1, 2028, the disclosure of an original birth certificate, as defined, to an adopted person, or descendant, as defined, of a deceased adopted person, would require the State Registrar to provide a copy of the original birth certificate to those persons, and would establish a process to request an original birth certificate, as specified. The bill would also require the State Registrar to create and make available to a birth parent a contact preference form on or before July 1, 2028, containing certain elections that would be available for release when a request for an original birth certificate is made.

Existing law requires the clerk of the court to report the decree to the State Registrar within 5 days after a decree of adoption. Existing law requires the State Registrar to generate a new birth certificate when the State Registrar receives a report of adoption from a specified court or when the State Registrar receives a specified court order.

Existing law requires the new birth certificate to bear certain information and be identical to the certificate issued to the natural parents, except, when requested by the adopting parents, the certificate is required to omit the facility of birth and the race and color of the parents.

This bill would remove the adopted parents exception described above that required the certificate to omit the facility of birth and the race and color of the parents.

Existing law authorizes the adopting parents to request an amended certificate that omits, among other things, the city and county of birth, or the color and race of the parents.

This bill would repeal that authorization.

Existing law prohibits an agency from disclosing personal information that would link the information to the individual unless, among other things, the information is provided to a governmental entity by law, or the disclosure is to the individual to whom the information pertains. Existing law makes vital records related to adoptions, other than a newly issued birth certificate, available only upon the order of the superior court of the county of residence of the adopted child or of the county granting the order of adoption.

This bill would authorize, beginning on July 1, 2028, the disclosure of an original birth certificate, as defined, to an adopted person, or descendant, as defined, of a deceased adopted person, would require the State Registrar to provide a copy of the original birth certificate to those persons, and would establish a process to request an original birth certificate, as specified. The bill would also require the State Registrar to create and make available to a birth parent a contact preference form on or before July 1, 2028, containing certain elections that would be available for release when a request for an original birth certificate is made.

Existing law requires the clerk of the court to report the decree to the State Registrar within 5 days after a decree of adoption. Existing law requires the State Registrar to generate a new birth certificate when the State Registrar receives a report of adoption from a specified court or when the State Registrar receives a specified court order.

Existing law requires the new birth certificate to bear certain information and be identical to the certificate issued to the natural parents, except, when requested by the adopting parents, the certificate is required to omit the facility of birth and the race and color of the parents.

This bill would remove the adopted parents exception described above that required the certificate to omit the facility of birth and the race and color of the parents.

Existing law authorizes the adopting parents to request an amended certificate that omits, among other things, the city and county of birth, or the color and race of the parents.

This bill would repeal that authorization.

Existing law prohibits an agency from disclosing personal information that would link the information to the individual unless, among other things, the information is provided to a governmental entity by law, or the disclosure is to the individual to whom the information pertains. Existing law makes vital records related to adoptions, other than a newly issued birth certificate, available only upon the order of the superior court of the county of residence of the adopted child or of the county granting the order of adoption.

This bill would authorize authorize, beginning on July 1, 2028, the disclosure of an original birth certificate, as defined, to an adopted person, or descendant, as defined, of a deceased adopted person, would require the State Registrar to provide a copy of the original birth certificate to those persons, and would establish a process to request an original birth certificate, as specified. The bill would also require the State Registrar to create and make available to a birth parent a contact preference form on or before July 1, 2028, containing certain elections that would be available for release when a request for an original birth certificate is made.

Existing law requires the clerk of the court to report the decree to the State Registrar within 5 days after a decree of adoption. Existing law requires the State Registrar to generate a new birth certificate when the State Registrar receives a report of adoption from a specified court or when the State Registrar receives a specified court order.

Existing law requires the new birth certificate to bear certain information and be identical to the certificate issued to the natural parents, except, when requested by the adopting parents, the certificate is required to omit the facility of birth and the race and color of the parents.

This bill would remove the adopted parents exception described above that required the certificate to omit the facility of birth and the race and color of the parents.

Existing law authorizes the adopting parents to request an amended certificate that omits, among other things, the city and county of birth, or the color and race of the parents.

This bill would repeal that authorization.

Existing law regulates the hiring of real property and imposes various requirements on landlords relating to the application for, and leasing of, residential rental property. Existing law places limitations on the amount of rent and security that a landlord can charge a tenant, as specified.

This bill would enact the Fair Rental Act of 2025. The bill would prohibit a landlord or their agent from charging certain fees, including, any fee that is not specified in the rental agreement, a processing fee, including a convenience fee or a check cashing fee, for the payment of rent or any other fees or deposits, or a fee for a tenant to own a household pet. The bill would also prohibit a landlord or their agent from charging a late fee for the late payment of rent that is more than 2% of the monthly rental rate, and would prohibit the late fee from being charged unless the rent is overdue by 7 days or more. Under the bill, if a landlord or their agent charges and collects a fee from a tenant that is not authorized by law, the landlord or their agent would be liable to the tenant in a civil action for the cost of the fee, plus 5% interest compounded daily from the date the fee was collected

Existing law requires the owner of qualifying residential property, as defined, that provides parking with the qualifying residential property to unbundle parking from the price of rent, as specified. Existing law defines unbundled parking as the practice of selling or leasing parking spaces separate from the lease of the residential use.

This bill would repeal those provisions, and instead, would prohibit a landlord or its agent from charging a fee for a parking space.

Existing law authorizes a landlord or their agent to charge an applicant who requests to rent a residential housing unit an application screening fee to cover the costs of obtaining information about the applicant. Existing law prohibits the amount of the application screening free from being greater that the actual out-of-pocket costs of gathering information concerning the applicant, including, but not limited to, the cost of using a tenant screening service or a consumer credit reporting service, and the reasonable value of time spent by the landlord or their agent in obtaining information on the applicant, as provided.

This bill, instead, would authorize the application screening fee to cover the costs of the screening, and would prohibit the amount of the application screening fee from being greater that the actual out-of-pocket costs of conducting the screening, including, but not limited to, the cost of using a tenant screening service or a consumer credit reporting service, as provided. The bill would thereby eliminate the authority of the landlord or their agent to charge, as part of the application screening fee, the reasonable value of time spent by the landlord or their agent in obtaining information on the applicant.

Date of Hearing: August 5, 2026

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Buffy Wicks, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 381

Author:(Wahab) – As Amended Ver:May 21, 2026

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill requires the State Registrar, beginning July 1, 2028, to provide to an adult adoptee born in California, or to an adult descendant of a deceased adopted person, a copy of the adopted person’s original birth certificate upon request, and requires the State Registrar to develop and make available a contact preference form for birth parents.

More specifically, this bill:

1. Requires the State Registrar, beginning July 1, 2028, to provide a copy of the original birth certificate, upon request, to an adopted person 18 years of age or older who was born in California, or to a descendant 18 years of age or older of a deceased adopted person, applying the same procedures, fees, and waiting periods applicable to a nonadopted person’s request for a birth certificate.
2. Requires the State Registrar, on or before July 1, 2028, to develop and make available a contact preference form on which a birth parent may indicate a contact preference and provide additional information; and requires the State Registrar to match and attach a submitted form to the original birth certificate, provide a copy of the form when the original birth certificate is produced, and replace any previously filed form.
3. Requires the State Registrar, notwithstanding any other law, to announce and publicize the availability of the contact preference form.
4. Retains access by court order, upon a showing of good cause, to adoption records other than the original birth certificate and the newly issued birth certificate.

FISCAL EFFECT:

Costs to the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) of approximately $1.2 million to $1.9 million in 2027-28 and $944,000 to $1.6 million annually ongoing beginning in 2028-29 (Health Statistics Special Fund) to implement the bill. CDPH’s estimate covers four positions and related costs to review application eligibility, develop and publish the contact preference form, and manage increased workload, including responding to calls, as well as licensing fees for document-management software, reprogramming of the California Integrated Vital Records System (Cal-IVRS), and an upgrade to the FileNet record repository system.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. The author contends that adoptees are the only group of Californians denied access to their own true birth records, that sealing original birth certificates is an outdated practice rooted in stigma rather than necessity, and that in an era of DNA testing and genealogy databases anonymity no longer exists. The author states the bill modernizes California law by giving adoptees equal access to their original birth certificates while providing birth parents a nonbinding contact preference form.
2. Background. When a child is adopted in California, existing law generally supplants the child’s original birth certificate with a new certificate bearing the adoptive parents’ names. The original certificate is sealed along with the remaining adoption records, and the new certificate becomes the only certificate open to public inspection. California has sealed original birth certificates in this manner since 1935. The original birth certificate and other sealed adoption records are available only upon the order of a superior court, granted upon a verified petition showing good and compelling cause. Existing law also affords birth parents a degree of confidentiality beyond the sealing itself: the Department of Social Services must inform a birth parent at the time of adoption that identifying information will be released to an adult adoptee only upon the birth parent’s written consent, and a birth parent may indicate whether identifying information may be disclosed.

This bill creates an administrative pathway, effective July 1, 2028, for an adult adoptee born in California, or an adult descendant of a deceased adoptee, to obtain a copy of the original birth certificate directly from the State Registrar, without a court order. A requester submits a request to the State Registrar under the same procedures, fees, and waiting periods that apply to a nonadopted person’s request for the person’s own birth certificate, and the State Registrar’s role is limited to verifying eligibility: that the requester is 18 years of age or older and is either the adoptee or a qualifying descendant of a deceased adoptee. The administrative pathway applies to all original birth certificates sealed under existing law, regardless of when the adoption was finalized — the bill contains no prospective limitation, so certificates sealed in every era of the sealing statute become available upon request. The pathway is a right of access for the adoptee and qualifying descendants only, not a public unsealing: the newly issued (adoptive) birth certificate remains the only certificate open to public inspection, and the remaining adoption records remain available only by court order. To address the potential impact on birth parents, the bill directs the State Registrar to develop a nonbinding contact preference form and to publicize the availability of the form; the form allows a birth parent to state a contact preference but does not restrict an adoptee’s access to the original birth certificate. If a birth parent has filed a contact preference form, the State Registrar attaches the form to the original birth certificate and provides a copy of the form with the certificate, so the requester receives the birth parent’s stated preference at the time of disclosure.

1. Support and Privacy Considerations. The bill is sponsored by the California Alliance for Adoptee Rights, an organization of adult adoptees seeking access to their own original birth records. Sponsors contend that adoptees are the only Californians who cannot obtain their own birth records without petitioning a court, and that access to the original birth certificate serves needs including medical history, heritage, and identity. The change implicates the privacy interests of birth parents, whose names appear on the original birth certificate. Because the bill applies to previously sealed certificates, birth parents whose adoptions were finalized under the existing confidentiality framework would have their names become available to the adoptee without their consent. The policy committee analysis notes that whether a birth parent retains a reasonable expectation of privacy is contested; some birth parents affirmatively support access, and commercial DNA testing has made anonymity difficult to maintain, while decades of birth parents may have relied on the confidentiality the sealing statute promised.

Analysis Prepared by: Shiran Zohar / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: June 30, 2026

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY

Ash Kalra, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 381

Author:(Wahab) – As Amended Ver:May 21, 2026

PROPOSED CONSENT

SENATE VOTE: 35-0

SUBJECT: VITAL RECORDS: ADOPTEES' BIRTH CERTIFICATES

SYNOPSIS

When a child is adopted in California, their adoption records, including their original birth certificates reflecting their birth parents’ names, are sealed. Existing law provides narrow avenues for adoptees to access their original birth certificates – namely through a petition in court demonstrating compelling cause to release the record. This privacy protection has been the state of the law for decades, although there have been numerous attempts to change it. This bill once again attempts to open access to adoptees and their descendants to access an adoptee’s original birth certificate by requiring the State Registrar to make the original birth certificate available once the adoptee is 18. The sponsors of this measure, an organization representing the interests of adoptees, contend that this is a matter of civil rights and claim that they are entitled to their original birth certificate simply because it is theirs. However, there are a number of policy concerns, including the privacy interest of the birth parents, although the sponsors contend there is no such interest. These concerns are discussed in this analysis, along with some proposed amendments that may strike a better balance.

This bill is sponsored by the California Alliance for Adoptee Rights (CAAR). The bill enjoys additional support from organizations representing adoptees across the country and various adoption organizations. There is no known opposition. This bill was previously referred to the Committee on Health but due to logistical challenges related to the upcoming legislative deadlines, the bill was re-referred and will now only be heard by this Committee.

SUMMARY: Makes previously sealed original birth certificates available to adoptees and the descendants of deceased adoptees. Specifically, this bill:

1. Authorizes an agency to disclose personal information in a manner that would link the disclosed information to the individual to whom it pertains, beginning on July 1, 2028, if the information is disclosed to an adopted person, or descendant of a deceased adopted person, limited to the adopted person’s original birth certificate.
2. Defines “original birth certificate” to mean the birth certificate issued at a live birth of an individual that has been sealed and supplanted pursuant to existing law relating to adoptions.
3. Strikes the ability of adoptive parents to request that an adopted child’s new birth certificate not include the specific name and address of the hospital or other facility where the birth occurred, the color and race of the parents, or both.
4. Strikes the ability of adoptive parents to request an amended birth certificate that omits the specific name and address of the hospital or other facility where the birth occurred; the city and county of birth; or the color and race of the parents.
5. Makes inoperative on July 1, 2028 the statute restricting all records specified in Article 2, Chapter 5, Part 1, Division 102 of the Health and Safety Code relating to adoption, including an original birth certificate, a California court report of adoption, and an out-of-state court report of adoption received by the State Registrar, from being made available only upon the order of the superior court of the county of residence of the adopted child or the superior court of the county granting the order of adoption.
6. Does all of the following beginning July 1, 2028:
   1. Requires the State Registrar, notwithstanding any other provision of law, to provide to an adopted person who is 18 years of age or older and who was born in California, or to a person 18 years of age or older who is a descendant of a deceased adopted person who was born in California, a copy of the adopted person’s original birth certificate previously filed with the State Registrar.
   2. Requires the adopted person or descendant of a deceased adopted person to make the request to the State Registrar to receive a copy of an original birth certificate. Requires the copy of the original birth certificate to clearly indicate that it may not be used for identification purposes.
   3. Requires all procedures, fees, and waiting periods relevant to accessing vital records and applicable to a nonadopted person’s request for a copy of a birth certificate to be applied to requests made pursuant to 6) a).
   4. Requires the State Registrar to provide a copy of the contact preference form, if such a form is attached to an original birth certificate, at the time the original birth certificate is produced to the adopted person or the descendant.
   5. Makes all records and information specified in Article 2, Chapter 5, Part 1, Division 102 of the Health and Safety Code relating to adoption, other than the newly issued birth certificate, available only upon the order of the superior court of the county granting the order of adoption, and only after good cause is shown for granting the order.
7. On or before July 1, 2028, requires the State Registrar to make available to the public a contact preference form. Requires the contact preference form to include the following selections to be completed at the option of the birth parent:
   1. “I would like to be contacted.”
   2. “I would prefer to be contacted only through an intermediary.”
   3. “I would prefer not to be contacted at this time. If I decide at a later time that I would like to be contacted, I will submit an updated contact preference form to the State Department of Public Health.”
8. Requires the contact preference form to also include an additional blank space for the birth parent to provide any additional information they choose.
9. Requires the State Registrar to do the following if a birth parent of an adopted person submits a completed contact preference form to the State Registrar:
   1. Match the contact preference form to the adopted person’s original birth certificate;
   2. Attach the contact preference form to the original birth certificate;
   3. Replace any previously filed contact preference form with a newly completed contact preference form.
10. Makes a contact preference form submitted to the State Registrar a confidential communication between the birth parent and the adopted person or descendant of a deceased adopted person and, notwithstanding any other law, limits its release as provided under 6) e).
11. Requires the State Registrar, notwithstanding any other law, to announce and publicize the availability of the contact preference form utilizing a means of communication appropriate to inform the public effectively.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Provides that, among other rights, all people have an inalienable right to pursue and obtain privacy. (California Constitution, Article I, Section 1.)
2. Declares that the right to privacy is a personal and fundamental right protected by the California Constitution and that all individuals have a right of privacy in information pertaining to them. (Civil Code Section 1798.1, the Information Practices Act of 1977.)
3. Requires the Department of Social Services (DSS), with respect to adoptions in which the relinquishment for or consent to adoption was signed on or after January 1, 1984, to disclose the identity and address of the adopted person’s birth parent to an adopted person 21 years of age or older if the birth parent has indicated consent to the disclosure in writing. (Family Code Section 9203.)
4. Requires DSS, at the time of the adoption, to tell the birth parent that the adopted person, upon reaching age 21, may request the name and address of the birth parent, and DSS must release this information if the birth parent consents in writing. Provides that the birth parents may check a box indicating whether or not they wish their name and address to be disclosed and may update this information at any time. (Family Code Section 8818.)
5. Prohibits, except where expressly permitted or required by statute, DSS or a licensed adoption agency from releasing information that would identify persons who receive, or have received, adoption services. (Family Code Section 9201 (a).)
6. Under a mutual consent registry, permits DSS or the licensed adoption agency to facilitate contact between an adult adopted person and his or her birth parents if each have filed a written consent with DSS or the agency. (Family Code Section 9204.)
7. Requires that, in an adoption proceeding, the adoption files are not open to inspection by any person other than the parties to the proceeding and their attorneys and DSS, except upon written authority of the judge of the superior court. Allows a judge to authorize any person to inspect the adoption files only in exceptional circumstances and for good cause approaching the necessitous. (Family Code Section 9200.)
8. Defines “descendants” to mean children, grandchildren, and their lineal descendants of all generations, with the relationship of parent and child at each generation being determined as specified. (Probate Code Section 6205.)
9. Requires every live birth, fetal death, death, and marriage that occurs in the state to be registered with the local registrar. (Health and Safety Code Section102230.)
10. Requires the certificate of live birth to include specified information, including, among other things, the full name and sex of the child; date and place of birth as well as the full name, birthplace, and date of birth of each parent, including month, day, and year, and the parental relationship of the parent to the child. (Health and Safety Code Section 102425.)
11. Requires the State Registrar, local registrar, or county recorder, upon request and payment of a fee, to supply an applicant with a certified copy of the record of a birth, fetal death, death, marriage, or marriage dissolution registered with the official. (Health and Safety Code Section 103525.)
12. Requires, unless otherwise requested by the adopting parent, that the State Registrar issue a new birth certificate, bearing the names of the adoptive parents, when an adoption is recorded for a child born in California and the child’s birth certificate is on file with that office. (Health and Safety Code Section 102635.)
13. Requires the new birth certificate to bear the name of the child as shown in the report of adoption, the names and ages of the child’s adopting parents, the date and place of birth, and prohibits a reference to the adoption of the child from being made in the new birth certificate. Requires the new certificate to be identical with a birth certificate registered for the birth of a child of natural parents, except, when requested by the adopting parents, that it is prohibited from including the specific name and address of the hospital or other facility where the birth occurred, the color and race of the parents, or both. (Health and Safety Code Section 102645.)
14. Requires that the new birth certificate supplant any birth certificate previously registered for the child and shall be the only birth certificate open to public inspection. (Health and Safety Code Section 102680.)
15. Requires the original birth certificate and other records and information as specified, other than the newly issued birth certificate, to be available only upon the order of the superior court of the county of residence of the adopted child or the superior court of the county granting the order of adoption. Prohibits such order from being granted by the superior court unless a verified petition setting forth facts showing the necessity of the order has been presented to the court and good and compelling cause is shown for the granting of the order. Requires the clerk of the superior court to send a copy of the petition to DSS. Requires DSS to send a copy of all records and information it has concerning the adopted person with the name and address of the natural parents removed to the court. Requires the court to review these records before making an order. (Health and Safety Code Section 102705.)
16. Requires, if the petition is by or on behalf of an adopted child who has attained majority, these facts to be given great weight, but makes the granting of any petition solely within the discretion of the court. Requires the name and address of the natural parents to be given to the petitioner only if they can demonstrate that the name and address, or either of them, are necessary to assist them in establishing a legal right. (Ibid.)
17. Prohibits an agency from disclosing any personal information in a manner that would link the information disclosed to the individual to whom it pertains unless the information is disclosed as follows:
    1. To an adopted person and disclosure is limited to general background information pertaining to the adopted person’s biological parents, if the information does not include or reveal the identity of the biological parents; and,
    2. To a child or a grandchild of an adopted person and disclosure is limited to medically necessary information pertaining to the adopted person’s biological parents. Prohibits the information, or the process for obtaining the information, from including or revealing the identity of the biological parents. Requires DSS to adopt regulations governing the release of information that require licensed adoption agencies to provide the same services provided by DSS, as specified. (Civil Code Section1798.24 (q) and (r).)

FISCAL EFFECT: As currently in print this bill is keyed fiscal.

COMMENTS: According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Service’s Children’s Bureau, between 2020 – 2022, an average of about 5,600 children were adopted in California each year. (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Children’s Bureau, Adoption Data available at: https://cwoutcomes.acf.hhs.gov/cwodatasite/adopted/index/.) Birth parents may decide to relinquish their child for adoption for any number of reasons, from being unable to afford the care necessary to raise a child to simply not wanting to be a parent. In many cases, the decision to opt for adoption rather than raise a child themselves can be a challenging choice for a parent. Additionally, adoption itself can often bring long-term challenges to the adoptive family and, most notably, the adoptee. These challenges can include impacts on the adoptee’s sense of identity: “If you were adopted and lack genetic, medical, religious, and other historical information about your birth family, you may want answers to questions that would help form your identity, such as why your birth parents placed you for adoption, what became of those parents, whether you have siblings, and whether you resemble your birth parents or extended family of origin in appearance or in other characteristics.” (Child Welfare Information Gateway The Impact of Adoption, The Children’s Bureau (October 2019) at p. 5.)

This bill targets a concern that adult adoptees, unlike most other people, are largely unable to obtain their original birth certificate and attempts to strike a balance between the understandable desire of some adult adoptees to know more about their backgrounds and histories, against the privacy interests of birth parents. According to the author:

In California, people have the right to access their own vital records—except adoptees. Sealing original birth certificates after adoption is an outdated and discriminatory practice rooted in stigma, not necessity. In an era of DNA testing and genealogy databases, secrecy no longer exists. What remains is a policy that denies adoptees equal access to their own identity.

Withholding original birth certificates can also have real consequences, including limiting access to family medical history, cultural heritage, and critical health information. Adoptees deserve the same autonomy and dignity afforded to every other Californian.

SB 381 modernizes California law by ensuring adoptees have equal access to their original birth certificates. This bill also establishes a process to request an original birth certificate and considers the potential sensitivity of contact between the birth mother and an adoptee by requiring the State Registrar to create a nonbinding contact preference form for birth mothers, available for release when a request for an original birth certificate is made.

SB 381 is about equality, dignity, and bringing California’s adoption laws into the modern era.

The bill undoubtedly identifies an understandable concern, and one that is emotionally fraught. Changes in this area of the law should be done cautiously and with an acknowledgement that birth parents who have decided to give their child up for adoption may make that personal and difficult decision because their identifying information will remain concealed. However, it is equally understandable that an adopted person, who did not play a role in the decision to be adopted, may wish to access information that they may understand to be foundational to their own identity. Also, birth parents may change their minds at some point, after giving up their child for adoption, and may be open to establishing a relationship with their children when they are adults. The Legislature has considered similarly narrowly crafted bills in the past, all aiming to ensure the greatest degree of privacy for birth parents while acknowledging the interests of adopted persons.

Existing law relating to birth certificates and adoptions, briefly. When a child is born in California, existing law requires a record to be made of that birth, including the names of the birth parents and the location of the birth, among various other details. For the majority of the California-born population, that initial birth record will become their original, and only, birth certificate. People use their birth certificate for any number of administrative purposes such as obtaining a passport or applying for a marriage certificate. When a child is adopted, however, in many cases that original birth certificate reflecting the birth parents’ names is supplanted with a new birth certificate bearing the names of the adoptive parents. Existing law does permit adoptive parents to request that a new birth certificate not be established. Absent that request, the child’s original birth certificate is then sealed, along with the remaining adoption records including the court report of adoption. Existing law also allows adoptive parents to request the new birth certificate omit the specific name and address of the hospital where the child was born, and the color and race of the birth parents.

Once an original birth certificate is supplanted and the adoption records are sealed, the new birth certificate becomes the only record available for public inspection. The new birth certificate bears no indication that it is not an original birth certificate and does not reference the original birth certificate. In order to access any of the adoption records, a person must petition the superior court of the adopted child’s county of residence, or the superior court that granted the adoption order. A court may only grant access to any of the records if the petition adequately sets forth facts showing the necessity of the order, and the court finds there is good and compelling cause. If the petition is brought by or on behalf of the adoptee, the court is required to give the facts identified in the petition “great weight”, but it retains full discretion as to whether or not to grant the petition. The statute further specifies that the name and address of the birth parents may only be given to the petitioner if they can demonstrate that those facts are necessary to assist them in establishing a legal right.

There is very little case law under Health and Safety Code 102705, but Committee staff received anecdotal evidence that over the past ten years, Los Angeles County has received fewer than 900 petitions under the section. As Los Angeles County represents nearly a third of statewide civil filings, it seems reasonable to extrapolate that approximately 270 petitions may be filed annually requesting access to adoption records. It is not immediately evident how many of these petitions were granted, how many were filed by adoptees themselves, and what grounds may have been sufficient to justify a court granting the petition.

The Department of Social Services and licensed California adoption agencies also maintain a mutual consent registry. As thoroughly described by the Assembly Committee on Health in their analysis of this measure:

According to DSS’s website, an adoptee may complete a Consent for Contact form and submit it to DSS or the licensed California adoption agency that handled the adoption. If DSS or the licensed California adoption agency receives a consent form from the adult adoptee (18 years of age or older) and one from their birth parent(s), names and addresses can be disclosed to both parties so they may contact one another. The law prohibits DSS and licensed California adoption agencies from soliciting consents and providing search services for adoptees or birth parents. If an adoptee does not know which adoption agency handled their adoption, DSS can assist in finding that information. This process might result in an OBC being discovered in an adoption file, but as previously stated, only DPH maintains those official records. Additionally, according to the DSS “Adoptee Make Contact,” webpage, for adoptions completed after January 1, 1984, DSS or the licensed California adoption agency that handled the adoption can also disclose the name and address of an adoptee’s birth parent(s) if: the birth parent signed a relinquishment or consent for adoption or the parent’s rights were involuntarily terminated by court action after January 1, 1984; the birth parent signed an Adoptions Information Act Statement form granting permission for such disclosure; and, the adoptee submitted an Adoptions Information Act Statement form requesting disclosure of the name and address of the birth parent(s). The adoptee must be 21 years or older to complete the statement. (Assem. Com. on Health, Analysis of Sen. Bill No, 381 (2025 – 2026 Reg. Session) as amended May 21, 2026.)

In essence, the department functions as an intermediary between birth parents and adoptees to facilitate, in as many circumstances as may be appropriate, contact between the two parties.

This bill aims to open access to California adoptees’ original birth certificates. Under its provisions, beginning July 1, 2028, the State Registrar would be required to provide an adult adoptee who was born in California, or their descendant if the adoptee is deceased, a copy of the adopted person’s original birth certificate. The bill applies the same procedures, fees, and waiting periods applicable to any other person requesting their birth certificate from the Registrar. Importantly, it appears the original birth certificate would remain confidential from the rest of the public, and the birth certificate created following the adoption would remain the only birth certificate available for public inspection. Additionally, the bill maintains the remaining adoption records sealed and subject to release only by order of the court.

The bill also requires the State Registrar to develop and make available a “contact preference form” on or before July 1, 2028. The contact preference form must include specified sections to be completed by the birth parent, should they so choose, including an option for the birth parent to indicate any of the following:

• “I would like to be contacted.”
• “I would prefer to be contacted only through an intermediary.”
• “I would prefer not to be contacted at this time. If I decide at a later time that I would like to be contacted, I will submit an updated contact preference form to the State Department of Health.”

The form must also provide an additional space for the birth parent to include any other information they would like to. Upon submission by the birth parent, the State Registrar must attach the contact preference form to the relevant birth certificate and, if a birth parent submits a subsequent form, replace any previously filed form.

The bill also appears to strike existing authority for an adoptive parent to request that the child’s new birth certificate, reflecting the adoptive parents names, not include the specific name and address of the hospital or other facility where the birth occurred, or the color and race of the parents, or both. The bill also strikes a statute authorizing an adoptive parent to request a subsequent amended birth certificate after the initial new birth certificate that supplants the original birth certificate that omits any of those elements, as well as the city and county of the child’s birth. Recognizing that the goal of this measure is transparency, it is not immediately clear what this provision aims to achieve. The statutes amended by this bill reference only the new birth certificate, not the original birth certificate. Because this bill aims to grant access to the adoptee’s original birth certificate, whether or not an adoptive parent requests information be changed on the new birth certificate is arguably irrelevant to the underlying aim of the measure.

Privacy concerns. The sponsors of this measure argue that birth parents cannot truly have an expectation of privacy, due to the various ways identifying information about them now can be discovered including genealogy testing services such as 23andMe. They also identify various court processes that grant access to the original unredacted birth certificate to adoptive parents and adopted individuals, outside of a procedure such as the one considered here. According to these organizations, the sum of these methods amounts to a complete erasure of any expectation of privacy.

While it is undisputed that an adoptee may use existing private companies and DNA testing to identify their birth families, it is not a foregone conclusion that birth parents do not retain any expectation of privacy. The California Constitution expressly guarantees an inalienable right to pursue and obtain privacy. Since 1935 when California sealed original birth certificates, California state courts have not specifically addressed the birth parent’s right to privacy in adoption records. In the event that adoption records become unsealed, the California Supreme Court’s decision in Hill v. National Collegiate Athletic Assn. (1994) 7 Cal. 4th 1, provides guidance on how to determine and balance privacy rights against other competing factors. Hill established a three-prong test to determine a cause of action for violation of the state constitutional right to privacy: (1) a legally protected privacy interest, (2) a reasonable expectation of privacy in the circumstances, and (3) conduct by the defendant constituting a serious invasion of privacy.

For the first element of the Hill test, these adoption records could implicate both informational privacy and autonomy privacy. On the one hand, the statute may not constitute a “dissemination or misuse” of identifying information since the disclosure is limited to the adult adoptee or their descendants if the adoptee is deceased. On the other hand, the release of an original birth certificate bearing a birth parent’s name could very well implicate autonomy privacy. As described by the court in Hill, autonomy privacy refers to “interests in making intimate personal decisions or conducting personal activities without observation, intrusion, or interference[.]” (Hill (1994) 7 Cal. 4th at 35.) Although the proposed statute does not make all adoption records available, it nevertheless requires the state to release a birth parent’s name in a proceeding relating to an undeniably intimate and personal decision, recognition of which may constitute observation or intrusion.

The second element of the Hill test requires the plaintiff to have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the information. Strong arguments exist on both sides. A birth parent may not have a reasonable expectation of privacy since the process is already open in various ways, particularly since the advent of commercial genetic testing kits provided by companies such as 23andMe. Birth records are not sealed at the time of relinquishment, but rather at the time of adoption, and adoptive parents, as parties to the action of adoption, already have a right to view the file and may choose whether to even have a new birth certificate issued and the original sealed. These choices reflect the birth parent’s existing lack of privacy in the adoption process.

However, numerous statutory provisions guarantee implied, perhaps even explicit, confidentiality to the birth parent. For example, under existing law, a new, amended birth certificate supplants any previously registered birth certificate and is the only one open to public inspection. Additionally, the state must, at the time of the adoption, inform the birth parent that the adoptee, upon reaching age 21, may request the name and address of the birth parent, and the DSS must release this information if the birth parent consents in writing. The birth parent is asked to check a box indicating whether or not they wish their name and address to be disclosed and they are also told that they can update this information at any time. A birth parent may also request the court to order the county clerk not to provide documents for inspection or copying to any other person unless the name of the birth parents or any identifying information related to them is redacted.

The third element of the Hill test requires a serious invasion of the privacy interest by the defendant. The Hill Court stated that an actionable invasion of privacy must be sufficient in “nature, scope, and actual or potential impact to constitute an egregious breach of the social norms underlying the privacy right.” Having relied on the confidentiality guaranteed by the system, birth parents who wish to remain anonymous may argue that they face a serious invasion of privacy.

Even if a court finds a protected right to privacy, this right is not absolute and must be balanced against other important interests. The adoptee has an important interest in accessing information about their origins. While some states have opened their adoption records, many others have struck the balance in favor of the birthparent’s confidentiality.

Policy concerns. Regardless of whether a court would find that allowing disclosure of previously confidential original birth certificates constitutes a violation of birth parent’s right to privacy, there are other significant policy implications for the proposed measure.

First, the sponsors contend that the original law sealing original birth certificates was initially enacted to protect adoptive families and adoptees, not birth parents. However, the original underlying motive for the statute does not negate the fact that decades of birth parents may be relying on the promised confidentiality. Moreover, while the sponsors also point to the fact that there has been no opposition to the bill, it is not entirely fair to point to a lack of opposition from a population that is attempting to maintain confidentiality as an indication that there is no potential harm or distress that could stem from the proposed change in the law. Additionally, while the bill enjoys support from some birth parents and such support is meaningful, it also does not indicate the position of birth parents who do not wish to be identified. It merely indicates that these birth parents support the proposed change.

As with every element of reproductive health decision making, the choice to put a child up for adoption is a personal one. Ultimately, someone’s choice to pursue adoption, regardless of the reasons behind it, is a decision to terminate, or never initiate, a parental relationship with a biological child. A birth parent may elect to continue with a pregnancy based on the promise of a closed adoption and the knowledge that no other individual, including the child, will know the birth parent’s identity. While some birth parents may later come to change their mind, their initial decision is not one that should be modified without at least alerting the birth parent to its possibility. While it is true that DNA testing programs exist, and many people may in fact be able to identify their birth parents through them, their availability does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that the Legislature should lead the way in breaking down the protections that birth parents may rely on.

There is no doubt that an adoptee’s inability to access their original birth certificate poses frustrating circumstances for those who wish to obtain that aptly named vital record. It is a challenging truth that a person’s life may be fundamentally altered through decisions made by people who the child has never met and without any input from the child. That is, at its core, unfair. However, the reality that such circumstance is unfair does not, standing on its own, justify a wholesale change in the status quo. As mentioned numerous times already, birth parents may be going through life on the understanding that the original birth certificate bearing their name will never be released absent their consent and to pull that shield away without any forewarning or opportunity to object may ultimately just replace one unfairness with another.

It seems that the author and sponsors have acknowledged the potential impact on birth parents should this measure go into effect. They have incorporated two provisions into this bill in an attempt to stem any harm: the “contact preference” form and a requirement that the State Registrar announce and publicize the availability of the contact preference form.

There are a couple notable points about both. First, the contact preference form, while potentially informative to the adoptee, is not binding in any meaningful way. Should a birth parent indicate that they would prefer not to be contacted, it seems an adoptee is free to ignore that preference completely. Therefore, while it may be instructive to the adoptee and potentially allow them to better prepare themselves for disappointment in the event their birth parent reacts negatively to any outreach, it does next to nothing to protect the privacy and wellbeing of the birth parent. Second, while somewhat helpful in notifying birth parents of the already-changed law, the requirement that the State Registrar “announce and publicize the availability of the contact preference form” would only serve to alert birth parents who may be paying particular attention to the actions of the State Registrar that there is a new form available. While these provisions potentially provide some avenue for birth parents who truly wish to have no contact from the adoptee to communicate as much, it seems entirely likely that many, if not most, birth parents in that situation may have no say whatsoever in the availability of a document which they previously understood to be confidential.

Potential amendments. Understanding the sponsors’ deep investment and understandable desire to access their original birth certificate, the author may wish to consider the following amendments to better balance the interests of all involved.

A mutual consent registry for birth certificates. As suggested by the Assembly Committee on Health, the author may wish to consider requiring the State Registrar to disclose a copy of the adoptee’s original birth certificate if the birth parents have indicated written consent to the disclosure. Additionally, the previously proposed amendments suggested authorizing the Department of Public Health to disclose a copy of the original birth certificate with the birth parents’ personally identifying information redacted if one or both birth parents declined to consent. In order to ensure that adoptees still had an avenue to obtain their full unredacted birth certificate in the event one or both parents refuses to consent, the amendments proposed by Health Committee would have also reinstated the court process in existing law.

Advertisement of the change in the law. As previously discussed, this measure only requires the State Registrar to “announce and publicize the availability of the contact preference form utilizing a means of communication appropriate to inform the public effectively.” While it is possible that notice of the contact preference form itself may allow birth parents to deduce a potential change in the law, this provision on its own is insufficient to ensure that birth parents will be made aware that the original birth certificate bearing their names may be made available to the adopted person. As such, the author may wish to consider requiring the State Registrar to provide individual notice to birth parents whose address is on record with the Registrar of the change in the law. The sponsors contend that this measure is also supported by California birth parents who wish to have greater contact with their birth children. By engaging in a meaningful notice campaign, this amendment would not only allow an adoptee potentially greater access to both their birth parents’ information and original birth certificate, but also allow birth parents themselves greater latitude to engage with their birth child. Acknowledging the potential financial impact of such a requirement, the author may otherwise wish to consider expanding this provision to require the State Registrar to engage in a meaningful notice campaign designed to provide birth parents reasonable notice of the change in the law, including that an adopted child may request their original birth certificate in full absent consent from the birth parent, before the law actually changes. In order to achieve this campaign, the author may also wish to consider further extending the bill’s delayed implementation date to allow the State Registrar sufficient time to appropriately notice birth parents in the state. It is no secret that the state is facing harsh budgets, and that departments across the state are clamoring for more funding to provide for their current programs. However, a lack of funding is no excuse to enact a policy change that undoes decades of an expectation of confidentiality without appropriate notice. Therefore, if the author is concerned about potential financial implications of this measure in its most complete form that acknowledges the interests of birth parents as well as adoptees, the author may wish to consider waiting until there is a healthier budget that would allow the Registrar to engage in an appropriate notice campaign.

Prospective application. Finally, the author may wish to consider making this bill applicable on a prospective basis. There is no doubt that the sponsors of this measure, who are adoptees themselves and therefore have intimate first-hand experience with the impact of restricted access to their original birth certificates, have touched on a matter of significant and meaningful concern. There is also, as repeatedly mentioned in this analysis, the interest of birth parents that the Legislature must weigh against that of the adoptees. As discussed already, the circumstances invoked by this measure involve an unfairness to adoptees and a potential unfairness to adopted parents. It is an undeniably challenging circumstance, one filled with justifiably heightened emotions. Acknowledging there is an interest in accessing original birth certificates and that other states have seemingly successfully done so, as well as the fact that upending decades of the status quo that many birth parents may be relying on, it seems that an approach, which may admittedly be potentially insufficient to the current sponsors of this measure, to make the bill prospective in nature and allow adult adoptees adopted on or after July 1, 2028 to access their original birth certificates may strike the appropriate balance.

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: This bill is sponsored by the California Alliance for Adoptee Rights (CAAR). The bill enjoys additional support from organizations representing adoptees across the country and various adoption organizations. In support of their measure, CAAR submits:

Adoptees are asking only for their own birth record, a vital record issued by the State for all live births. It is independent from and precedes any future adoption or adoption records. Adoptees are the only group of people born in California denied access to their true birth record. Adoptees want and deserve their OBC simply because it is theirs. In passing similar laws in other states, legislators have recognized that it is a fundamental human right to have access to one’s OBC. It is a matter of transparency, dignity, and equal rights. SB 381 restores equal rights to adoptees by giving them access to their OBCs.

In addition, granting access will avoid the negative consequences that can arise from not having one’s OBC. Of significance to this committee are potential health risks from not having access to family health history, including missed preventive measures, incorrect diagnoses, and delayed or ineffective treatments, all of which might result in multi-generational harm. As a result, adoptees and their descendants might face higher health costs from having to treat diseases that could have been prevented with accurate information. Further, it is critical to one’s mental health and integral to one’s identity to have information about one’s biological, historical, and cultural roots. Adoptees might also be denied membership in groups to which they belong (such as Native Americans) without their OBC to prove their lineage. And, without their OBC, adoptees adopted at an older age (often from foster care) might be denied a passport if the filing of their amended birth certificate is more than one year after their date of birth. Finally, maintaining secrecy perpetuates the stigma and shame previously associated with being adopted.

The law sealing adoptees’ OBCs was passed back in the 1930’s to protect adoptive families and adoptees, not birth parents. This intent is further supported in how the law is implemented; first, relinquishment alone doesn’t lead to sealing (only adoption does) and second, there is no wholesale prohibition against access as there are exceptions – notably, courts retain discretion, with no notice to or input from birth parents, to grant access to one’s OBC upon a proper showing. Courts and legislators in other states have concluded under similar circumstances that there is thus no guarantee of, nor even a reasonable expectation of, confidentiality that would preclude granting access.

Not insignificantly, the large majority of birth mothers support providing adoptees access to their OBCs. Birth mothers say they might have wanted confidentiality from their community or their family at the time they relinquished, but they never wanted nor were they promised confidentiality from their own child. This is a women’s rights issue and an adoptee rights’ issue. Women don’t want the government trying to “protect” them or speak for them, and don’t want their voices as birth mothers weaponized against adult adoptees. Birth mothers and birth mother organizations have submitted numerous letters of support, including one letter with over 1,300 signatures, and have likewise appeared at our hearings in large numbers to offer support on the record. They have shown up time and time again across the country to provide support for similar bills.

[…]

Even if a birth parent hopes for confidentiality from their child despite the lack of a guarantee or of a reasonable expectation thereof, modern technology with DNA testing has made anonymity nonexistent. Birth parents know they can be found. The current law does not prevent learning one’s identity or contacting one’s parents. Our goal is not contact but, simply, to gain access to our OBC and our true identity. But it is worth noting that SB 381 will provide access to one’s identity in a far less intrusive way that is more private for all parties. When access is denied, people are forced to turn to DNA testing, with an ensuing family whisper campaign as relatives try to figure out who relinquished a child. By contrast, SB 381 will give access to exactly one person – the adoptee (or his/her direct descendant if the adoptee is deceased). Furthermore, with the contact preference form (CPF), SB 381 provides something that birth parents don’t have when reached by DNA testing – opportunity for a direct, confidential communication to their child to (1) state contact preference (which might have changed since relinquishment) and (2) through additional blank spaces on the CPF, provide whatever information they’d like (e.g. explain why they do or don’t want contact /provide updated health information/say anything at all). In fact, there might be birth parents, particularly older ones, who have been searching for their child and perhaps won’t find them before they die but will now have an opportunity to say something to their child should their child one day request their OBC.

Seventeen states now provide adult adoptees with unrestricted access to their OBC, and bills are pending in both South Carolina and Pennsylvania in addition to California. Hundreds of thousands of OBCs have been released over several decades (and, in the case of Alaska and Kansas, which never sealed their records, far longer). The benefits to adoptees have been huge (positive identity development, psychological benefits, health history knowledge, etc.), whereas there have been no known negative consequences. There have been court challenges in only two states (Oregon state, and Tennessee state and federal claims), both during the 1990’s, and the courts upheld the laws granting access, finding no violation of the state contracts clause, and concluding that providing an adoptee with his own birth record would not trigger any statutory or constitutional right to privacy concerns. There have been no challenges since.

[…]

Access is supported in law, and SB 381 endorsed by adoptees, birth and adoptive parents, lawyers and mental health professionals working with all members of the adoption triad, organizations making policy recommendations within the foster care and adoption arena, and more. There have been only positive results in the states that provide access. Knowing where you come from should not depend on court order, parental approval, or luck. Providing unrestricted access will restore equal treatment and align California with the growing national trend for truth and fairness. For these reasons, we respectfully urge a YES vote on SB 381.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California Alliance for Adoptee Rights (CAAR) (sponsor)

Academy of Adoption and Assisted Reproduction Attorneys
Adoptee Advocates of Michigan
Adoptee Rights Law Center PLLC
Adoptees' Liberty Movement Association (ALMA)
Adoption Knowledge Affiliates
Bastard Nation: the Adoptee Rights Organization
California Alliance of Child and Family Services
California Association of Adoption Agencies
Catholic Mothers for Truth & Transparency
Concerned United Birthparents
Ethical Family Building
Mothers for Open Records Everywhere
National Center on Adoption and Permanency
Saving Our Sisters - Sos, Incorporated
Women's Collective for Adoptee Equality

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by: Manuela Boucher-de la Cadena / JUD. / (916) 319-2334

Date of Hearing: June 23, 2026

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HEALTH

Mia Bonta, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 381

Author:(Wahab) – As Amended Ver:May 21, 2026

SENATE VOTE: 35-0

SUBJECT: Vital records: adoptees’ birth certificates.

SUMMARY: Requires the State Registrar (SR) to make available to the public a contact preference form to be completed at the option of an adopted person’s birth parent. Requires the SR to make an adopted person’s original birth certificate (OBC) available to them upon request regardless of the birth parents’ stated preference to be contacted. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires, notwithstanding any other provision of law, the SR to provide an adopted person who is 18 years of age or older and who was born in this state, or to a person 18 years of age or older who is a descendant of a deceased adopted person who was born in this state, a copy of the adopted person’s OBC previously filed with the SR. Authorizes the disclosure of this information commencing July 1, 2028.
2. Requires the adopted person or descendent to make a request to the SR to receive a copy of the adopted person’s OBC. Requires the copy of the OBC to clearly indicate that it may not be used for identification purposes.
3. Requires all procedures, fees, and waiting periods pursuant to existing law, and applicable to a nonadopted person’s request for a copy of a birth certificate, to apply to requests made pursuant to this bill.
4. Requires, if a contact preference form is attached to an OBC, the SR to provide a copy of the contact preference form at the time the OBC is produced to the adopted person or the descendant.
5. Requires the SR to make available to the public, on or before July 1, 2028, a contact preference form, including the following selections to be completed at the option of the birth parent:
   1. “I would like to be contacted.”;
   2. “I would prefer to be contacted only through an intermediary.”;
   3. “I would prefer not to be contacted at this time. If I decide at a later time that I would like to be contacted, I will submit an updated contact preference form to the State Department of Public Health (DPH).”; and,
   4. An additional blank space for the birth parent to provide any additional information they choose.
6. Requires, if a birth parent of an adopted person submits a completed contact preference form to the SR, the SR to do the following:
   1. Match the contact preference form to the adopted person’s OBC.
   2. Attach the contact preference form to the OBC.
   3. Replace any previously filed contact preference form with a newly completed contact preference form.
7. Makes a contact preference form submitted to the SR pursuant to this bill a confidential communication between the birth parent and the adopted person or descendant, of a deceased adopted person and, notwithstanding any other law, may only be released as provided by this bill.
8. Requires, notwithstanding any other law, the SR to announce and publicize the availability of the contact preference form utilizing a means of communication appropriate to inform the public effectively.
9. Defines “OBC” as the birth certificate issued at a live birth of an individual that has been sealed and supplanted pursuant to existing law.
10. Deletes existing law which prohibits the new birth certificate from including the specific name and address of the hospital or other facility where the birth occurred, the color and race of the parents, or both if requested by the adopting parents.
11. Repeals 12) of Existing Law below which authorizes, at any time after the issuance of a new birth certificate and at the request of the adopting parents, another amended birth certificate that omits any of the following information:
    1. The specific name and address of the hospital or other facility where the birth occurred;
    2. The city and county of birth; and,
    3. The color and race of the parents.
12. Makes inoperative on July 1, 2028 and repeals on January 1, 2029 15) of Existing Law below which makes specified records and information relating to adoptions other than the newly issued birth certificate available only upon court order, as specified.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Declares that the right to privacy is a personal and fundamental right protected by the California Constitution and that all individuals have a right of privacy in information pertaining to them. [Civil Code § 1798.1]
2. Establishes DPH, and sets forth its powers and duties, including duties as the SR related to vital records and health statistics. [Health and Safety Code (HSC) § 102100, et seq.]
3. Requires the SR to prescribe and furnish all record forms for use in carrying out the provisions governing vital records and prohibits the use of any record form or format other than those prescribed by the SR. [HSC § 102200]
4. Requires every live birth, fetal death, death, and marriage that occurs in the state to be registered with the local registrar. [HSC § 102230]
5. Requires the certificate of live birth to include specified information, including, among other things, the full name and sex of the child; date and place of birth as well as the full name, birthplace, and date of birth of each parent, including month, day, and year, and the parental relationship of the parent to the child. [HSC § 102425]
6. Requires the SR, local registrar, or county recorder, upon request and payment of a fee, to supply an applicant with a certified copy of the record of a birth, fetal death, death, marriage, or marriage dissolution registered with the official. [HSC § 103525]
7. Requires, unless otherwise requested by the adopting parent, a new birth certificate to be established by the SR upon receipt of either: a report of adoption from any court of record that has jurisdiction of the child in this state, another state, the District of Columbia, in any territory of the United States (U.S.), or in any foreign country, for any child born in California and whose birth certificate is on file with the SR; or, a readoption order. Prohibits a new certificate from being established if that is requested by the adopting parent. [HSC § 102635]
8. Defines “descendants” to mean children, grandchildren, and their lineal descendants of all generations, with the relationship of parent and child at each generation being determined as specified. [Probate Code § 6205]
9. Requires the new birth certificate to bear the name of the child as shown in the report of adoption, the names and ages of the child’s adopting parents, the date and place of birth, and prohibits a reference to the adoption of the child from being made in the new birth certificate. Requires the new certificate to be identical with a birth certificate registered for the birth of a child of natural parents, except, when requested by the adopting parents, that it is prohibited from including the specific name and address of the hospital or other facility where the birth occurred, the color and race of the parents, or both. [HSC § 102645]
10. Authorizes another amended certificate be issued at any time after the issuance of a new birth certificate at the request of the adopting parents that omits any or all of the following:
    1. The specific name and address of the hospital or other facility where the birth occurred;
    2. The city and county of birth; and,
    3. The color and race of the parents. [HSC § 102675]
11. Requires the new birth certificate to supplant any birth certificate previously registered for the child and to be the only birth certificate open to public inspection. [HSC § 102680]
12. Requires the OBC and other records and information as specified, other than the newly issued birth certificate, to be available only upon the order of the superior court of the county of residence of the adopted child or the superior court of the county granting the order of adoption. Prohibits such order from being granted by the superior court unless a verified petition setting forth facts showing the necessity of the order has been presented to the court and good and compelling cause is shown for the granting of the order. Requires the clerk of the superior court to send a copy of the petition to the State Department of Social Services (DSS). Requires DSS to send a copy of all records and information it has concerning the adopted person with the name and address of the natural parents removed to the court. Requires the court to review these records before making an order. [HSC § 102705]
13. Requires, if the petition is by or on behalf of an adopted child who has attained majority, these facts to be given great weight, but makes the granting of any petition solely within the discretion of the court. Requires the name and address of the natural parents to be given to the petitioner only if they can demonstrate that the name and address, or either of them, are necessary to assist them in establishing a legal right. [Ibid.]
14. Requires the SR to supply to an applicant a certified copy of the newly amended record of birth to the registrant without additional cost. [HSC § 102710]
15. Prohibits an agency from disclosing any personal information in a manner that would link the information disclosed to the individual to whom it pertains unless the information is disclosed as follows:
    1. To an adopted person and disclosure is limited to general background information pertaining to the adopted person’s biological parents, if the information does not include or reveal the identity of the biological parents; and,
    2. To a child or a grandchild of an adopted person and disclosure is limited to medically necessary information pertaining to the adopted person’s biological parents. Prohibits the information, or the process for obtaining the information, from including or revealing the identity of the biological parents. Requires DSS to adopt regulations governing the release of information that require licensed adoption agencies to provide the same services provided by DSS, as specified. [Civil Code (CIV) § 1798.24 (q) and (r)]
16. Prohibits, except where expressly permitted or required by statute, DSS or a licensed adoption agency from releasing information that would identify persons who receive, or have received, adoption services. [Family Code (FAM) § 9201(a)]
17. Requires DSS, with respect to adoptions in which the relinquishment for or consent to adoption was signed on or after January 1, 1984, to disclose the identity and address of the adopted person’s birth parent to an adopted person 21 years of age or older if the birth parent has indicated consent to the disclosure in writing. [FAM § 9203]
18. Requires DSS, at the time of the adoption, to tell the birth parent that the adopted person, upon reaching age 21, may request the name and address of the birth parent, and DSS must release this information if the birth parent consents in writing. Provides that the birth parents may check a box indicating whether or not they wish their name and address to be disclosed and may update this information at any time. [FAM § 8818]
19. Permits DSS, or the licensed adoption agency, under a mutual consent registry, to facilitate contact between an adult adopted person and their birth parents if each have filed a written consent with DSS or the agency. [FAM § 9204]
20. Requires that, in an adoption proceeding, the adoption files are not open to inspection by any person other than the parties to the proceeding and their attorneys and DSS, except upon written authority of the judge of the superior court. Allows a judge to authorize any person to inspect the adoption files only in exceptional circumstances and for good cause approaching the necessitous. [FAM § 9200]
21. Allows any party to the proceeding to request the court to order the county clerk not to provide documents for inspection or copying to any other person unless the name of the birth parents or any identifying information related to them is redacted. [FAM § 9200]
22. Requires the clerk of the superior court entering a final order of adoption concerning an Indian child to provide the U.S. Secretary of the Interior or a designee with a copy of the order within 30 days of the date of the order, together with specified information including
    the name and tribal affiliation of the child; the names and addresses of the biological parents and of the adopting parents, as specified. [FAM § 9208]
23. Requires, if the court records contain an affidavit of the biological parent or parents that their identity remain confidential, the court to include that affidavit with the other information. [Ibid.]
24. Requires, upon application by an Indian individual who has reached the age of 18 years and who was the subject of an adoptive placement, the court which entered the final decree of adoption to inform that individual of the tribal affiliation, if any, of the individual’s biological parents and provide any other information as may be necessary to protect any rights flowing from the individual’s tribal relationship, including, but not limited to, tribal membership rights or eligibility for federal or tribal programs or services available to Indians. Requires, if the court records contain an affidavit of the biological parent or parents that their identity remain confidential, the court to inform the individual that the Secretary of the Interior may, upon request, certify to the individual’s tribe that the individual’s parentage and other circumstances of birth entitle the individual to membership under the criteria established by the tribe. [FAM § 9209]
25. Establishes “safe-surrender sites,” designated by the board of supervisors of a county or by a local fire agency, upon the approval of the appropriate local governing body of the agency, to be responsible for accepting physical custody of a minor child who is 72 hours old or younger from a parent or individual who has lawful custody of the child and who surrenders the child and provides that no parent or other individual having lawful custody of a minor child 72 hours old or younger may be prosecuted if they voluntarily surrender physical custody of the child to personnel on duty at a safe-surrender site. [HSC § 1255.7]

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, unknown, potentially significant costs to the SR within DPH (General Fund) to comply with the requirements of this bill. Specifically, the SR will incur costs to provide to an adopted person a copy of the adopted person’s OBC, with an indication it may not be used for identification purposes, and an attached contact preference form, if applicable. This bill allows for some cost recovery by authorizing DPH to charge all fees applicable to a nonadopted person’s request for a copy of a birth certificate. However, initial funding would be necessary to cover the costs of the contact preference form. The SR will also incur costs to create a contact preference form, to match the contact preference form to the adopted person’s OBC, and, on a continuing basis, to replace any previously filed contact preference form with a newly completed contact preference form. DPH will also incur costs of announcing and publicizing the availability of the contact preference form.

COMMENTS:

1. PURPOSE OF THIS BILL. According to the author, in California, people have the right to access their own vital records—except adoptees. The author states that sealing OBCs after adoption is an outdated and discriminatory practice rooted in stigma, not necessity. The author continues that in an era of DNA testing and genealogy databases, secrecy no longer exists; what remains is a policy that denies adoptees equal access to their own identity. The author continues that withholding OBCs can also have real consequences, including limiting access to family medical history, cultural heritage, and critical health information. The author states that adoptees deserve the same autonomy and dignity afforded to every other Californian. The author continues that this bill modernizes California law by ensuring adoptees have equal access to their OBCs. The author continues that this bill also establishes a process to request an OBC and considers the potential sensitivity of contact between the birth mother and an adoptee by requiring the SR to create a nonbinding contact preference form for birth mothers, available for release when a request for an OBC is made. The author concludes that this bill is about equality, dignity, and bringing California’s adoption laws into the modern era.
2. BACKGROUND.
   1. SR. DPH’s Vital Records Registration Branch is charged with maintaining a uniform, comprehensive, and continuous index for all birth, death, fetal death, and marriage vital events which occur in California, of which there are over one million each year. Certified copies of vital records are available from DPH, 58 county recorders, and 61 local health jurisdictions. DPH maintains, and can provide, birth and death records from 1905 to the present. For marriage records, DPH maintains and can provide those from 1946 to the present, with some years excluded. DPH uses the data collected through vital records for public health research and planning. Prior to 2000, DPH created a replacement birth certificate by photocopying the public portion of the original record to amend registrant and parent information. The unaltered original certificate was sealed and archived. After 2000, birth certificates are altered electronically and original records are stored in an internal electronic system, on microfiche, or at the State Records Center. DPH maintains all copies of OBCs. When a new birth certificate is created by DPH, they send a “sealing notice” to the county of birth, instructing the county to replace the original certificate with the new certificate. Counties are instructed to confidentially destroy or delete all other records. DPH utilizes the Electronic Birth Registration-Amendment Request Portal for adoptive families to create a Court Report of Adoption form to amend a birth certificate after an adoption has been finalized. The amendment request package must be printed, certified by the court, and submitted to DPH.
   2. Adoptions by the numbers in California. According to a report by the National Council for Adoption titled, “Adoption by the Numbers,” in 2023, an estimated 10,597 children were adopted in California. This increased 11.23% from the previous year. In 2023, adoptions from foster care made up 59.5% of total adoptions, while private domestic adoptions made up 39.42%, and intercountry adoptions made up 1.09%. The total number of adoptions from foster care was 6,305, which increased 1.14% from the previous year. The total number of private domestic adoptions was 4,177, which increased 32.23% from the previous year. Lastly, the total number of intercountry adoptions was 115, which decreased 14.18% from the previous year.
   3. Adoptee birth certificates. Under existing law, the SR is required to issue a new birth certificate upon receiving either a court report of adoption or a readoption order. The OBC is sealed and supplanted with the new birth certificate. The new certificate is prohibited from making a reference to the adoption of the child, and is required to include the names and ages of the parents, the date and place of birth. The adopting parents can request that the new birth certificate not include the specific name and address of the hospital or other facility where the birth occurred, the color and race of the parents, or both.

California law allows adoptive parents to request that a new certificate “not be established by the SR.” In such cases the OBC is not sealed and it remains available to the adopted person.

Proponents of this bill state that adoptees may be denied membership to a tribe in which they belong without access to their OBC. However, existing law provides a mechanism for Indian adoptees with information necessary to establish the tribal affiliation of the child by requiring the court to provide identifying information about the child, their biological and adopting parents to the U.S. Secretary of Interior. The court records may contain an affidavit from the biological parent or parents that their identity remain confidential. Existing law further requires, upon application of an Indian adoptee who has reached the age of 18, the court to inform the individual of the tribal affiliation of the individual’s biological parents and provide any other information as may be necessary to protect any rights flowing from the individual’s tribal relationship or, if the biological parents submitted an affidavit to remain confidential, requires the court to inform the individual that the Secretary of Interior may certify to the individual’s tribe that the individual is entitled to tribal membership.

Proponents of this bill also state that this bill highlights the importance of obtaining the OBC to obtain health-related information. Existing law provides a mechanism to allow for the disclosure of information to a child or a grandchild of an adopted person and disclosure is limited to medically necessary information pertaining to the adopted person’s biological parents. However, the information, or the process for obtaining the information, is prohibited from including or revealing the identity of the biological parents.

• 1. Avenues for adoptees to obtain information about their birth parents. State law authorizes a superior court to order the release of an OBC, or other information in possession of the SR relating to the adoption, if (1) the request for release is submitted through a verified petition, and (2) the petition sets forth facts showing the necessity of the order and good and compelling cause is shown for granting the order. When the petition seeks the names and addresses of an adopted person’s birth parents, that information may be released only if the petitioner demonstrates that the information is necessary to assist them in establishing a legal right. Before granting such a petition, the court must obtain the relevant adoption records from DSS. When such a verified petition is submitted by, or on behalf, of an adopted person who is 18 years of age or older, the court must give this fact great weight, but the granting of the petition remains solely in the discretion of the court.
  2. Mutual Consent. State law also establishes the Mutual Consent Program that is administered by either DSS or the licensed California public or private adoption agency that handled the adoption. According to DSS’s website, an adoptee may complete a Consent for Contact form and submit it to DSS or the licensed California adoption agency that handled the adoption. If DSS or the licensed California adoption agency receives a consent form from the adult adoptee (18 years of age or older) and one from their birth parent(s), names and addresses can be disclosed to both parties so they may contact one another. The law prohibits DSS and licensed California adoption agencies from soliciting consents and providing search services for adoptees or birth parents. If an adoptee does not know which adoption agency handled their adoption, DSS can assist in finding that information. This process might result in an OBC being discovered in an adoption file, but as previously stated, only DPH maintains those official records. Additionally, according to the DSS “Adoptee Make Contact,” webpage, for adoptions completed after January 1, 1984, DSS or the licensed California adoption agency that handled the adoption can also disclose the name and address of an adoptee’s birth parent(s) if: the birth parent signed a relinquishment or consent for adoption or the parent’s rights were involuntarily terminated by court action after January 1, 1984; the birth parent signed an Adoptions Information Act Statement form granting permission for such disclosure; and, the adoptee submitted an Adoptions Information Act Statement form requesting disclosure of the name and address of the birth parent(s). The adoptee must be 21 years or older to complete the statement.
  3. What does this bill do? This bill deletes the existing process for adoptees to petition the court in order to obtain the sealed OBC via court order on July 1, 2028 and thereafter would instead require the SR to provide adult adoptees over the age of the 18 with the sealed OBC upon their request. In releasing the OBC which contains identifying information about the birth parent to an adopted person regardless of the birth parents stated preference to not be contacted, this bill significantly changes the landscape as it relates to closed adoptions. The bill also deletes existing law which authorizes adopting parents to request a new amended birth certificate that omits specified information including specific name and address of the hospital or other facility where the birth occurred, the color and race of the parents, and the city and county of birth.
  4. Other States. According to the Adoptee Rights Law Center’s website, as of November 2025, 16 states allow for the unrestricted disclosure of an OBC to an adoptee. Twenty-two other states allow access with some limitations, including allowing birthparents to veto the disclosure of birth records or identifying information. There are variations across the states. Twelve states, including California, require a court order to release the OBC.

1. SUPPORT. The California Alliance for Adoptee Rights (CAAR), the sponsor of this bill, notes that adoptees are asking only for their own birth record, a vital record issued by the State for all live births. CAAR states that adoptees are the only group of people born in California denied access to their true birth record. Adoptees want and deserve their OBC simply because it is theirs. CAAR states that this bill restores equal rights to adoptees by giving them access to their OBCs. CAAR further notes that granting access will avoid the negative consequences that can arise from not having one’s OBC. CAAR states that of significance to this committee are potential health risks from not having access to family health history, including missed preventive measures, incorrect diagnoses, and delayed or ineffective treatments, all of which might result in multi-generational harm. CAAR continues it is critical to one’s mental health and integral to one’s identity to have information about one’s biological, historical, and cultural roots. CAAR continues that without their OBC, adoptees adopted at an older age (often from foster care) might be denied a passport if the filing of their amended birth certificate is more than one year after their date of birth. Finally, maintaining secrecy perpetuates the stigma and shame previously associated with being adopted. CAAR concludes that providing unrestricted access will restore equal treatment and align California with the growing national trend for truth and fairness.
2. PREVIOUS LEGISLATION.
   1. SB 1274 (Eggman) of 2024 would have authorized the disclosure of an OBC to an adopted person, or child or grandchild of an adopted person. Would have required the SR to make available a contact preference form to be completed at the option of the birth parent. This bill was not heard in Senate Health Committee.
   2. AB 1302 (Lackey) of 2023 would have created a process by which individuals who were adopted via a closed adoption could obtain their original, unredacted birth certificate reflecting their birth parents’ identifying information from the SR. AB 1302 was not heard in the Assembly Committee on Judiciary.
   3. AB 372 (Ma) of 2009 would have required, in the case of medical necessity regarding a serious health condition of an adopted person that the superior court, upon petition, order the SR to provide a copy of the original and unredacted birth certificate of the adoptee. AB 372 would have also required the SR, if the adoptee is 25 years or older and both birth parents listed on the adoptee’s birth certificate are deceased, to immediately provide a copy of the original and unredacted birth certificate to the adoptee upon request. AB 372 was held on the Assembly Appropriations suspense file.
   4. AB 1349 (Pescetti) of 2001 would have required DPH to provide “Contact Preference Forms” and medical history forms to birth parents and to provide a copy of the completed forms, if available, to the adopted person. AB 1349 would have also authorized an adult adopted person who has not identified their birth parents to request DSS or the licensed adoption agency that facilitated the adoption to conduct a search for the adopted person’s birth parents using a confidential intermediary. AB 1349 was held on the Assembly Appropriations suspense file.
3. AMENDMENTS. As noted above, 1) of Existing Law declares that the right to privacy is a personal and fundamental right protected by the California Constitution and that all individuals have a right of privacy in information pertaining to them. State law currently treats OBCs as confidential, to be released only by a court order and a showing of good cause. State law also currently offers a process for the exchange of personal information which requires the affirmative consent of both the adult adoptee and the birth parent through the Mutual Consent Registry. Given existing law and precedent, there may be some birth parents who placed children for adoption with the expectation that their identities would remain confidential. Concerns have been raised that birth parents who placed children for adoption under traumatic circumstances (including those involving coercion or abuse) and may wish to retain their anonymity would be negatively impacted by the disclosure of identifying information within the OBC after potentially having spent decades keeping that information private. Additionally, concerns have been raised that this bill effectively ends closed adoption and could have a chilling effect on adoption. While there is no formal opposition on file, it is likely that there are individuals who have concerns with this bill that have not publicly come forward in order to protect their anonymity. The Committee may wish to amend this bill as follows:
   1. To address privacy concerns, require the SR (beginning July 1, 2028) to disclose a copy of the OBC to an adoptee or descendant as defined in this bill upon their request, if the birth parent or parents have indicated written consent to the disclosure. Require, if the birth parent or parents do not consent to the release of a copy of the original birth certificate, DPH to disclose a copy of the adoptee’s OBC with the birth parent or parents’ personally identifying information redacted. Require DPH to respond to the request within 20 working days of receipt. Require DPH to prescribe a form for use by a birth parent or parents to indicate written consent for the disclosure of the OBC, and authorize the birth parent or parents to file written consent at the time parental rights are terminated and any time thereafter. Authorize the birth parent or parents to change the decision to permit the disclosure of the OBC at any time by sending a notarized letter by certified mail to that effect to DPH;
   2. To provide an additional avenue for adoptees to obtain their birth certificates with no redactions, reinstate existing law which allows adoptees to obtain their birth certificates via court order;
   3. To ensure birth parents’ and adoptees are aware of an adoptee’s ability to request an OBC pursuant to this bill, require the SR to publicize an adoptee’s ability to request an OBC utilizing a means of communication appropriate to inform the public effectively;
   4. To ensure effective implementation of this bill, require DPH to create a form to be completed by the requester of an OBC, including an affidavit that the requester to the best of requester’s knowledge that the requester is an adoptee or descendant as described in this bill. Authorize DPH to adopt regulations requiring additional means of identification from a requester that it deems necessary. Allow DPH to charge a reasonable fee in an amount DPH establishes to cover the costs of processing requests pursuant to this bill and waive fees for a person receiving public assistance; and,
   5. To streamline implementation of this bill, delete the contact preference form component of this bill, which is duplicative of the DSS mutual consent registry.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California Alliance for Adoptee Rights (CAAR) (sponsor)

Academy of Adoption and Assisted Reproduction Attorneys
Adoptee Advocates of Michigan
Adoptee Rights Law Center PLLC
Adoption Knowledge Affiliates
Bastard Nation: the Adoptee Rights Organization
California Alliance of Child and Family Services
California Association of Adoption Agencies
California Youth Connection (CYC)
Catholic Mothers for Truth & Transparency
Coalition for Truth and Transparency in Adoption
Concerned United Birthparents
Dependency Legal Services
Ethical Family Building
Los Angeles Dependency Lawyers, Inc.
Louisiana Coalition for Adoption Reform
Mothers for Open Records Everywhere
National Association of Social Workers, California Chapter
National Center on Adoption and Permanency
New York Adoptee Rights Coalition
Sacramento Regional Coalition to End Homelessness
Saving Our Sisters
Women's Collective for Adoptee Equality

Numerous individuals

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by: Eliza Brooks / HEALTH / (916) 319-2097

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: SB 381

Author: Wahab (D), et al.

Amended: 1/22/26

Vote: 21

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 13-0, 1/13/26

AYES: Umberg, Niello, Allen, Ashby, Caballero, Durazo, Laird, Reyes, Stern, Valladares, Wahab, Weber Pierson, Wiener

SENATE HEALTH COMMITTEE: 7-0, 1/14/26

AYES: Valladares, Durazo, Gonzalez, Padilla, Richardson, Weber Pierson, Wiener

NO VOTE RECORDED: Menjivar, Grove, Limón, Rubio

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 1/22/26

AYES: Caballero, Seyarto, Cabaldon, Dahle, Grayson, Richardson, Wahab

SUBJECT: Vital records: adoptees’ birth certificates

SOURCE: California Alliance for Adoptee Rights

DIGEST:

This bill (1) permits an adopted person aged 18 years or older, or, if the adopted person is deceased, their descendant, to obtain their original birth certificate upon request, beginning on July 1, 2028; (2) requires the State Registrar to establish and publicize the availability of a nonbinding contact preference form, which birth parents may submit to indicate whether they wish to be contacted when an original birth certificate is released; and (3) deletes certain categories of information which currently may be omitted from a new birth certificate created after a child is adopted.

ANALYSIS:

Existing constitutional law provides that all people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights, including the right to privacy. (California Constitution, art. 1, § 1.)

Existing state law:

1. Establishes the procedures for the creation and registration of a birth certificate for a person born in California. (Health & Safety (Saf.) Code, div. 102, pt. 1, ch. 3, §§ 102400 et seq.)
2. Requires the State Registrar to establish a new birth certificate upon the receipt of a report of adoption from any court of record, as specified, for any child born in California and whose birth certificate is on file in the office of the state registrar, unless the adopting parent or parents request no new birth certificate be established. (Health & Saf. Code, §§ 102635, 102640.)
3. Provides all of the following with respect to a new birth certificate created under 2):
   1. The new birth certificate shall bear the name of the child as stated in the report of the adoption, the names and ages of their adopting parents, the date and place of birth, and no reference to the adoption.
   2. The new certificate shall be identical with the birth certificate registered for the birth of a child to natural parents, except, at the request of the adopting parents, the new birth certificate shall not include the name and address of the location where the birth occurred, the color and race of the parents, or both.
   3. At any time after the issuance of a new birth certificate, the adopted parents may request and receive another amended birth certificate that omits any or all of: the specific name and address of the location of the birth; the city and county of birth; and/or the color and race of the parents. (Health & Saf. Code, §§ 102645, 102675.)
4. Provides that the new birth certificate created under 2) shall supplant any birth certificate previously registered for the child and shall be the only birth certificate open to public inspection; the prior birth certificate shall be transmitted to the State Registrar by the county recorder or sealed. (Health & Saf. Code, §§ 102680, 102685.)
5. Provides that an original birth certificate, after being supplanted by a birth certificate reflecting the adoption, shall be available only upon the order of the superior court of the county of residence of the adopted child or the county granting the order of adoption, under the following circumstances:
   1. The court may grant the order only upon the presentation of a verified petition setting forth facts showing the necessity of the order, and good and compelling cause is shown for the granting of the order.
   2. The clerk of the superior court shall send a copy of the petition to the State Department of Social Services (DSS), which shall send a copy of all records and information it has concerning the adopted person with the name and address of the natural parents removed to the court; the court must review these records before making an order.
   3. If the petition is by or on behalf of an adopted child who has attained the age of majority, these facts shall be given great weight, but the granting of any petition is solely within the sound discretion of the court.
   4. The name and address of the natural parents shall be given to the petitioner only if they can demonstrate that the name, address, or both are necessary to assist them in establishing a legal right. (Health & Saf. Code, § 102705.)
6. Establishes the Information Practices Act of 1977 (IPA), which, among other things, prohibits a state agency from disclosing any personal information in a manner that would link the information disclosed to the individual to whom it pertains unless the information is disclosed pursuant to a stated exception. (Civil (Civ.) Code, § 1798.24.)
7. Establishes exceptions to 6) for the release of information to an adopted person, as follows:
   1. General background information relating to the adopted person’s biological parents may be released, if the information does not include or reveal the identity of the biological parents.
   2. Medically necessary information pertaining to an adopted person’s biological parents may be released to the adopted person or their child or grandchild, provided that the information shall not include or reveal the identity of the biological parents. (Civ. Code, § 1798.24(q), (r).)
8. Permits an adopted person aged 18 years or older, or the adoptive parent if the adopted person is under 18 years of age, to request and receive from DSS the medical report of the adopted person and their parents upon request, provided that the names and addresses in the report unless the requesting person has previously received that information. (Family (Fam.) Code, § 9202.)
9. Establishes a process by which DSS or a licensed adoption agency may release the identity of an adopted person’s birth parent or parents and their most current address, or the identity of an adopted person and their most current address, when both the birth parent and the adopted person consent to the release of data, the adoption was completed on or after January 1, 1984, and the adopted person is 21 years of age or older, as specified. (Fam. Code, § 9203(a).)
10. Requires DSS to announce the availability of the method of arranging contact among an adult adopted person, their birth parents, and their adoptive parents pursuant to 9), by using a means of communication appropriate to inform the public effectively. (Fam. Code, § 9203(e).)

This bill:

1. Defines “original birth certificate” as a birth certificate issued at a live birth of an individual and that was subsequently supplanted and sealed following an adoption.
2. Eliminates the provisions permitting a birth certificate issued after an adoption to omit the specific name and address of the location where the child was born, the color and race of the parents, or both.
3. Provides, beginning July 1, 2028, notwithstanding any other provision of law, that the State Registrar shall provide a copy of an adopted person’s original birth certificate to the adopted person, if they are 18 years of age or older, or, if the adopted person is deceased, to a descendant of a deceased adopted person, provided that the adopted person was born in this state.
4. Provides that an adopted person 18 years of age or older, or a descendant of the adopted person, may obtain their original birth certificate pursuant to 3) by making a request to either the county where the original birth certificate is held or the State Registrar.
5. Requires an original birth certificate provided pursuant to 3) to clearly indicate that it may not be used for identification purposes.
6. Provides that all procedures, fees, and waiting periods in place for a request for a certified copy of a vital record shall also apply to a request for an original birth certificate under 3).
7. Provides that, if a contact preference form is attached to an original birth certificate pursuant to 9), the State Registrar shall provide a copy of the form at the time the original birth certificate is produced to the adopted person or their descendant.
8. Requires the State Registrar to make available to the public, on or before July 1, 2028, a contact preference form to be completed and submitted at the option of a birth parent, with the following selections:
   1. “I would like to be contacted.”
   2. “I would prefer to be contacted only through an intermediary.”
   3. “I would prefer not to be contacted at this time. If I decide at a later time that I would like to be contacted, I will submit an updated contact preference form to the State Department of Public Health.”
9. Requires the State Registrar, if a birth parent of an adopted person submits a completed contact preference form to the State Registrar, to do all of the following:
   1. Match the contact preference form to the adopted person’s original birth certificate.
   2. Attach the contact preference form to the original birth certificate.
   3. Replace any previously filed contact preference form with a newly completed contact preference form.
10. Provides that a contact preference form submitted to the State Registrar is a confidential communication between the birth parent and the adopted person or their descendant, and may be released only in connection with a request pursuant to 3).
11. Requires the State Registrar to announce and publicize the availability of the contact preference form utilizing a means of communication appropriate to inform the public effectively.
12. Establishes an exception under the IPA for the release of an original birth certificate to an adopted person pursuant to 1)-10).

Comments

Under current law, after a state court issues an adoption decree, the court must submit a report of the adoption to the State Registrar.^[1] Upon receipt of such a report, the State Registrar must establish a new birth certificate for the adopted person, unless the adopting parents opt out of the creation of a new birth certificate. A new birth certificate must list the adoptive parents as the adopted person’s parents and not refer to the adoption,^[2] and at the request of the adoptive parents, the new birth certificate shall omit the adopted person’s specific place of birth, the birth parents’ race or color, or both.^[3] The new birth certificate supplants the original birth certificate and becomes the only legal record of birth for that child open to inspection; the original birth certificate must be transmitted to the State Registrar to be held in confidence or sealed by the county registrar.^[4]

State law currently limits the circumstances under which an adopted person can access their original birth certificate or the identity of their birth parents. A superior court may order the release of an original birth certificate, or other information in possession of the State Registrar relating to the adoption, if (1) the request for release is submitted through a verified petition, and (2) the petition sets forth facts showing the necessity of the order and good and compelling cause is shown for granting the order.^[5] When the petition seeks the names and addresses of an adopted person’s birth parents, that information may be released only if the petitioner demonstrates that the information is necessary to assist them in establishing a legal right.^[6] Additionally, for persons placed for adoption or adopted in 1984 or after, the Family Code establishes a procedure through which an adopted person, or a birth parent, can learn the identity of the other through mutual consent of the adopted person and the birth parent.^[7]

This bill permits, beginning July 1, 2028, an adopted person who has reached 18 years of age, or their descendant if the adopted person is deceased, to access their original birth certificate without restriction. This bill accomplishes this by requiring the State Registrar or county—whichever entity holds the original birth certificate—to release the original birth certificate to the adopted person or their descendant upon proper application. This change is intended to give adopted persons, or their descendants, greater knowledge of where they came from, as well as give them better access to health information. This bill also requires the State Registrar to create and publicize the availability of a “contact preference form” for birth parents to submit to the State Registrar; the form allows a birth parent to indicate whether they (1) would like to be contacted, (2) would like to be contacted through an intermediary, or (3) do not wish to be contacted by the adopted person once their identity is revealed through the release of the original birth certificate. The contact preference form is not binding on the adopted person receiving their birth certificate, and this bill puts the onus on birth parents to learn of, and submit, a contact preference form.

While there is no opposition on file, this bill raises questions about the privacy of birth parents. While birth parents have no absolute guarantee of privacy under state law, existing law generally prohibits the disclosure of a birth parent’s identity to an adopted child without the consent of the birth parent or a showing of good cause. Proponents argue that this concern, in the absence of opposition, is paternalistic, and that studies show that most birth parents do not object to their identities being shared with their subsequently adopted children. Concerns have been raised, however, about whether birth parents who wish to remain anonymous can meaningfully oppose this bill, and about the fact that this bill places the burden on birth parents to submit a contact preference form with no guarantees that the adopted person will respect their wishes.

In addition to the changes to the procedures for releasing an original birth certificate, this bill makes conforming changes to the IPA to ensure that the release of an original birth certificate to an adopted person or their descendant is not blocked by that Act. This bill also provides that, outside of the procedure established for adopted persons or their descendants, an original birth certificate may be released only with a court order upon a showing of good cause.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

This bill presents unknown, potentially significant costs to the State Registrar within the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) (General Fund) to comply with the requirements of this bill. Specifically, the State Registrar will incur costs to provide to an adopted person a copy of the adopted person’s original birth certificate, with an indication it may not be used for identification purposes, and an attached contact preference form, if applicable. The bill allows for some cost recovery by authorizing the department to charge all fees applicable to a nonadopted person’s request for a copy of a birth certificate. However, initial funding would be necessary to cover the costs of the contact preference form. The State Registrar will also incur costs to create a contact preference form, to match the contact preference form to the adopted person’s original birth certificate, and, on a continuing basis, to replace any previously filed contact preference form with a newly completed contact preference form. CDPH will also incur costs of announcing and publicizing the availability of the contact preference form.

SUPPORT: (Verified 1/21/26)

California Alliance for Adoptee Rights (source)

Academy of Adoption & Assisted Reproduction Attorneys

Adoptee Advocates of Michigan

Adoptee Rights Center

Bastard Nation

California Youth Connection

Catholic Mothers for Truth & Transparency

Coalition for Truth and Transparency in Adoption

Concerned United Birthparents
Ethical Family Building

Families Rising

Los Angeles Dependency Lawyers, Inc.

Louisiana Coalition for Adoption Reform

Mothers for Open Records Everywhere

National Center on Adoption and Permanency

New York Adoptee Rights Coalition

Saving Our Sisters

Strong Families Rising

Women’s Collective for Adoptee Equality

Over 1,600 individuals

OPPOSITION: (Verified 1/21/26)

None received^[8]

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the California Alliance for Adoptee Rights:

Adoptees want and deserve their [original birth certificate (OBC)] because it is theirs. In passing similar laws in other states, legislators have recognized that it is a fundamental right to have access to one’s OBC. It is a matter of transparency, dignity, and equal rights. They further recognized that times have changed since the days of shame and stigma associated with being adopted, or illegitimate, and the legislature must likewise change.

There are also potential negative consequences to not having one’s OBC. There are potential health risks from not having access to family history, which may result in multi-generational harm. Adoptees and their descendants might also face higher health costs from having to treat diseases that could have been prevented with proper knowledge about their family health risks. Access to one’s biological and historical roots is integral to one’s identity and critical to one’s physical and mental health. Further, maintaining secrecy perpetuates the stigma and shame previously associated with being adopted. Adoptees might also be denied membership in groups to which they belong (such as California born Native Americans) without their OBC to prove lineage. Adoptees adopted at an older age might be denied a passport due to the date discrepancy between their two birth certificates…

Even if some small percentage of birth mothers do not support access, current law does not prevent learning one’s identity or making contact. Birth mothers and their relatives are routinely contacted through DNA testing, search angels, and social media, without access to OBCs. Our goal is not contact, which is often possible now, our bill will simply provide us with our OBC, the true record of our birth. It is worth noting, though, that SB 381 is far less intrusive in that only the adoptee will see the OBC, rather than the entire family seeing DNA results or being contacted and then speculating as to who the birth parents might be. It should also be noted that our bill provides for a nonbinding birth preference form for parents to express their preference.

Prepared by: Allison Whitt Meredith / JUD. / (916) 651-4113

1/26/26 13:22:00

**** END ****

1. Health & Saf. Code, § 102625. ↑

2. Id., §§ 102635, 102645. ↑

3. Id., § 102645. ↑

4. Id., §§ 102680, 102685. ↑

5. Id., § 102705. ↑

6. Ibid. ↑

7. Fam. Code, § 9203. ↑

8. Opposition letters were submitted for the bill before it was gutted and amended on January 5, 2026; these letters are not relevant to the current version of the bill. ↑

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

Senator Anna Caballero, Chair

2025 - 2026 Regular Session

SB 381 (Wahab) - Vital records: adoptees’ birth certificates

Bill Summary:

SB 381 would require the State Registrar to provide, to an adult adopted person who was born in California, or to a descendant of a deceased adopted person, a copy of the adopted person’s original birth certificate, as specified.

*********** ANALYSIS ADDENDUM – SUSPENSE FILE ***********

The following information is revised to reflect amendments

adopted by the committee on January 22, 2026

Fiscal Impact:

Unknown, potentially significant costs to the State Registrar within the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) (General Fund) to comply with the requirements of this bill. Specifically, the State Registrar will incur costs to provide to an adopted person a copy of the adopted person’s original birth certificate, with an indication it may not be used for identification purposes, and an attached contact preference form, if applicable. The bill allows for some cost recovery by authorizing the department to charge all fees applicable to a nonadopted person’s request for a copy of a birth certificate. However, initial funding would be necessary to cover the costs of the contact preference form. The State Registrar will also incur costs to create a contact preference form, to match the contact preference form to the adopted person’s original birth certificate, and, on a continuing basis, to replace any previously filed contact preference form with a newly completed contact preference form. CDPH will also incur costs of announcing and publicizing the availability of the contact preference form.

Author Amendments:

Add Senators Archuleta, Ashby, Blakespear, Cervantes, Choi, Cortese, McGuire, McNerney, Ochoa Bogh, Pérez, Richardson, Smallwood-Cuevas, Valladares, Wiener and Assemblymember Haney as co-authors.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

Senator Anna Caballero, Chair

2025 - 2026 Regular Session

SB 381 (Wahab) - Vital records: adoptees’ birth certificates

Bill Summary:

SB 381 would require the State Registrar to provide, to an adult adopted person who was born in California, or to a descendant of a deceased adopted person, a copy of the adopted person’s original birth certificate, as specified.

Fiscal Impact:

Unknown, potentially significant costs to the State Registrar within the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) (General Fund) to comply with the requirements of this bill. Specifically, the State Registrar will incur costs to provide to an adopted person a copy of the adopted person’s original birth certificate, with an indication it may not be used for identification purposes, and an attached contact preference form, if applicable. The bill allows for some cost recovery by authorizing the department to charge all fees applicable to a nonadopted person’s request for a copy of a birth certificate. However, initial funding would be necessary to cover the costs of the contact preference form. The State Registrar will also incur costs to create a contact preference form, to match the contact preference form to the adopted person’s original birth certificate, and, on a continuing basis, to replace any previously filed contact preference form with a newly completed contact preference form. CDPH will also incur costs of announcing and publicizing the availability of the contact preference form.

Background:

CDPH’s Vital Records Registration Branch is charged with maintaining a uniform, comprehensive, and continuous index for all birth, death, fetal death, and marriage vital events which occur in California, of which there are over one million each year. Certified copies of vital records are available from CDPH, 58 county recorders, and 61 local health jurisdictions. CDPH maintains, and can provide, birth and death records from 1905 to the present. Prior to 2000, CDPH created a replacement birth certificate by photocopying the public portion of the original record to amend registrant and parent information. The unaltered original certificate was sealed and archived. After 2000, birth certificates are altered electronically and original records are stored in an internal electronic system, on microfiche, or at the State Records Center. CDPH maintains all copies of original birth certificates. CDPH utilizes the Electronic Birth Registration-Amendment Request Portal for adoptive families to create a Court Report of Adoption form to amend a birth certificate after an adoption has been finalized. The amendment request package must be printed, certified by the court, and submitted to CDPH.

Under existing law, a new birth certificate must be established by the State Registrar upon receipt of either a report of adoption from any court of record that has jurisdiction of the child in this state, another state, the District of Columbia, in any territory of the U.S., or in any foreign country, for any child born in California and whose birth certificate is on file with the State Registrar; or, a readoption order. The new birth certificate must bear the name of the child as shown in the report of adoption, the names and ages of the adopting parents, and the date and place of birth. Existing law prohibits the new birth certificate from having any reference to the adoption of the child. The new certificate must be identical with a birth certificate registered for the birth of a child of natural parents, except, when requested by the adopting parents, the new birth certificate must omit the specific name and address of the hospital or other facility where the birth occurred, the color and race of the natural parents, or both. Existing law also permits another amended certificate to be issued, at the request of the adopting parents, that omits: the specific name and address of the hospital or other facility where the birth occurred; the city and county of birth; and/or, the color and race of the natural parents.

Pursuant to current law, the new birth certificate supplants any certificate previously registered and requires it to be the only birth certificate open to public inspection. All records and information, other than the newly issued birth certificate, are available only upon the order of the county superior court of residence of the adopted child or the county superior court granting the order of adoption.

Proposed Law:

• Defines “original birth certificate” as the birth certificate issued at a live birth of an individual that has been sealed and supplanted, as specified.
  
• Strikes existing provisions of law, that require the birth certificate of an adopted person to, at the request of the adopting parents, omit the name and address of the facility where the birth occurred, the color and race of the parents, and the city and county of birth.
  
• Exempts an adoptee’s original birth certificate from the existing required court process.
  
• Requires the State Registrar to provide to an adopted person who is 18 years of age or older and who was born in this state, or to a descendant who is 18 years of age or older of a deceased adopted person who was born in this state, a copy of the adopted person’s original birth certificate, as follows:
  
  • To receive a copy of an original birth certificate, the adopted person, or descendant, shall make the request to the State Registrar. A copy of the original birth certificate shall clearly indicate that it may not be used for identification purposes;
    
  • All procedures, fees, and waiting periods applicable to a nonadopted person’s request for a copy of a birth certificate, shall apply; and,
    
  • If a contact preference form is attached to an original birth certificate the State Registrar shall provide a copy of the contact preference form at the time the original birth certificate is produced to the adopted person or the descendant.
    
• Requires the State Registrar to make, a contact preference form available to the public. The contact preference form shall include the following, to be completed at the option of the birth parent:
  
  • “I would like to be contacted”;
    
  • “I would prefer to be contacted only through an intermediary”; and,
    
  • “I would prefer not to be contacted at this time. If I decide at a later time that I would like to be contacted, I will submit an updated contact preference form to the State Department of Public Health.”
    
• Requires the State Registrar to announce and publicize the availability of the contact preference form utilizing a means of communication appropriate to inform the public effectively.
  
• Requires, if a birth parent of an adopted person submits a completed contact preference form to the State Registrar, the State Registrar to:
  
  • Match the contact preference form to the adopted person’s original birth certificate;
    
  • Attach the contact preference form to the original birth certificate; and,
    
  • Replace any previously filed contact preference form with a newly completed contact preference form.
    
• Provides that a contact preference form submitted to the State Registrar is a confidential communication between the birth parent and the adopted person or descendant.
  
• Delays implementation to July 1, 2028.

Related Legislation:

• SB 1274 (Eggman of 2024) was substantially similar to this bill. SB 1274 was set, but never heard, in the Senate Health Committee.
  
• AB 1302 (Lackey of 2023) would have created a process by which individuals who were adopted via a closed adoption could obtain their original, unredacted birth certificate reflecting their birth parents’ identifying information from the State Registrar. AB 1302 was set, but never heard, in the Assembly Committee on Judiciary.
  
• AB 372 (Ma of 2009) would have required, in the case of medical necessity regarding a serious health condition of an adopted person that the superior court, upon petition, order the State Registrar to provide a copy of the original and unredacted birth certificate of the adoptee. AB 372 would have also required the State Registrar, if the adoptee is 25 years or older and both birth parents listed on the adoptee’s birth certificate are deceased, to immediately provide a copy of the original and unredacted birth certificate to the adoptee upon request. AB 372 was held on the Assembly Appropriations suspense file.
  
• AB 1349 (Pescetti of 2001) would have required CDPH to provide “Contact Preference Forms” and medical history forms to birth parents and to provide a copy of the completed forms, if available, to the adopted person. AB 1349 would have also authorized an adult adopted person who has not identified their birth parents to request CDSS or the licensed adoption agency that facilitated the adoption to conduct a search for the adopted person’s birth parents using a confidential intermediary. AB 1349 was held on the Assembly Appropriations suspense file.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON HEALTH

Senator Caroline Menjivar, Chair

BILL NO: SB 381

SUBJECT: Vital records: adoptees’ birth certificates

SUMMARY:

Requires the State Registrar to provide, to an adult adopted person who was born in California, or to a direct line descendant of a deceased adopted person, a copy of the adopted person’s original birth certificate, as defined.

Existing law:

1. Establishes the California Department of Public Health (CDPH), and sets forth its powers and duties, including duties as the State Registrar related to vital records and health statistics. [HSC §102100, et seq.]
2. Requires the certificate of live birth to include only the following information:
   1. Full name and sex of the child;
   2. Date of birth, including month, day, hour, and year;
   3. Place of birth;
   4. Full name, birthplace, and date of birth of each parent, including month, day, and year, and the parental relationship of the parent to the child;
   5. Multiple births and birth order of multiple births;
   6. Signature, and relationship to the child, of a parent or other informant, and date signed;
   7. Name, title, and mailing address of the attending physician and surgeon or principal attendant, signature, and certification of live birth by the attending physician and surgeon or principal attendant or certifier, date signed, and name and title of the certifier, if other than the attending physician and surgeon or principal attendant;
   8. Date accepted for registration and signature of local registrar;
   9. A state birth certificate number and local registration district and number; and,
   10. A blank space for entry of the date of death with a caption reading “Date of Death”. [HSC §102425(a)]
3. Requires the State Registrar, local registrar, or county recorder, upon request and payment of a fee, to supply an applicant with a certified copy of the record of a birth, fetal death, death, marriage, or marriage dissolution registered with the official. [HSC §103525]
4. Requires a new birth certificate to be established by the State Registrar upon receipt of either:

a report of adoption from any court of record that has jurisdiction of the child in this state, another state, the District of Columbia, in any territory of the U.S., or in any foreign country, for any child born in California and whose birth certificate is on file with the State Registrar; or, a readoption order. Prohibits a new certificate from being established if that is requested by the adopting parent. [HSC §102635, §102640]

1. Requires the new birth certificate to bear the name of the child as shown in the report of adoption, the names and ages of the adopting parents, and the date and place of birth. Prohibits the new birth certificate from having any reference to the adoption of the child. Requires the new certificate to be identical with a birth certificate registered for the birth of a child of natural parents, except, when requested by the adopting parents, prohibits the new birth certificate from including the specific name and address of the hospital or other facility where the birth occurred, the color and race of the parents, or both. [HSC §102645]
2. Permits another amended certificate to be issued, at the request of the adopting parents, that omits:
   1. The specific name and address of the hospital or other facility where the birth occurred;
   2. The city and county of birth; and/or,
   3. The color and race of the parents. [HSC §102675]
3. Requires the new birth certificate to supplant any certificate previously registered, and requires it to be the only birth certificate open to public inspection. [HSC §102680]
4. Requires all records and information, other than the newly issued birth certificate, to be available only upon the order of the county superior court of residence of the adopted child or the county superior court granting the order of adoption. Prohibits such an order from being granted by the superior court unless a verified petition setting forth facts showing the necessity of the order has been presented to the court, and good and compelling cause is shown for the granting of the order. Requires the superior court to send a copy of the petition to the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) and requires CDSS to send a copy of all records and information it has concerning the adopted person with the name and address of the natural parents removed to the court. Requires the court to review these records before making an order. [HSC §102705]
5. Requires the name and address of the natural parents to be given to the petitioner only if they can demonstrate that the name and address are necessary to assist in establishing a legal right. [HSC §102705]

This bill:

1. Requires the State Registrar to provide, to an adult adopted person born in California, or to a direct line descendant of a deceased adopted person, a copy of the adopted person’s original birth certificate. Defines “original birth certificate” as the birth certificate issued at a live birth of an individual that has been sealed and supplanted.
2. Exempts an adoptee’s original birth certificate from the court process outlined in 8) of existing law above.
3. Requires the adopted person, or a descendant of a deceased adopted person, to make the request to either the county or State Registrar. Requires a copy of the original birth certificate to clearly indicate that it may not be used for identification purposes. Requires all procedures, fees, and waiting periods, applicable to a nonadopted person’s request for a copy of a birth certificate, to apply.
4. Deletes existing law in 6) above that prohibits, when requested by the adopting parents, a new birth certificate issued for an adopted child from including the name and address of the hospital or other facility where the birth occurred, the city and county of birth, and the color and race of the parents. Deletes existing law that permits another amended certificate to be issued, at the request of the adopting parents, that omits the information specified in 5) of existing law above.
5. Requires the State Registrar to make available to the public, a contact preference form. Requires the contact preference form to include the following sections to be completed at the option of the birth parent:
   1. “I would like to be contacted.”
   2. “I would prefer to be contacted only through an intermediary.”
   3. “I would prefer not to be contacted at this time. If I decide at a later time that I would like to be contacted, I will submit an updated contact preference form to the State Department of Public Health.”
6. Requires the State Registrar, if a contact preference form is attached to an original birth certificate, to provide a copy of the contact preference form at the time the original birth certificate is produced to an adopted person.
7. Requires the State Registrar, if a birth parent of an adopted person submits a completed contact preference form, to match the contact preference form to the adopted person’s original birth certificate; and, attach the contact preference form to the original birth certificate.
8. Deems a contact preference form to be a confidential communication between the birth parent and the adopted person or direct line descendant of a deceased adopted person.

FISCAL EFFECT:

This bill has not been analyzed by a fiscal committee.

COMMENTS:

1. Author’s statement. According to the author, in California, people have the right to access their own vital records—except adoptees. Sealing original birth certificates after adoption is an outdated and discriminatory practice rooted in stigma, not necessity. In an era of DNA testing and genealogy databases, secrecy no longer exists. What remains is a policy that denies adoptees equal access to their own identity. Withholding original birth certificates can also have real consequences, including limiting access to family medical history, cultural heritage, and critical health information. Adoptees deserve the same autonomy and dignity afforded to every other Californian. This bill modernizes California law by ensuring adoptees have equal access to their original birth certificates. This bill also establishes a process to request an original birth certificate and considers the potential sensitivity of contact between the birth mother and an adoptee by requiring the State Registrar to create a nonbinding contact preference form for birth mothers, available for release when a request for an original birth certificate is made. This bill is about equality, dignity, and bringing California’s adoption laws into the modern era.
2. The State Registrar. CDPH’s Vital Records Registration Branch is charged with maintaining a uniform, comprehensive, and continuous index for all birth, death, fetal death, and marriage vital events which occur in California, of which there are over one million each year. Certified copies of vital records are available from CDPH, 58 county recorders, and 61 local health jurisdictions. CDPH maintains, and can provide, birth and death records from 1905 to the present. For marriage records, CDPH maintains and can provide those from 1946 to the present, with some years excluded. CDPH uses the data collected through vital records for public health research and planning. Prior to 2000, CDPH created a replacement birth certificate by photocopying the public portion of the original record to amend registrant and parent information. The unaltered original certificate was sealed and archived. After 2000, birth certificates are altered electronically and original records are stored in an internal electronic system, on microfiche, or at the State Records Center. CDPH maintains all copies of original birth certificates. When a new birth certificate is created by CDPH, they send a “sealing notice” to the county of birth, instructing the county to replace the original certificate with the new certificate. Counties are instructed to confidentially destroy or delete all other records. CDPH utilizes the Electronic Birth Registration-Amendment Request Portal for adoptive families to create a Court Report of Adoption form to amend a birth certificate after an adoption has been finalized. The amendment request package must be printed, certified by the court, and submitted to CDPH.
3. CDSS Mutual Consent Program. California has a Mutual Consent Program that is administered by either CDSS or the licensed California public or private adoption agency that handled the adoption. According to CDSS, an adoptee may complete a Consent for Contact form and submit it to the CDSS or the licensed California adoption agency that handled the adoption. If CDSS or the licensed California adoption agency receives a consent form from the adult adoptee (18 years of age or older) and one from their birth parent(s), names and addresses can be disclosed to both parties so they may contact one another. The law prohibits the CDSS and licensed California adoption agencies from soliciting consents and providing search services for adoptees or birth parents. If an adoptee does not know which adoption agency handled their adoption, CDSS can assist in finding that information. This process might result in an original birth certificate being discovered in an adoption file, but as previously stated, only CDPH maintains those official records. Alternatively, according to the CDSS “Adoptee Make Contact,” webpage, for adoptions completed after January 1, 1984, CDSS or the licensed California adoption agency that handled the adoption can also disclose the name and address of an adoptee’s birth parent(s) if: the birth parent signed a relinquishment or consent for adoption or the parents rights were involuntarily terminated by court action after January 1, 1984; the birth parent signed an Adoptions Information Act Statement form granting permission for such disclosure; and, the adoptee submitted an Adoptions Information Act Statement form requesting disclosure of the name and address of the birth parent(s). The adoptee must be 21 years or older to complete the statement.
4. Double referral. This bill set for hearing on January 13, 2026 in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
5. Prior legislation. SB 1274 (Eggman of 2024) was substantially similar to this bill. SB 1274 was set, but never heard, in the Senate Health Committee.

AB 1302 (Lackey of 2023) would have created a process by which individuals who were adopted via a closed adoption could obtain their original, unredacted birth certificate reflecting their birth parents’ identifying information from the State Registrar. AB 1302 was set, but never heard, in the Assembly Committee on Judiciary.

AB 372 (Ma of 2009) would have required, in the case of medical necessity regarding a serious health condition of an adopted person that the superior court, upon petition, order the State Registrar to provide a copy of the original and unredacted birth certificate of the adoptee. AB 372 would have also required the State Registrar, if the adoptee is 25 years or older and both birth parents listed on the adoptee’s birth certificate are deceased, to immediately provide a copy of the original and unredacted birth certificate to the adoptee upon request. AB 372 was held on the Assembly Appropriations suspense file.

AB 1349 (Pescetti of 2001) would have required CDPH to provide “Contact Preference Forms” and medical history forms to birth parents and to provide a copy of the completed forms, if available, to the adopted person. AB 1349 would have also authorized an adult adopted person who has not identified their birth parents to request CDSS or the licensed adoption agency that facilitated the adoption to conduct a search for the adopted person’s birth parents using a confidential intermediary. AB 1349 was held on the Assembly Appropriations suspense file.

1. Support. The sponsor of this bill, California Alliance for Adoptee Rights (CAAR), along with multiple supporting organizations, write that adoptees are the only group of people born in California who are denied the right to access their original birth certificate, except for those who are granted a court order, which is rarely given. CAAR further states that this bill simply seeks to provide adoptees with access to their own birth record. Access to one’s biological and historical roots is integral to one’s identity and critical to one’s physical and mental health. Maintaining secrecy perpetuates the stigma and shame previously associated with being adopted. They assert that this bill will have little, if any, effect on privacy, especially with the existence of genetic testing and ancestry sites. The release of an original birth certificate is actually the least-invasive method by which an adopted person can learn the name of their birth parent(s).The Catholic Mothers for Truth & Transparency asserts that many birthmothers related to the organization, who were primarily unwed at the time, were sent away to Catholic maternity homes and gaslit into relinquishing their children. They write that for many, a reunion with their adult children is needed as a part of their healing, and to know that their child is okay. Concerned United Birthparents also state that the birth parents were never promised confidentiality. The National Center on Adoption and Permanency assert that a growing number of states have enacted laws like the policy proposed by this bill without any negative consequences. Many individuals write that adult adoptees should have unrestricted access to their original, unredacted birth certificates, emphasizing the importance of learning more of their identity and genetic roots.

SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION:

Support: California Alliance for Adoptee Rights (sponsor)

Adoptee Advocates of Michigan

Adoptee Rights Law Center

Adoption Knowledge Affiliates

Bastard Nation: the Adoptee Rights Organization

California Youth Connection

Catholic Mothers for Truth & Transparency

Coalition for Truth and Transparency in Adoption
Concerned United Birthparents
Ethical Family Building

Los Angeles Dependency Lawyers
Louisiana Coalition for Adoption Reform
Mothers for Open Records Everywhere
National Center on Adoption and Permanency

New York Adoptee Rights Coalition

Saving Our Sisters
Women's Collective for Adoptee Equality

100+ individuals

Oppose: None received.

-- END --

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE

Senator Thomas Umberg, Chair

2025-2026 Regular Session

Bill No: SB 381 (Author:Wahab)

Version: January 5, 2026

Hearing Date: January 13, 2026

Fiscal: Yes

Urgency: No

Consultant: AWM

SUBJECT

Vital records: adoptees’ birth certificates

DIGEST

This bill permits an adopted person aged 18 years or older, or, if the adopted person is deceased, their descendant, to obtain their original birth certificate upon request; and deletes certain categories of information which currently may be omitted from a new birth certificate created after a child is adopted.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

When a person born in California is adopted, the State Registrar generally creates a new birth certificate for the adopted person listing the adoptive parents as their legal parents. The adoptive parents—but not the adopted person or the birth parent—can elect not to have a new birth certificate created. When a new birth certificate is created, the adopted person’s original birth certificate is supplanted by this new birth certificate and sealed. A sealed original birth certificate can be produced to a party—including the adopted person—with a court order, which requires a showing of good cause for the disclosure.

This bill gives adopted persons aged 18 years or older unrestricted access to their original birth certificates, or, if the adopted person is deceased, gives unrestricted access to their adult descendants. The author and proponents of the bill—who include both adopted persons and birth parents who gave up children for adoption—argue that giving an adopted person access to their original birth certificate will benefit the adopted person in many ways, including by allowing them to access genetic health information, facilitating access to legal rights (such as establishing membership in a federally recognized Indian tribe), and giving them a better sense of where they came from. The bill also deletes provisions in current law that allow adoptive parents to omit, from a birth certificate created after an adoption, the adopted person’s location of birth and the race and color of their parents. The author has agreed to minor amendments to the bill which, due to the timing of the referrals, will be taken in the Senate Health Committee.

This bill is sponsored by the California Alliance for Adoptee Rights and is supported by the Academy of Adoption & Assisted Reproduction Attorneys; Adoptee Advocates of Michigan; the Adoptee Rights Center; Bastard Nation; Catholic Mothers for Truth & Transparency; the Coalition for Truth and Transparency in Adoption; Concerned United Birthparents; Ethical Family Building; Families Rising; Los Angeles Dependency Lawyers, Inc.; the Louisiana Coalition for Adoption Reform; Mothers for Open Records Everywhere; the National Center on Adoption and Permanency; the New York Adoptee Rights Coalition; Saving Our Sisters; Strong Families Rising; the Women’s Collective for Adoptee Equality; and over 1,600 individuals. The Committee has not received timely opposition to this bill. If this Committee passes this bill, it will then be heard by the Senate Health Committee.

PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE LAW

Existing constitutional law provides that all people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights, including the right to privacy. (Cal. Const., art. 1, § 1.)

Existing state law:

1. Establishes the procedures for the creation and registration of a birth certificate for a person born in California. (Health & Saf. Code, div. 102, pt. 1, ch. 3, §§ 102400 et seq.)
2. Requires, except as provided in 3), below, the Registrar to establish a new birth certificate upon the receipt of a report of adoption from any court of record, as specified, for any child born in California and whose birth certificate is on file in the office of the state registrar. (Health & Saf. Code, § 102635.)
3. Provides that the Registrar shall not establish a new birth certificate for an adopted child at the request of the adopting parent or parents. (Health & Saf. Code, § 102640.)
4. Provides all of the following with respect to a new birth certificate created under 2):
   1. The new birth certificate shall bear the name of the child as stated in the report of the adoption, the names and ages of their adopting parents, the date and place of birth, and no reference to the adoption.
   2. The new certificate shall be identical with the birth certificate registered for the birth of a child to natural parents, except, at the request of the adopting parents, the new birth certificate shall not include the name and address of the location where the birth occurred, the color and race of the parents, or both.
   3. At any time after the issuance of a new birth certificate, the adopted parents may request and receive another amended birth certificate that omits any or all of: the specific name and address of the location of the birth; the city and county of birth; and/or the color and race of the parents. (Health & Saf. Code, §§ 102645, 102675.)
5. Provides that the new birth certificate created under 2) shall supplant any birth certificate previously registered for the child and shall be the only birth certificate open to public inspection; the prior birth certificate shall be transmitted to the State Registrar by the county recorder or sealed. (Health & Saf. Code, §§ 102680, 102685.)
6. Provides that an original birth certificate, after being supplanted by a birth certificate reflecting the adoption, shall be available only upon the order of the superior court of the county of residence of the adopted child or the county granting the order of adoption, under the following circumstances:
   1. The court may grant the order only upon the presentation of a verified petition setting forth facts showing the necessity of the order, and good and compelling cause is shown for the granting of the order.
   2. The clerk of the superior court shall send a copy of the petition to the State Department of Social Services (DSS), which shall send a copy of all records and information it has concerning the adopted person with the name and address of the natural parents removed to the court; the court must review these records before making an order.
   3. If the petition is by or on behalf of an adopted child who has attained the age of majority, these facts shall be given great weight, but the granting of any petition is solely within the sound discretion of the court.
   4. The name and address of the natural parents shall be given to the petitioner only if they can demonstrate that the name, address, or both are necessary to assist them in establishing a legal right. (Health & Saf. Code, § 102705.)
7. Establishes the Information Practices Act of 1977 (IPA), which, among other things, prohibits a state agency from disclosing any personal information in a manner that would link the information disclosed to the individual to whom it pertains unless the information is disclosed pursuant to a stated exception. (Civ. Code, § 1798.24.)
8. Establishes exceptions to 7) for the release of information to an adopted person, as follows:
   1. General background information relating to the adopted person’s biological parents may be released, if the information does not include or reveal the identity of the biological parents.
   2. Medically necessary information pertaining to an adopted person’s biological parents may be released to the adopted person or their child or grandchild, provided that the information shall not include or reveal the identity of the biological parents. (Civ. Code, § 1798.24(q), (r).)
9. Prohibits, except where expressly permitted or required by statute, DSS or a licensed adoption agency from releasing information that would identify persons who receive, or have received, adoption services. (Fam. Code, § 9201(a).)
10. Establishes exceptions to 9) for administrative purposes, including the provision of information to DSS for recordkeeping and evaluation purposes; the exchange of information between birth parents and prospective adoptive parents for specified pre-adoption purposes; the provision of specified information to a juvenile court, county welfare department, welfare agency, or health care provider; and to qualified researchers for research purposes, if specified confidentiality requirements are met. (Fam. Code, § 9201(b)-(f).)
11. Permits an adopted person aged 18 years or older, or the adoptive parent if the adopted person is under 18 years of age, to request and receive the medical report of the adopted person and their parents upon request, provided that the names and addresses in the report unless the requesting person has previously received that information. (Fam. Code, § 9202.)
12. Establishes, as an exception to 9), a process by which DSS or a licensed adoption agency may release the identity of an adopted person’s birth parent or parents and their most current address, or the identity of an adopted person and their most current address, as follows:
    1. DSS or a licensed adoption agency may, at the request of an adopted person, release the identity of that person’s birth parent or parents and their most current address to the adopted person, if (1) the adopted person is 21 years of age or older, and (2) the birth parent has indicated their consent to the release. (Fam. Code, § 9203(a)(1).)
    2. DSS or a licensed adoption agency may, at the request of the birth parent of a person who has been adopted, release the adoptive name of the adopted person and their most current address if (1) the adopted person is 21 years of age or older, and (2) the adopted person has indicated, in writing to DSS pursuant to 14), that the adopted person wishes their name and address to be disclosed.
    3. DSS or a licensed adoption agency may, at the request of the adopted parent of an adopted person under 21 years of age, disclose the identity of a birth parent and the birth parent’s most current address if DSS or the licensed adoption agency finds that a medical necessity or other extraordinary circumstances justify the disclosure. (Fam. Code, § 9203(a).)
13. Requires DSS to establish a form for requests under 12), which must include an affidavit to be executed by the requester stating that, to the best of their knowledge, the requester is an adoptee, the adoptee’s birth parent, or the adoptee’s adoptive parent; and must advise the adopted person that, if the adoptee consents, their adoptive parents will be notified of the filing of the request before the release of the name and address of the adoptee’s birth parent. (Fam. Code, § 9203(b).)
14. Requires DSS to establish a form for an adult adoptee or an adoptee’s birth parents to indicate their consent for the release of their contact information upon request of their birth parents or the adopted person, respectively, pursuant to 12); neither DSS nor a licensed adoption agency may solicit, directly or indirectly, the execution of a written consent. (Fam. Code, § 9204.)
15. Requires DSS to announce the availability of the method of arranging contact among an adult adopted person, their birth parents, and their adoptive parents pursuant to 12), by using a means of communication appropriate to inform the public effectively. (Fam. Code, § 9203(e).)
16. Provides that 12)-15) apply only to adoptions in which the relinquishment for, or consent to, adoption was signed, or the birth parent’s rights were involuntarily terminated by court action on or after January 1, 1984. (Fam. Code, § 9203(g).)

This bill:

1. Defines “original birth certificate” as a birth certificate issued at a live birth of an individual and that was subsequently supplanted and sealed following an adoption.
2. Eliminates the provisions permitting a birth certificate issued after an adoption to omit the specific name and address of the location where the child was born, the color and race of the parents, or both.
3. Provides, notwithstanding any other provision of law, that the State Registrar shall provide a copy of an adopted person’s original birth certificate to the adopted person, if they are 18 years of age or older, or, if the adopted person is deceased, to a descendant of a deceased adopted person, provided that the adopted person was born in this state.
4. Provides that an adopted person 18 years of age or older, or a descendant of the adopted person, may obtain their original birth certificate pursuant to 3) by making a request to either the county where the original birth certificate is held or the State Registrar.
5. Requires an original birth certificate provided pursuant to 3) to clearly indicate that it may not be used for identification purposes.
6. Provides that all procedures, fees, and waiting periods in place for a request for a certified copy of a vital record shall also apply to a request for an original birth certificate under 3).
7. Provides that, if a contact preference form is attached to an original birth certificate pursuant to 9), the State Registrar shall provide a copy of the form at the time the original birth certificate is produced to the adopted person or their descendant.
8. Requires the State Registrar to make available to the public a contact preference form to be completed and submitted at the option of a birth parent, with the following selections:
   1. “I would like to be contacted.”
   2. “I would prefer to be contacted only through an intermediary.”
   3. “I would prefer not to be contacted at this time. If I decide at a later time that I would like to be contacted, I will submit an updated contact preference form to the State Department of Public Health.”
9. Requires the State Registrar, if a birth parent of an adopted person submits a completed contact preference form to the State Registrar, to do all of the following:
   1. Match the contact preference form to the adopted person’s original birth certificate.
   2. Attach the contact preference form to the original birth certificate.
   3. Replace any previously filed contact preference form with a newly completed contact preference form.
10. Provides that a contact preference form submitted to the State Registrar is a confidential communication between the birth parent and the adopted person or their descendant, and may be released only in connection with a request pursuant to 3).
11. Establishes an exception under the IPA for the release of an original birth certificate to an adopted person pursuant to 1)-10).
12. Makes technical and nonsubstantive conforming changes.

COMMENTS

1. Author’s comment

According to the author:

In California, people have the right to access their own vital records—except adoptees. Sealing original birth certificates after adoption is an outdated and discriminatory practice rooted in stigma, not necessity. In an era of DNA testing and genealogy databases, secrecy no longer exists. What remains is a policy that denies adoptees equal access to their own identity.

Withholding original birth certificates can also have real consequences, including limiting access to family medical history, cultural heritage, and critical health information. Adoptees deserve the same autonomy and dignity afforded to every other Californian.

SB 381 modernizes California law by ensuring adoptees have equal access to their original birth certificates. This bill also establishes a process to request an original birth certificate and considers the potential sensitivity of contact between the birth mother and an adoptee by requiring the State Registrar to create a nonbinding contact preference form for birth mothers, available for release when a request for an original birth certificate is made.

SB 381 is about equality, dignity, and bringing California’s adoption laws into the modern era.

2. Background on the adoption process and the creation of a new birth certificate following an adoption

California law provides processes and procedures for the adoption of an unmarried minor.^[1] In broad strokes, a family court may issue an order of adoption when specified criteria are met, including:

• The prospective adoptive parents are at least 10 years of age older than the proposed adoptive child, unless one of the proposed adoptive parents is a specified relative of the proposed adoptive child and the court is satisfied that the adoption is in the best interest of the child and the public interest.
• The child’s birth parents consent—or, if there is only one known or presumed parent, the birth parent consents—to the adoption.
• The child, if they are 12 years of age or older, consents to the adoption.
• If the child is an Indian child, as defined, the court satisfies specified requirements under the federal Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA).^[2]
• As applicable, the county adoption agency or the private adoption agency provides specified reports relating to the child and the suitability of the adoption.
• The court determines, after examining all persons appearing before the court, that the interest of the child will be promoted by the adoption.^[3]

All court hearings in an adoption proceeding are held in private, and the court must exclude from the hearings all persons except for officers of the court, the parties, their witnesses, counsel, and representatives of the agencies present to perform their official duties under the law governing adoptions.^[4] Court documents relating to the adoption proceeding are confidential and may not be inspected without a court order, and if documents are provided to a party, the birth parents’ names must generally be redacted.^[5] Similarly, neither DSS nor a licensed adoption agency may release information that would identify persons who receive, or have received, adoption services, except under specified conditions.^[6] The confidentiality of records, and the exceptions to the rule of confidentiality, is discussed further in Comment 3, below.

Following the issuance of an adoption decree, the court must submit a report of the adoption to the State Registrar.^[7] The State Registrar must then establish a new birth certificate for the adopted person, which must list the adoptive parents as the adopted person’s parents and not refer to the adoption.^[8] At the request of the adoptive parents, the new birth certificate shall omit the adopted person’s specific place of birth, the birth parents’ race or color, or both.^[9] The new birth certificate supplants the original birth certificate and becomes the only legal record of birth for that child open to inspection; the original birth certificate must be transmitted to the State Registrar to be held in confidence or sealed by the county registrar.^[10]

Alternatively, the adoptive parents may elect not to have a new birth certificate established for the adopted person.^[11] Neither the birth parents nor the adopted person has the right to consent or object to the creation of, or decision not to create, a new birth certificate.

3. The current procedures by which an adopted person can obtain information about their birth parent(s)

State law currently provides two avenues for an adopted person to obtain information about their birth parents.

First, the Health and Safety Code provides that a superior court may order the release of an original birth certificate, or other information in possession of the State Registrar relating to the adoption, if (1) the request for release is submitted through a verified petition, and (2) the petition sets forth facts showing the necessity of the order and good and compelling cause is shown for granting the order.^[12] When the petition seeks the names and addresses of an adopted person’s birth parents, that information may be released only if the petitioner demonstrates that the information is necessary to assist them in establishing a legal right.^[13] Before granting such a petition, the court must obtain the relevant adoption records from DSS.^[14] When such a verified petition is submitted by, or on behalf, of an adopted person who is 18 years of age or older, the court must give this fact great weight, but the granting of the petition remains solely in the discretion of the court.^[15]

Second, for persons placed for adoption or adopted in 1984 or after, the Family Code establishes a procedure through which an adopted person, or a birth parent, can learn the identity of the other through mutual consent.^[16] Specifically, the Family Code requires DSS to establish forms through which an adopted person aged 21 or older, or the birth parent of an adopted person, can indicate their consent to have their name and address released to their birth parent or adopted child upon request from the birth parent or adopted child.^[17] DSS is then required to accept applications from adopted persons or birth parents requesting the names and addresses of birth parents or adopted persons; upon receipt of such a form, DSS can check to determine whether the birth parent or adopted person has given consent for the release, and if such consent was given, provide the requesting party with the information they seek.^[18] DSS is also tasked with publicizing this program to ensure that birth parents and adopted persons are aware of this option.^[19] Additionally, the information can be released to a birth parent’s name and address to the adoptive parent of an adopted person under the age of 21 years, if the adoptive parent demonstrates that a medical necessity or other extraordinary circumstance warrants the disclosure.^[20]

4. This bill permits an adopted person aged 18 years or older, or their descendant if the adopted person is deceased, to access the adopted person’s original birth certificate

The major goal of this bill is to permit an adopted person who has reached 18 years of age, or their descendant if the adopted person is deceased, to access their original birth certificate. The bill accomplishes this by requiring the State Registrar or county—whichever entity holds the original birth certificate—to release the original birth certificate to the adopted person or their descendant upon proper application. This change is intended to give adopted persons, or their descendants, greater knowledge of where they came from, as well as give them better access to health information.

The bill also requires the State Registrar to create a “contact preference form” for birth parents to submit to the State Registrar; the form allows a birth parent to indicate whether they (1) would like to be contacted, (2) would like to be contacted through an intermediary, or (3) do not wish to be contacted by the adopted person once their identity is revealed through the release of the original birth certificate. In the event that a birth parent listed on an original birth certificate has completed a contact preference form for an original birth certificate that is subsequently requested by the adopted person or their descendant, the State Registrar or county that holds the birth certificate must deliver the contact preference form along with the original birth certificate. The contact preference form is non-binding. The bill specifies that the contact preference form is a confidential communication and cannot be released except in connection with the release of an original birth certificate to the adopted person or their descendant.

The bill makes conforming changes to the IPA to ensure that the release of an original birth certificate to an adopted person or their descendant is not blocked by that Act. The bill also provides that, outside of the procedure established for adopted persons or their descendants, an original birth certificate may be released only with a court order upon a showing of good cause.

The author has agreed to minor amendments to the release procedure, as well as a delayed implementation date to permit the State Registrar to develop and publicize the availability of the contact preference form. These amendments are set forth below in Comment 6.

In addition to the major change discussed above, this bill eliminates the provisions permitting adoptive parents to request that a new birth certificate omit (1) the location and address of the adopted person’s place of birth, or (2) the race and color of the adopted person’s birth parents. These changes apply both to the provision for the creation of a new birth certificate following an adoption and to the provision allowing adoptive parents to request a subsequent new birth certificate that omits that information.

5. The privacy questions raised by this bill

The California Constitution expressly states that every person has an inalienable right to privacy.^[21] “Legally recognized privacy interests are generally of two classes: (1) interests in precluding the dissemination or misuse of sensitive and confidential information (‘informational privacy’); and (2) interests in making intimate personal decisions or conducting personal activities without observation, intrusion, or interference (‘autonomy privacy’).”^[22] At the same time, California’s “privacy right is not absolute and at times must yield to other important interests.”^[23] The privacy implications of this bill are discussed below.

1. Does California’s constitutional right to privacy compel, or prohibit, the changes in this bill?

State law currently treats original birth certificates as confidential, to be released only by a court order and a showing of good cause.^[24] State law also currently offers an opt-in process for reuniting adopted persons with their birth parents, i.e., one in which both parties must give affirmative consent to the exchange of personal information. This bill, by allowing adopted adults (or their descendants) to access their original birth certificate as a matter of course, removes a birth parent’s interest in their anonymity—if any—from the equation.

The proponents of the bill argue that birth parents have no cognizable privacy interest in their name as listed on an original birth certificate. They argue that, to the extent the law imposes confidentiality on adoption-related documents, these measures were intended to protect the privacy of adoptive parents, not birth parents. For example, the law grants the adoptive parents, not the birth parents, the right to elect whether to create a new birth certificate or to keep the original birth certificate following an adoption.^[25] The Legislature passed this law in 1968, so one could argue that birth parents have been on constructive notice since 1969 that their identity might not be a secret.^[26] Also, at a more practical level, adoptive parents are given information relating to an adopted child’s birth parents which they may or may not retain, and may or may not share with their adopted child; absent an express agreement to the contrary, the birth parent would have no control over what information is passed on to their natural child.

The proponents of the bill also argue that there are countermanding reasons why disclosure of an original birth certificate should override any privacy interest held by a birth parent. These include: access to familial health information; the ability to access legal benefits, i.e., when a child is an Indian child who needs an original birth certificate to establish tribal membership; and an adopted person’s interest in knowing their origins.

On balance, it does not appear that there is a clear constitutional mandate one way or the other for this bill. The bill does not seek an additional privacy right, and it does not appear that the constitution compels the state to keep birth parents’ identities confidential, given that adoptive parents retain such discretion over whether to share that information. The bill therefore raises policy questions, not constitutional ones.

1. In the absence of a constitutional mandate, what are the privacy implications of the bill as a matter of policy?

The proponents of this bill assert that this bill will have little, if any, effect on privacy. They argue that, with the advent of widespread genetic testing and ancestry sites, the release of an original birth certificate is actually the least-invasive method by which an adopted person can learn the name of their original parent(s). Some of the proponents also assert that this bill is not about contacting birth relatives, but is instead about allowing adopted persons to learn more about their origins; other proponents, however, assume that SB 381 will be used to further contact between the adopted person and their birth parent(s).

To the extent that a birth parent does not wish to be contacted, the bill does provide the option of submitting a contact preference form to the State Registrar. If a birth parent fills out and submits a contact preference form, it will be provided to the adopted person along with their original birth certificate. It is unclear, however, how effective the contact preference form will be. First, SB 381 puts the onus on the birth parent to submit a contact preference form; it is unclear how many birth parents will be aware of this option or go through the steps of filling one out. Second, the form is non-binding, meaning there is nothing to prevent an adopted person from contacting their birth parent in spite of the parent’s wishes. The author has agreed to amendments to give the State Registrar time to develop and publicize the existence of the form before original birth certificates can be released; these amendments are set forth in Comment 6, below.

There is also, unfortunately, a gendered component to the disclosure of an original birth certificate. California law requires the birthing parent (virtually always the mother) to be listed on the birth certificate; the listing of a second parent (virtually always the father) is optional, depending on the circumstances and what information the mother provided at the time of birth.^[27] As a result, released birth certificates will virtually always disclose the identity of the mother, but not necessarily the father.

Proponents of the bill are adamant that any concern for the privacy of birth parents—especially birth mothers—is at best a red herring, and at worst a bad-faith argument. The Committee has received numerous letters insisting that the question of birth mother privacy is a non-issue because, they say, birth mothers want to be contacted. Some of these letters come from birth mothers who, themselves, are open to the disclosure of their identities after harrowing experiences in which they were essentially forced to give up their children. For example, Catholic Mothers for Truth & Transparency writes:

For too long, organizations who facilitated the relinquishment of our children have spoken for us continually claiming we not only needed their protection at the time we found ourselves pregnant and unwed, but that we still need protection today from our adult sons/daughters whom we were separated from through adoption. In doing so, they have co-opted our voice to formally oppose allowing adult adoptees to access their original birth certificates. Frankly, this is infuriating because it's the exact opposite of how we feel. We write today as a collective voice to tell you for ourselves what is actually best for us. We thank you in advance for your time and for this opportunity to speak out on this important issue.

Esteemed legislators, it pains us to state the grim reminder that history has not been kind to us. When we found ourselves pregnant— and for most of us, unwed— we were blamed wholly for our situation. We were shamed and humiliated. Many of us were sent away to Catholic maternity homes where we were stripped of our identities and forced into silence. We were gaslighted by Catholic authorities to believe we deserved the shame and humiliation they bestowed upon us, gaslighted to believe we were not good or strong enough to keep our babies, that we didn’t love them unless we gave them up. By the time this heinous system was done with us, it had accomplished exactly what it had set out to do: render us powerless, alone, and broken to the point where we had no other choice but to relinquish our babies.

As you can imagine, healing from this unspeakable trauma is not easy nor is it swift. The secrecy and the shame we carried affected the very essence of life itself, our relationships— everything from the way we parented subsequent children to the way we connected with our partners, our aging parents and many other important people in our lives. It wasn’t healthy for us or anyone in our lives for us to keep carrying this heavy burden alone. So we had to do the work to heal. Only when we began to embrace the truth— the truth that we were coerced by shame and humiliation to give up our children— only then could we forgive ourselves and work to repair the damage left in the wake of our trauma. For many of us, a reunion with our adult sons/daughters is needed as part of our healing. Like any mother who has lost her child, we need to know they are okay.

Other proponents cite studies relating to birth mother openness to disclosure, such as a letter from the National Center on Adoption and Permanency citing a study showing that 90 to 95 percent of birth mothers “want some level of information or contact with the lives that they created.”

The proponents may be correct that birth parents, as a general rule, are open to the disclosure of their identities to their adopted offspring. The Committee did not receive timely opposition to this bill, or even—as of the time of this analysis’s release—untimely opposition. It is difficult to say, however, whether this reflects a true lack of opposition, or is a result of the span of time the bill has been in print. Specifically, this bill went into print on January 5, 2026; this analysis is being released five days later. There is also a potential Catch-22 here: birth parents who wish to stay anonymous cannot both stay anonymous and lobby for their own anonymity.

In the absence of opposition to SB 381, the proponents’ allegation that it is paternalistic to prioritize hypothetical birth parent concerns over the interests of actual adopted persons and birth parents has some merit. At the same time, the difficulty posed for birth parents who wish to remain anonymous remains a concern. Going forward, the author and proponents may wish to consider whether additional protective measures for birth parents who wish to remain anonymous, or uncontacted, are feasible.

1. Other states’ approaches

At least 16 states currently grant an adopted person unconditional access to their original birth certificate.^[28] There are variances between the details of these states’ laws; for example, some states allow an adopted person to access their original birth certificate at 18 years of age, while others set the bar at 21 years of age; some states allow some category of an adoptee’s descendants to access an adopted person’s original birth certificates, while some do not. Many of these laws have been enacted fairly recently, and, as the proponents of the bill note, there are no widespread reports of negative consequences resulting from adopted persons being permitted to access their birth certificates.

Notably, other states’ laws authorize other parties—such as the birth parent or a federally recognized Indian tribe—to obtain an original birth certificate, not just the adopted person or their descendants. Going forward, the author and sponsor may wish to examine further whether valid policy goals could be achieved by expanding the bill beyond adoptees or, if the adoptee is deceased, their descendants.

6. Amendments

As discussed above in Comments 4 and 5, the author has agreed to amendments to (1) make minor clarifying changes, and (2) give the State Registrar time to develop and publicize the contact preference form before permitting an adopted person to access an original birth certificate. These amendments are set forth below, subject to any nonsubstantive changes the Office of Legislative Counsel may make.

Amendment 1

At page 9, at the beginning of line 26, insert “person aged 18 years or older who is a”

Amendment 2

On pages 9 and 10, provide that the current version of Health & Safety Code section 102705 shall be repealed, and that the version of Health & Safety Code section 102705 set forth in SB 381 shall be added, on January 1, 2028.

Amendment 3

At page 10, in line 4, insert “or the descendant” after “the adopted person”

Amendment 4

On page 10, in line 32, insert “on or before July 1, 2027,” after “public,”

Amendment 5

On page 11, after line 17, insert:

(d) Notwithstanding any other law, the State Registrar shall announce and publicize the availability of the contact preference form utilizing a means of communication appropriate to inform the public effectively.

7. Arguments in support

According to the California Alliance for Adoptee Rights:

Adoptees want and deserve their [original birth certificate (OBC)] because it is theirs. In passing similar laws in other states, legislators have recognized that it is a fundamental right to have access to one’s OBC. It is a matter of transparency, dignity, and equal rights. They further recognized that times have changed since the days of shame and stigma associated with being adopted, or illegitimate, and the legislature must likewise change.

There are also potential negative consequences to not having one’s OBC. There are potential health risks from not having access to family history, which may result in multi-generational harm. Adoptees and their descendants might also face higher health costs from having to treat diseases that could have been prevented with proper knowledge about their family health risks. Access to one’s biological and historical roots is integral to one’s identity and critical to one’s physical and mental health. Further, maintaining secrecy perpetuates the stigma and shame previously associated with being adopted. Adoptees might also be denied membership in groups to which they belong (such as California born Native Americans) without their OBC to prove lineage. Adoptees adopted at an older age might be denied a passport due to the date discrepancy between their two birth certificates…

Even if some small percentage of birth mothers do not support access, current law does not prevent learning one’s identity or making contact. Birth mothers and their relatives are routinely contacted through DNA testing, search angels, and social media, without access to OBCs. Our goal is not contact, which is often possible now, our bill will simply provide us with our OBC, the true record of our birth. It is worth noting, though, that SB 381 is far less intrusive in that only the adoptee will see the OBC, rather than the entire family seeing DNA results or being contacted and then speculating as to who the birth parents might be. It should also be noted that our bill provides for a nonbinding birth preference form for parents to express their preference.

SUPPORT

California Alliance for Adoptee Rights (sponsor)

Academy of Adoption & Assisted Reproduction Attorneys

Adoptee Advocates of Michigan

Adoptee Rights Center

Bastard Nation

Catholic Mothers for Truth & Transparency

Coalition for Truth and Transparency in Adoption

Concerned United Birthparents
Ethical Family Building

Families Rising

Los Angeles Dependency Lawyers, Inc.

Louisiana Coalition for Adoption Reform

Mothers for Open Records Everywhere

National Center on Adoption and Permanency

New York Adoptee Rights Coalition

Saving Our Sisters

Strong Families Rising

Women’s Collective for Adoptee Equality

Over 1,600 individuals

OPPOSITION

None received^[29]

RELATED LEGISLATION

Pending legislation: None known.

Prior legislation:

SB 1274 (Eggman, 2024) was substantially similar to this bill. SB 1274 died in the Senate Health Committee.

AB 1302 (Lackey, 2023) would have provided new mechanisms by which individuals who were adopted via a closed adoption may obtain their original unredacted birth certificate reflecting their birth parents’ identifying information, with different procedures for persons whose adoptions were completed before and after January 1, 2025. AB 1302 died in the Assembly Health Committee.

AB 372 (Ma, 2009) would have allowed an adult adoptee access to his or her original birth certificate in cases of medical necessity regarding a serious health condition. In addition, the bill would have provided adoptees age 25 and above with access to their original, unredacted birth certificates unless a birth parent expressly objected. AB 372 died in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

**************

1. See generally Fam. Code, div. 13, pt. 1, §§ 8600 et seq. Tribal customary adoptions are not covered by these procedures. (See Fam. Code, § 8600.5.) ↑

2. 25 U.S.C. §§ 1901 et seq. ↑

3. Fam. Code, div. 13, pt. 2, chs. 1, 2, & 3. ↑

4. Id., § 8611. ↑

5. Id., § 9200. ↑

6. Id., § 9201. ↑

7. Health & Saf. Code, § 102625. ↑

8. Id., §§ 102635, 102645. ↑

9. Id., § 102645. ↑

10. Id., §§ 102680, 102685. ↑

11. Id., § 102640. ↑

12. Id., § 102705. ↑

13. Ibid. ↑

14. Ibid. ↑

15. Ibid. ↑

16. Fam. Code, § 9203. ↑

17. Id., §§ 9203, 9204. The information in question might be held by a licensed adoption agency; in such cases, the agency must coordinate with DSS to determine whether consent has been given for the release of the information. (Id., § 9203.) ↑

18. Id., § 9203. ↑

19. Id., § 9204. ↑

20. Id., § 9203. ↑

21. Cal. Const., art. 1, § 1. ↑

22. Hill v. NCAA (1994) 7 Cal.4th 1, 35. ↑

23. Grafilo v. Soorani (2019) 41 Cal.App.5^th 497, 507. ↑

24. Health & Saf. Code, § 102705. ↑

25. Id., § 102645. ↑

26. See SB 310 (Sherman, Ch. 485, Stats. 1968). ↑

27. See Health & Saf. Code, § 102425. ↑

28. See Ala. Code § 22-9A-12 (Alabama); Alaska Stats. § 18-50-500 (Alaska); Col. Rev. Stats. § 19-5-305 (Colorado; birth parents who sent in a consent form prior to January 1, 2016, are still entitled to have their names redacted from an original birth certificate released to an adopted person); Conn. Gen. Stats. § 7-53 (Connecticut); Ga. Code, § 31-10-14 (Georgia); Kan. Stats. § 65-2423 (Kansas); La. Rev. Stats. 40:73 (Louisiana); Me. Rev. Stats., tit. 22, § 2768 (Maine); Mass. Gen. L., tit. 46, § 2B (Massachusetts); Minn. Stats. Ann., § 144-2252 (Minnesota); N.H. Rev. Stats. § 5-C9 (New Hampshire); McKinney's Public Health Law § 4138-e (New York); Or. Rev. Stats. § 432.229 (Oregon); R.I. Gen.Laws 1956, § 23-3-15 (Rhode Island); S.D. Codified L., § 34-25-16.4 (South Dakota); 15 Vt. Stats. Ann. § 6-107 (Vermont). ↑

29. The Committee received letters in opposition to the bill before it was gutted and amended on January 5, 2026; these letters are not relevant to the current version of the bill. ↑