Introductory note: Since the old common law of England didn't address adoption (English adoption law began in 1926), it existed in the United States only by statute, beginning with Massachusetts in 1851. Many states patterned themselves after the Massachusetts law, including Illinois, which in turn became the source of much of Colorado's initial adoption statute.

1879 – Adoption law began by deed, which "was executed, acknowledged and recorded as in the conveyance of real estate." Adoption records and proceedings were open to the public.

1907 – The State Legislature established the Colorado Juvenile Court as a separate entity from the county courts, making it one of the first in the nation and giving it jurisdiction to handle dependency and neglect matters.  Adoptions were handled by probate courts in the early 1900s.

1909 - Chapter 78, Section 137 of the Colorado Session Laws was amended to read: 
Disposal of children. -  no child shall be sold or disposed of for any valuable consideration by any of the persons or organizations subject to the provisions of this subdivision, and no child shall be given away or otherwise disposed of by them or any of them, except by legal adoption in a court of record, without first obtaining a permit from the state bureau of child and animal protection, which may issue such permit after due investigation into the fitness of the applicant for such child.

1911 - Chapter 78, Section 139 established requirements to license maternity homes: "It shall be unlawful for any person, persons, firm corporation, society, association or company to engage in, carry on or conduct the business of receiving, or caring for girls or women approaching or during child-birth, or to advertise or hold himself out as...without first obtaining a license from the state board of health and a license from the state board of child and animal protection."  Originally, maternity homes were designed to be places where single women could be provided a safe place to have their baby, temporary housing, along with training in order to become self-sufficient enough to support and parent the child.     

1910-1920s – The Eugenics Movement dominated much thinking regarding families and adoption in European and American culture, and reinforced the stigma of bastardy and illegitimacy. Many adoptable children were branded as "bastard" and "bad seeds."

1927 – Judge Benjamin Barr Lindsey, who advocated for and worked to establish a separate court in order to treat juvenile offenders differently than adults, burned records of the Juvenile Court after narrowly losing his seat in a legally contested 1924 election wherein he was opposed by the Ku Klux Klan. His stated reason was to protect previous juvenile proceedings from public exposure or blackmail by the Klan.

1930s – The double-edged sword of the Amended Birth Certificate was introduced to adoption, which was still a relatively rare occurrence in the U.S. until the infamous Georgia Tann and others like her discovered how to turn it into a lucrative business. Social workers argued that since original birth certificates marked those born out of wedlock for life with the designation of ILLEGITIMATE on the document, the amended birth certificate would give adoptees a clean slate with no stigma of bastardy. The new document also established the new legal name and inheritance rights for the child. On the negative side, it also placed some adoption agencies in the position of "brokers," and created an adversarial relationship among members of the triad. In order to deal with growing numbers of orphans in major eastern cities like New York and Boston, children were loaded on to “orphan trains,” as some 200,000 had been since the 1850s and sent west to be “put up for adoption” at train stops in midwestern and western farming communities. Some of them fared well; many amounted to indentured servants and farm workers.

1935 - The state still required that all birth certificates document whether the birth was 'legitimate or illegitimate." However, a Senate bill amended Chapter 78,  Section 118 of the Colorado Session Laws so that adoptive parents could ask the court of jurisidiction in the adoption to issue a certificate of identification which would be accepted by all school districts in "lieu of a birth certificate and without further evidence of such certificate." 

1943 - Senate Bill 1 removed the requirement that the birth certificate document the "legitimacy" of the infant.  It also instituted the amended birth certificate for adoptees and children whose names would change due to "the subsequent intermarriage...of the parents of any child born out of wedlock."  Related documents show that it was the adoptive parents' responsibility to obtain a copy of the adoptee's original birth certificate and present it, along with the adoption decree and related documentation, to the state registrar as part of the process that generated the amended birth certificate. Vital statistics records in the possession of the state registrar were open to inspection to those who could demonstrate a "direct and tangible interest in the matter recorded." For those who had been issued amended birth certificates, "the evidence upon which the new certificate was made and the original certificate shall be sealed and filed may be opened only upon order of the court of competent jurisdiction, after the court has satisfied itself that the interests of the child or of the child's descendants or the adopting parents will be served by opening said seal."

However, if the adoption disrupted, "Upon receipt of a certified copy of a court order setting aside or nullifying any adoption decree, the state registrar shall restore the original certificate to its original place in the file."         

1946 – a study prepared for the Colorado General Assembly’s Subcommittee on Courts, Procedures and Statutory Revision recommended updating Colorado’s law in order to better protect:
1.  Children (from unnecessary relinquishment, adoption by unfit parents, or post-adoption interference from “natural parents”),
2. Natural parents (from “hurried decisions to give up a natural child, made under special strains and anxiety”), and
3. Adopting parents (from adopting children about whose heredity and health they know nothing, and from “later disturbance of their relationship to the child by natural parents”).

1949 – In response to the above recommendations, Senate Bill 604. effective May 20, 1949, made adoption records and proceedings confidential subject to approval of the release of records to a requesting party upon demonstration of good cause. The stated legislative intent was, “All records should be kept confidential in order to avoid unnecessarily disturbing the relationships between the child and adoptive parents once the adoption has taken place.” However, the child’s birth name, i.e., “Baby Girl Martin,” still routinely appeared on the Final Decree of Adoption. The bill also renamed the practice of child indenture “apprenticeship.”

1951 - House Bill 220 amended various sections of Chapter 106 of the 1949 law. It mandated iincreased investigation of the health and integrity of the prospective adoptive parents, the physical and mental condition of the child, and "the child's family background including the names of parents and other identifying data regarding the parents, if obtainable."  

Section 15 was amended to read: "Records. Records and papers in adoption cases in courts and in all participating agencies from and after the filing of the petition shall be confidential records of the court and not open to public inspection unless by order of the court." The bill established the practice of issuing both an Interlocutory Decree of Adoption, and, assuming things went well in the first year, then a Final Decree of Adoption. The adoption decree routinely included the birth name of the child, usually "Baby Boy" or "Baby Girl" followed by the last name of the birth mother.  However, certain agencies and maternity homes used fictitious names for mothers, which sometimes appeared on original birth certificates and relinquishment/adoption papers.            

1967 – House Bill 1001 introduced the concept of anonymity between the parties to an adoption. Courts could still provide access to records for parties to the adoption upon demonstration of “good cause.” The rationale behind adding section 22-4-4 regarding anonymity was stated by the committee:

“The new adoptive parent-child relationship will be more stable if there is less possibility for contact with the prior family....Subsection (2) repeats the general requirement that anonymity be preserved throughout and is not found in the present statues on relinquishment and adoption.”

One of the prime bill sponsors was the uncle of a long time member of Adoptees in Search.

1978 – Congress approves the Indian Child Welfare Act, allowing access to their records, birth and tribal histories for adult adoptees (18 or older) of at least 25% Native American ancestry.

1978 – The Child Welfare League of America (CWLA) states in their Standards of Excellence that an adoption agency “cannot make firm assurances of confidentiality, in view of possible or future changes in the law or its interpretation.” [Standard 2.4(1978)]

1978 – A federal class action lawsuit is filed in U.S. District Court against the state and Denver, Jefferson and El Paso counties by seven adult adoptees, claiming laws depriving them of access to birth records are unconstitutional.

1979 – State Representative (later Denver Mayor) Wellington Webb receives anonymous death threats for sponsoring a bill to grant adult adoptees access to records. The bill is defeated.

1981 – a proposed settlement of the 1978 lawsuit that would allow the State Health Department to search birth records at the request of adult adoptees is accepted by the plaintiffs. The state legislature rejects it.

1982 – Responding to pressure from the lawsuit, the State Board of Health approved establishment of a state adoption registry. Assistant Health Director Elizabeth Foote says it responds to “an increasing interest among adult adoptees and their birth parents in contacting one another.”

1983 – Rep. Bonnie Allison (R-Jefferson County), sponsors a bill to retroactively create a state adoption reunion registry. The legislature approves the bill, which is signed by Governor Richard Lamm.

1988 – CWLA's Standards of Excellence state that adoption agencies  "cannot guarantee birth parents confidentiality in any adoption. Laws governing confidentiality are changing and may continue to change by permitting more options of openness in the process. Courts currently can issue orders to open adoption records, and adopted persons and their families may establish contact with birth parents even when existing laws support confidentiality. Birth parents should be so advised." [Standard 2.4 (1988)]

1989 – Adult adoptee and State Rep. Steve Ruddick (D-Aurora) sponsors HB1177, originally intended to provide access to records for adult adoptees. In a controversial compromise, it was amended to establish Colorado as the second state after Washington to create a Confidential Intermediary Program.

1992 – Denver Juvenile Court Judge Dana Wakefield declares the new confidential intermediary law unconstitutional, stalling the processing of some 350 cases in Denver County. Other jurisdictions continue to process petitions. The Denver Post (02/28/93) and Westword (02/29/93) cover the story, disclosing the judge's personal connection to the issue in follow up investigations.

1993 – The Colorado Supreme Court overturns Judge Wakefield's ruling, censuring him for "impermissible exercise of judicial authority," saying "The juvenile court raised an issue on behalf of unidentified parties that were not before the court on its own motion in order to create a controversy that it then proceeded to decide." Some in the judicial community have since inappropriately dubbed the 1989 law "the Wakefield amendment." 

1995 – Colorado's Task Force for the Recodification of the Children's Code recommends access for adult adoptees age 18 or older to certain adoption records, including the original birth certificate. The related bill to overhaul the entire Children's Code is sponsored by Senator Dottie Wham (R - Denver) and dies under the weight of multiple difficulties and controversies.

1997 - The Tennessee Supreme Court [in re: Doe v. Sundquist (2 S.W.3d. 919)] reversed a Court of Appeals ruling, affirming that a law which granted access to original birth certificates for adult adoptees was not unconstitutional in that it did not impair vested rights of birthparents and did not violate their right to privacy.

1998 – Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Dottie Wham (R-Denver), and House Judiciary Chair Jeanne Adkins (R-Parker) co-sponsor SB62, which would retroactively open adoption records for adoptions finalized prior to1967 and after July 1, 1998 to adult adoptees, birthparents (unless parental rights were terminated due to child abuse), and adoptive parents. Despite bi-partisan support, Senator Ken Chlouber (R-Leadville), an adoptive father dubbed the "cowboy poet laureate" of the legislature, wears his black "bill-killing" cowboy hat and passionately opposes the measure on the Senate floor, making the now legendary allegation that "...the only medical history my son needs is mine!" The bill is narrowly defeated.

1999 – State Rep. Fran Coleman (D-Denver), an adult adoptee, and State Senator Doug Linkhart (D-Denver), an adoptive parent, co-sponsor HB 1188, which receives strong bi-partisan support. Access to records is made available by mutual consent of the parties or in cases where  the sought party is deceased. For adoptions finalized after September 1, 1999, the presumption of the law shifts from anonymity to access to original birth certificates for most adoptees age 18 and over. [House vote: 45-17, Senate vote: 31-3] Governor Bill Owens(R) signs the bill into law.

Dec. 29, 1999 - The Court of Appeals of Oregon [in re: Does v. State of Oregon, (164. Or.App. 543, 993 P.2d. 822)] upheld Measure 58, which granted access to original birth certificate for Oregon adoptees.   

2000 – Cleanup legislation HB 1336, is passed, including a new provision for Licensed Child Placement Agencies to act as intermediaries and perform searches and facilitate reunions. AIS-CTC objects to this provision, based on the inherent conflict of interest in allowing the same organization to do relinquishment counseling while having a future financial interest in creating requests for confidentiality.

2001 – Adoptive parent West Edell champions a small but significant amendment to Section 25-2-113, C.R.S., allowing an adoptive parent or adoptee to request that no changes be made to the adoptee's original birth certificate at the time of adoption.

2005 – Representatives Coleman (D-Denver) and Lynn Hefley (R-Colorado Springs) co-sponsor HB1287 with Senators Kester (R-Pueblo) and Tapia (D-Denver) which would grant retrospective access to original birth certificates for adult adoptees whose adoptions were finalized prior to September 1999. The House adds an "opt-out" veto option for birthparents and approves the bill, but the Senate guts the original content and replaces it with wording drafted by parties hoping to force all pre-1999 adoptees into obtaining mutual consent from the sought party before records can be released.  Upon threat of veto by Governor Bill Owens (R), the sponsors agree to accept the Senate version of the bill. AIS-CTC strongly opposes the compromise version since it abandons the original intent of the bill, does nothing to recognize rights of adult adoptees, and seeks to impose levels of secrecy in excess of earlier time periods. (See related letters to the editor under the News/PR link).

April 16, 2009 - The Colorado Court of Appeals issues an opinion stating, "...therefore, for adoptions finalized prior to July 1, 1967, but after July 1, 1951, an adoptee may have access to the names of his or her birth parents and to all court records and papers regarding the adoption. We therefore reverse the order which requires petitioner to use a confidential intermediary process to gain access to adoption records." The mandate is issued May 25, 2009, and the first original birth certificate released as a result of the ruling goes to the appellant, Jeff Hannasch, June 23, 2009. 

The Court of Appeals further found that, for adoptions finalized prior to passage of the 1949 bill, adoption records were not sealed.