or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Unassisted Childbirth › Choosing not to get a birth certificate at all...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Choosing not to get a birth certificate at all... - Page 11

post #201 of 218
I may have missed it in this gargantuan thread, but what does your partner think Strong Believer?
post #202 of 218
Thread Starter 
Thankyou Mwherbs, for sharing your information and experience. It is that kind of information which may go a long way in helping someone make a level headed and informed decision. Your understanding and thoughtfulness throughout this thread is greatly appreciated.

Tessie... My partner is supportive. We are working together to get more information, and to educate each other. He had the same questions as many of you have had at first, but doing the research has been very beneficial for both of us. He has gained a new outlook, and I have learned more than I knew. He s on board with the decision not to register this child, nor any of the children we may have in the future.

You find it very hard not pick fights, don't you Wannabe? Wanting an environment of support, free from spiteful attacks on character based upon unwarranted and petty assumptions... Yeah, I'm guilty of that.
post #203 of 218
"I hear Sierra leone is pretty much in Anarchy. No big brother looking over your shoulder there."

No. It's more Little Brother- rather than requiring exemption letters for vaccinations, they stop you on roads (which they do not repair, unlike Big Brother) every 500 meters and demand money or else you will see one end or the other of the kalashnikov that they are holding in their little hands. Fun, fun, fun!!!

That being said, you could always buy an island and issue your own passports. I think it takes a lot of lobbying to get recognized by other countries, though, which would be a pain in the a** to say the least.

I know the government has a big long file on me ever since they did a background check so that I could go on a tour that a relative arranged. That's okay.

The real trick to staying free is just to be as loud as possible and get attention abroad. They are usually too afraid to kill you then. It looks bad.

I am still wondering about the whole travel thing. I can really see living off the grid and all but what about not being able to go to, uh, I dunno, Bolivia? Nepal? See Lakes Victoria and Geneva? Presumably having a passport is way worse for off-the-griders than a birth certificate. So what do you do?

I live overseas and I love it. I even live in a country where I have to pay through the nose to register at the local police station every three months. They don't do this to control me. They do it to have an excuse to get money since their government salaries are crap. I think of it as charity.

So, how do you all feel about that? For me it's just such a big part of my life.
post #204 of 218
A few years ago some of the reservations were issuing their own passports- don't know how seriously they are taken or how well recognized ....
post #205 of 218
Originally Posted by PreggieUBA2C View Post
I am in Canada, so the way it works here may be different, but I thought I'd share anyway since the discussion has evolved to include personal philosophy and ideology.

All of our children are registered, but do not have BC's, however, it's really the same thing. Much has already been expressed here, but my main reason for wishing we hadn't registered our children is that it essentially entitles the governement and its agencies to monitor and direct how we raise our children. An unregistered child is not in the jurisdiction of cps, for example. Registration is literally giving title of your child to the Crown Corporation (here), and removes ultimate authority from the parents. Now if you believe that the gov't only has our best interests in mind, and you are into Brave New World, then this might not be disturbing to you. It is to me. It is also disturbing to me that my bc says right on it that it is a bank note- that is, a tradable commodity on the world markets. I am not a scholar in the field of dirty world economic dealings, but I cringe to know that since I have been registered, I have become a 'human resource' and my lifetime's worth of 'output' is traded like any other commodity/resource (instead of the gold we no longer have to back the Canada Bank Note- I guess I am a good enough replacement for a few gold bars...). If you think this is a conspiracy theory, maybe you could explain to me why my bc says "Canada Bank Note." I haven't tried yet, but I thought of taking it to the Bank of Canada and trying to cash it in... I wonder what my name is worth.

I find it disturbing that every document I have ever recieved from the gov't or bank has my name in capital letters, like my bc. I know that is because my name is incorporated, which is why I don't have to register a business name if I choose to use my birth name, but if I want another name, I have to register; my birth name is already a registered corporation. And it is bankrupt, just like the government that incorporated it. It owes me everything it has, and it's the same for my children. My postscript should clear up why I cannot collect on this debt, however.

There is a lot more to this, and there are a lot of freedom-fighters or so-called extremists who fight against this stuff; I am only one in heart because my life situation doesn't allow me the luxury of autonomy currently. I don't believe that what I know about what I am having been registered, is worth any of the supposed 'benefits' I recieve, but having come upon this information so late, I have to just suck it up, and hope that one day I can release myself and our family. I trust that most of this seems like nonsense to most, but if you begin to research, you'll find a wide spectrum of both trustworthy and untrustworthy resources to help you to understand. It becomes clear which is which rather quickly, depending on how quickly you read.

Look up STRAWMAN, government bankruptcy, read through the articles at the IMF site, use the new terminology you'll learn there to look more up. The trail is long and very dirty, and if you have the stomach for it, you'll want to search more.

There are ample reasons for not wanting to register a child. There are very few for wanting to do it, in my opinion, and sadly in our case, just one of those reasons is compelling enough that we had to register our last child, even knowing what we do, and will probably have to register this one too I feel angry about it though...

For those who are registration advocates, why do you think that we should register children so they will have an easier time being enslaved to a corrupt system later on? Why wouldn't it be equally easy to live outside of it when one has been raised with the understanding to carry that through? All of the items on the reasons-for-registering list seem to me to be fabricated needs anyway (that have swallowed up what could have just as easily been available through other means, and have thereby become like shackles for some). I believe that we as human beings are designed to meet the needs of ourselves and each other as individuals, don't you? Why do you feel that you need what the government is offering in return for your compliance? (These are not rhetorical questions; they are actual questions that I have asked in a way that makes my own intentions clear so that they can be answered with your opinion, but in a given context, which makes discussion possible- I've been accused of asking only rhetorical questions because I give intended context... I don't get it... any way, I am truly curious to know if you can think of this in depth and still come to the conclusion that you need what the government tells you it is giving you, so please answer if you are inclined)

P.S. For those who already know this stuff, a supreme court justice set a precedent in Canadian law that the strawman is the natural man, flesh and blood, merging them as one entity, by intention of both the one who addresses him by his birth name and also by his recognition of that name regardless of how it is written, spoken or implied or how it came about. I think it is different in the United States still.

Strongbeliever, I am interested in what you are willing to share. Would you be willing to pm?
Here in the US, the birth certificates vary in format by state. But, I don't believe any of them tell us that we are a commodity. And why should they? Do you have to notify trees and gold bars and oil that they are a commodity?

But I know we are a commodity because I know the history. To get out of the Great Depression, the US Congress mortgaged the whole land of the US to the Bank of London. (You don't "own" you land -- just lease from the government a right to exclusive use in exchange for paying property taxes. I have heard that there are still some pieces of land, called "alloidal", where the land truly belongs to the owner and the government can't take it away due to failure to pay taxes.) The interest on that mortgage is supposed to be backed by our labor. Taxes on our labor are the collateral to ensure that the Congress can pay the interest. How would the Congress be assured of access to the fruits of our labor? Easy, rewrite the laws so that they own us.

We are legally considered "persons". Just as in Canada a strawman has been merged with the man, a US citizen is merged with person. A person is an office of the state. There are many things you can do or not do that are equivalent legally to accepting the office of person. We are assumed to have accepted the office of person if we have every accepted being called a person. We are assumed to have accepted the office if we use the normal form of street address. There is a different form if you are a "sovereign." You can't be a sovereign and a citizen or person.

Originally Posted by 2bluefish View Post
One of the things many of us fraidy cats here in the US have been fighting is a program that they are pushing to register all livestock - including pet horses, or livestock that are pets. They want to microchip all the animals and pinpoint your property with GPS. And they want to control how animals move from place to place. If your vet knows that your animal is not in compliance, he will be required to report you. I'm not one to fuss much about "big agriculture" but this is one of those things that will *only* benefit big agriculture and will make life very difficult for all the small guys. Not to mention that I see having animals and producing my own food as a type of safety measure against a disaster. I don't want the gov't having the power to come take or destroy my animals if they see fit (I'm sure they could find a way to do it anyway, if they really wanted, but at least they don't have GPS on my animals!)

I do feel that the life I have as part of the system is better than the life I could potentially have *right now* outside the system. However, I feel this life in the system is much more precarious than many people want to admit.
If I am remembering that correctly, it says that more than one chicken counts as a flock, and they have to be microchipped at the owner's expense.

Originally Posted by mwright View Post
I mostly wanted to comment back to 2bluefish about the animals being microchipped. The government is actually in the works of setting up people to be microchipped as well and that's a very scary thing. Our farms are going away. It's truely a sad thing. We are losing our freedom bits and pieces at a time. I believe that our government is behind alot of evil things and its in preparation for taking control of the people. I also think it's going to get alot worse. I think we need to do our research and learn all that we can about this and decide to take a stand and fight for our freedom.

I wouldn't be surprised if they started to sneak the microchips into vaccinations. I mean, everyone gets them so it would make it really easy to just slip those in.
I heard a *rumor* a few years ago that there was a pilot program in 1998 where several hospitals were secretly microchipping all babies born there.

Just another reason to homebirth. And never leave your child alone with a medical professional. And be very careful what you let them inject into your children.

Originally Posted by bryonyvaughn View Post
To get a New York State (NYS) DL you need ID + a SScard OR ID + a letter from SSA explaining you are not eligible for a SSN. The second option is how there can be so many foreign born cabbies in NYC.
If you are legal to work, you can get a SS card. You just show the paperwork that you entered the country under.

I worked for an international company that sent employees from Japan to work in the NY office to learn better English. Their families came with them. The employees went right away to the SS office with their paperwork and got a SS card in 6-8 weeks. Then they got a driver's license. Their spouses had more trouble because they weren't eligible for a SS card and had to get that letter from the SS office.

Originally Posted by siennasmom View Post
Preggie, I'm trying to understand what you're saying. I've Googled. I found one page that said that some guy in Michigan got five of his kids taken away by CPS but one was returned because he didn't have a birth certificate and therefore didn't belong to the government. I find that completely nonsensical. If you think not having a birth certificate means the government won't "own" you, I think you're being naive. In the US, the government can lock people up and throw away the key in contravention of law and our very founding principles. They'll do what they want to do whether or not you have a particular piece of paper. I think you're much more likely to encounter problems from not having a BC than you are to thwart problems by not having one, but that's just me.
Exactly why I don't bother to announce my alternative views by rejecting documentation. It just gets negative attention, which these days is very dangerous. The government owns you because it has the force available to control you regardless of the legal right.

Originally Posted by Mahtob View Post
Uncharted area? : Two words: Google. Earth.

In the scenario you are imagining, there will not be any uncharted territory except possibly in a cave. But if the government wants to find you and any relatives know that you've gone off... they will start looking. And they would look in caves. They might do it just to prove a point.
They might do it just to eliminate any alternatives from existing, so that the next generation of slaves is no longer able to even imagine an alternative.

Originally Posted by fourlittlebirds View Post
I don't support government in making personal decisions for individuals, i.e., those who are in positions of power claiming that they know better than the individual what is best for the individual, and claiming the right to force it on them, or, to mandate that individuals are subjected to things that aren't good for them, "for the good of the whole." In that category are sexual, military, health, economic, environmental, and educational issues, etc. Overbearance of the government on any of these issues is a valid reason not to register a birth.
Absolutely. And history shows this overbearance just gets worse and worse, never better.

Here in Oregon it is a toss-up; the government isn't yet very harmfully intrusive in most things
I have heard so many stories of families in Oregon having trouble with the authorities for alternative living. Things like teaching their children pagan religions.

Originally Posted by Usually Curious View Post
One problem w/this is that regulations can change drastically from year to year. They may eventually outlaw private gardens(too much water needed to sustain), private wells(cannot meter and charge for the water accurately), your home(changing code or discovering a new type of endangered animal).
It is already illegal in some areas to collect rainwater.

Originally Posted by wannabe View Post
You're just trying to control your kid's lives to the nth degree and hoping that that will make them turn out the way you want them. Well, I have news for you - whether your daughter brings her new black girlfriend home for Thanksgiving and asks for a floritarian meal, or your son arrives home in a pin-striped suit with a soccer mom on his arm and proceeds to Ezzo-ify their child in your lounge whilst discussing the latest stock trends, they're still you're kids, and you can't control them forever. Sooner or later you have to let go, whether it's allowing them to get a driver's licence or standing back to let them go down the slide on their own.
And they are MY children until they reach a point where they don't need me, and then they can control their own lives. Better me controlling them until they are self-sufficient than the government controlling them until they die.

Originally Posted by wannabe View Post
Ever heard of moving? If you're hating where you live, go somewhere with less government. I hear Sierra leone is pretty much in Anarchy. No big brother looking over your shoulder there.
THIS is supposed to be the land of liberty. Why should I have to leave my homeland, where my family has been for 400 years? Just because some corrupt people have derailed us all from the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution? We have a DUTY to have a revolution if we are not pleased with the behavior of our government.

It is OUR responsibility to maintain the conditions of liberty here. Thomas Jefferson said we need to be eternally vigilant. He said that the government should fear the people, and not the other way around.

Originally Posted by wannabe View Post
Strongbeliever, you find it very difficult to be disagreed with, don't you? Why on earth would any of us want to sit around with only people who agree with us. Would make life very very boring and you'd never learn anything. But then, that confirms my observation about wishing to resrict your children's exposure to POV which are different from your own.

But that's OK, take your bat and ball and go home.

No, I'm sure it does apply to plenty of homeschoolers, but I can imagine several very good reasons to homeschool. I've considered it myself. And like every parent I've struggled with letting my child grow up and away from me (even though she's only 2). makes it easier to see it in others, y'know?
I find this very amusing. I am reading this thread for the first time from beginning to end, and the vast majority of the 199 posts I have read so far are from people who disagree with StrongBeliever. However, there is a big difference between some people talking about making a different choice and their reasons for weighing things the way they did, versus making personal attacks on a person and accusations of evil motives for their choices.


We decided to register our children because these days the government of the US acts, for all intents and purposes, as if every resident is under its jurisdiction. If we didn't register, our child would be a "sovereign." and any action the US or the state of NY took to limit him in any way would be equivalent to an act of war on a sovereign nation. However, my son has no army and would lose that war in an instant. So, the distinction between person and sovereign is in name only.

If we didn't register him, we would be dooming him to a life of false documents and illegal identities, since our system no longer interacts nicely with anyone who doesn't have the marks of the system. It forces those who don't bend to it into a life of fraud to survive. If he later has a problem with his registration, he can feel free to use an illegal identity then just the same. This way he has the option of a legal one too.


Re: What can and can't be done without documentation...

Why should we have to jump through so many hoops in order to do things that are our God-given right?

I acknowledge that we DO have these hoops around these days, but why are so many people comfortable with them?


In theory, I really think this comes down to the difference between freedom and permission. A driver's license is PERMISSION to drive. If you were free, you wouldn't need permission.

An analogy would be a parent/child relationship. If a parent allows a child to stay out late, that parent could be called permissive. But, since what the child can do is in the jurisdiction of the parent, the child is not free to do whatever he wants. When he is an adult he can choose for himself.

Those of us who are registered will be legally stuck in the child role forever.
post #206 of 218
Those of you who won't be getting BCs and SS#s, I have some questions.

I understand you don't mind not getting the child tax exemption, but what if you or your DH dies...do you have enough money that you would not need SS or state help?

What if your DH dies or becomes disabled, do you have enough money saved up that you'd still be able to stay home and homeschool instead of having to go to work?

Do you have enough money saved that, if your child developed leukemia, you would be able to pay for the treatment without health insurance?

What if your child decides one day that he or she DOES want to travel abroad, go to college, open an IRA, or get a credit card?

If you did get a SS# and BC for your child, and they later decided they wanted to fly under the radar, couldn't they make a transition on their own into document-free existance? Plenty of people do it, don't they, start living under the radar even after they've been registered and all, say if they're in hiding or something? Those of you who do live document-free, did you start out being raised that way?

I am genuinely curious, because living without a BC & SS# seems like somethign that would only be feasible if you had enough money not to ever need credit cards, health insurance, tax returns, state help, etc. I also don't understand how this decision can be made for our children by us, to opt them out of society, when we don't know what their views on traveling, banking, education, etc. will be when they are grown. That you raise them to believe what you do doesn't mean that they're going to believe those things, or I'd be Christian like my parents. It seems better to me to get those things just in case, and then if the child grows up and wants to be document-free, he can make transition to living that way.

Why do we have the right to drive? Driving is dangerous; don't we liscense people to make sure they drive safely? Do we have the right to drive drunk, to endanger people's lives that way? I don't think we have some God-given right to drive; God didn't make cars, we did. Even if you don't believe in licenses, the fact is if you're caught driving without one, you go to jail, right? Doesn't sound like something I want to do. Even if you're a great driver, what if someone drunk hits YOU? Then you're in as much 'trouble.'

I don't feel controlled by the government at all..and my husband is MILITARY, lol.

They might do it just to eliminate any alternatives from existing, so that the next generation of slaves is no longer able to even imagine an alternative.
I am not a slave. All countries have laws. Following them doesn't make me a slave.
post #207 of 218
The Constitution says your rights end where another's rights begin. Your right to drive ends where my right to live begins. That's why you can't drive without proving you're doing it safely or while drunk. Your freedom of speech ends where my right to safety begins. That's why you can't shout "Fire" in a crowded theatre.
post #208 of 218
we didn't register DS until he was 2.5, and started the delayed registration process then. it has been more than 6 months now. i had a family emergency overseas and i wasn't able to go--there was no way to speed up his registration even if a parliement member got involved and we were on the "compassionate" stream; it was devastating. i'm not sure this will matter much if you plan on never leaving your country.
post #209 of 218
Originally Posted by Lady Lilya
To get out of the Great Depression, the US Congress mortgaged the whole land of the US to the Bank of London.
I sure would love to hear more about this. Do you have any sources?
post #210 of 218
Let me hunt some more. So many of my saved links are broken.
post #211 of 218
post #212 of 218
This thread is closed to new posts. The UC forum isn't designed to host debate; please see the Forum's Guidelines here. Thanks for your understanding and cooperation.
post #213 of 218

I have a friend whose son is almost 2 and he has a SS without a BC...just saying...it is obviously possible. I also have another friend who doesn't have a BC but has a passport and her son is in public school. So there you go folks. There are ways around everything. PM if you have questions ;)

post #214 of 218
I would support the idea if I knew that my children could maintain ways to find income without the need for the BC. For example, writing books, craft sales, farmers market and more. Sometimes those jobs are very difficult as need for transportation is necessary to maintain the independence and there are times when people are hassled around so much that they will need a driver's license for something.

It seems to me that anyone over the age of 18 who does not have a drivers license is "bad" in the USA. If I knew I personally could live without birth certificate and husband too......I would consider not getting a BC ever. This world just doesn't revolve around reality and goodness but fantasy and scorn from time to time.
post #215 of 218
I don't know if this was posted long ago.

As long as the child knows how to count how many dandelions are on the courthouse lawn......he can certainly get a free education that way. no professional skills necessary. no bc necessary either.
post #216 of 218
late ggegegettgetting my bc so i thpught somone on. this thread may have decided at one point against bc then decided to get one and have advise. i am filing for a delayed bc in ca and i do not havevthe documentary evidence they require so has anyone else had to go infront of the superior court to gey one? That is what I'm facing with a 13 month old. i could not return to the county she was born until now and i missed. the year mark. sorry about the typos. this is my new verizon smart phone its a pain!
post #217 of 218

22 yrs ago I got a delayed birth certificate for my son. He was born at home, UC.


1. I got a form from a stationery store called an affidavit of birth.  I filled it out and had it notarized.


2. When my son was born, I paid to put a notice in the local newspaper. Newspapers were used more way back then!


3. I took my son to the pediatrician for a newborn exam and the office wrote a letter for me noting that I was there with my son on such and such day - and I kept the receipt for the payment of the visit for a new patient.


When my son was four I submitted the form. No problems. He has worked, traveled overseas, and gone to university. No problems.


A footnote:  I do recall years ago in the late 1960s lots of women had their babies at home and refused to get a bc because they did not want their sons drafted into the military for some future war. The military draft is no longer a threat, but one of my friends learned that if she waited long enough, she would have to go to her congressman to get an act of congress to give her son a birth certificate. There is always a way. Good luck.

post #218 of 218

I think the idea of paying for healthcare out of pocket is being taken really lightly.  Both of my kids have broken bones.  My daughter, who broke a leg jumping over some rocks, ended up with $20,000 of medical bills.  Our son's bills (broke an arm while playing with his friends) will probably total about $10,000.  Our part will be a couple hundred for both.  Even negotiating that down, between both kids, that might bankrupt some families.  Maybe it'll never happen.  It's a roll of the dice, but my kids are not the only ones I've seen in casts.  Accidents happen, and while you can support their immune systems to try to prevent other things, you can't really prevent a fall. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Unassisted Childbirth
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Unassisted Childbirth › Choosing not to get a birth certificate at all...