Enrollment at Birth Explained and Repudiated, Part I

The following consists, in part, of a body of anecdotal evidence that is altogether true and can be corroborated by the testimony of eye-witness participants and bystanders who were there, but that you, dear reader, will ultimately make the decision to believe or not. I share it in good faith for your edification, and for the greater goal of exposing this unconscionable program for what it truly is; as well as of making the case that it must be abolished concurrent with the abolition of “birthright citizenship” as they both currently exist. Without further ado:

I was born, Nov. 9, 1965. I turned 18, Nov. 9, 1983. Within a few days of that latter date, I received, by mail, an official notice from some agency or other representing the USG. The notification in question informed me, in no uncertain terms, that I had “come of age” per the law of the land, and was therefore to (1) register with Social Security, and (2) register with Selective Service. In that order. Within a fortnight of receiving that notice, I had successfully completed both tasks assigned me, and went about my merry way, thinking nothing more of it.

The point to take from this is that there was no “enrollment at birth” program when I was born; my generation enrolled itself into Social Security, or not, when we came of age and were prompted to by the USG, with the advice and consent of our parents and guardians, who cheerfully gave their consent because they couldn’t foresee what it would turn into either – what some might term, “a failure of imagination.” My, how things have changed!

I’ve alluded to this “enrollment at birth” program and its connection to “birthright citizenship” any number of times at this site and elsewhere over the years, and several times recently; but it occurs to me at this date that I have not discussed the program in the egregious terms that it has earned to itself over time. I mean to fill that void in this article.

My youngest son is “going on” fifteen years-old, so, adding at least two (2) years to his age, we may reliably date my first introduction to the problems inherent to the program back seventeen (17) years ago. At or about that time, a friend had introduced me to a mass of “sovereign citizen” literature, asking that I analyze it and report back to him my findings, in my own time and at my convenience. Most of which was totally nonsensical as far as I could tell, but there was one aspect of the literature that piqued my interest. Namely, the infamous “enrollment at birth” program mentioned above.

What follows below the fold is an explanation for why this information got my attention, and the course of action my wife and I decided on to test its veracity.

---

Having been physically present and intimately involved in the six (6) previous births of my children, by the time our seventh came along, I was very much aware that my wife had been making decisions affecting the future of my children minus any direct input from yours truly so far as the government was concerned. An arrangement I would have been perfectly content with allowing to continue uninterrupted, had this “enrollment at birth” thing not suddenly intruded itself upon my consciousness.

The “sovereign citizens” whose literature I was reading were making crazy-sounding claims about the program that seemed far-fetched and “out there” to me on the one hand, but they seemed like the kinds of things that neatly fit into the “you just can’t make this shit up” category at the same time. For example, their claim that hospital staffers are trained to ‘never take “no” for an answer’ when birth mothers fill out the form (immediately prior to their baby’s birth) authorizing (or not) hospital staff to initiate the process of enrolling the soon-to-be-born in Social Security.

Should the birth mother answer “no” on that question, they claimed, hospital staffers were instructed to discard the form, and to have the mother fill out a new one, urging her to answer the question correctly on the second try. Moreover, this process would continue, they said, until the right answer (“yes”) was checked by the mother. In the rare but not unheard-of event that their efforts failed to wear her down after several tries, staffer protocol was to “correctly” fill out a new form for her, and to forge her initials and her signature on the document.

You are beginning to understand by now, I trust, why it was I’d put these claims into the “you just can’t make this shit up” category, rather than simply dismissing them out of hand. But let us continue:

Now, when my wife got pregnant with our seventh child, this stuff was still fresh on my mind. As such, I determined to put these claims to the ultimate test upon the new baby’s birth. I discussed this idea of mine with my wife, and she agreed to “play along.” Longer story shortened, we did in fact follow through with our plan, and were actually stunned by what transpired shortly following.

Strange to say, but as it turns out these tin-foil-hat wearers I had been reading and dismissing left and right, had prophesied what would happen, right down to the dotting of the “i’s” and the crossing of the “t’s”. Moreover, whereas my wife went along with my plan half-heartedly to begin with, by the third round of the process, she was “all in,” and hell bent on seeing to it that punishment be meted out *if* the participants would not agree to stand down immediately. Everyone has his or her tolerance threshold, and my wife had reached hers at this point. This was no longer “fun and games” for her part, it was a cat fight she meant to win! But this is not all.

By this time, my wife and I were “old hands” at having and raising babies, and it was therefore virtually impossible to coerce or intimidate us into doing something affecting our children’s futures against our will by way of making idle threats. This fact did not dissuade hospital staffers in their determination to coerce my wife into filling the form out correctly *in my absence*. A new form was produced, and my wife was told that the hospital would not release the baby to our custody until she filled the form out to their liking. I learned of this new development in a panicked call from my wife as I was on my way to the hospital to pick *the two of them* up. My wife was panicked, but I was not: “Is the staffer in the room?,” I asked. “Yes, she is here.” “Put her on the phone”:

Staffer: “Hello, Mr. Morris?”

Me: “Yeah, what law that we have broken authorizes your kidnapping our son in effect?”

Staffer: “It’s not a law, it’s hospital policy.”

Me: “Screw your policy!; unless you can cite a law we’ve broken authorizing you to kidnap our child, I’m calling the sheriff and bringing him with me as soon as I hang up with you. Is that understood?!”

Staffer: “Yes.”

Me: “Do I need to bring the sheriff into this?”

Staffer: “No, that won’t be necessary, sir.”

Ten minutes later I arrived at the hospital and picked them both up, with no resistance from hospital staffers whatsoever, and we headed home. And that was that. Or was it?

(To be continued in Part II)