New York City Restricts Access to Vital Records

Sad news: "The public is no longer permitted to look at the birth and death indexes at the New York City Department of Health."

The following was written by Jan Meisels Allen who has given permission to distribute it elsewhere:

The New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH) has restricted access to the indices for vital records (birth, death) effective April 8, 2009. Only authorized personnel are now  permitted to research the indices.

In speaking with the Commissioner's office, I was advised that anyone may pay $15 to have the staff research a specific name for three years. More years requires additional payment. As genealogists, we would like to retain the opportunity to review the indices ourselves.

There is nothing, as of this posting, reflecting the change posted on the DOHMH website. (http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/html/home/home.shtml) .

The DOHMH has birth indices/records after 1909 and death indices/records after 1948. (The New York City Municipal Archives has birth indexes prior to 1910 and  death  indexes prior to  1949 http://www.nyc.gov/html/records/html/vitalrecords/home.shtml.)

In 2008, the DOHMH adopted a resolution to repeal and reenact Article 3 of the New York City Health Code (see http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/downloads/pdf/notice/article-3-adoption-June-2008.pdf or http://tinyurl.com/df6937. Section 3.25 (page 4)  states the amendment is for the protection of the privacy of persons who are subjects of the information while providing for the conditions under which information may be disclosed.

Also, Section 3.27, which permitted access to the printed indices of vital statistics records, has been repealed in its entirety. This was the section that permitted anyone to review the indices available at the DOHMH. The stated rationale for repeal is due to concerns over abuse in access which can lead to identity theft and security risks. The resolution states while this is a Department determination, they are taking into consideration the federal regulations for the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). This is not the usual interpretation of HIPAA, which is the standard for protecting the privacy of  patient medical records and other health information provided to health care providers.

Jan Meisels Allen
Director, International Association of Jewish Genealogical Societies and Chairperson, Public Records Access Monitoring Committee

Comments

[Infinite Ancestors]

I don't see any end dates for the index, so this action may be quite appropriate. It's not appropriate for genealogists to obtain birth records of living people without explicit permission from the subject. And unless you are a direct descendant, there is in almost all cases no real need for recent death records either.

[Colleen McHugh]

Just yesterday as I was doing a database overhaul and making to-do lists for individuals, I researched vital record acquisition in the states of Arizona, New York, and Pennsylvania. Researching the means by which I can obtain a certified copy of my mother's birth certificate I learned it would take a court order to get approved. I think instead I will order her death record from Az, wait four years until her birth certificate in NY State has been on file for 75 years, then request a genealogy copy.

That they closed off even the indices in NYC is very disappointing.

[Sharon]

Heir searches, DNA identification of remains of soldiers, adoption and torn apart families. California has complete access for all vital records. As a genealogist, I have used them many times. California has never had a case of stolen identity through their use.

[Infinite Ancestors]

Colleen, I'm waiting to be able to get my mother's birth certificate also (she died years ago). If she is deceased, typically the administrator of the estate (or equivalent) will have legal authority to get a copy.

Sharon, you highlight some purposes that are not purely genealogical and there is legal backing to obtain records for heir searches, estate purposes, etc.

I'm an avid genealogist. Clearly there should be no problem accessing records indices of deceased persons after some time. But birth records (and many other kinds of records of living persons) are a different story. Genealogy is a hobby, respect for the privacy rights of the living should take precedence. If privacy rights of the living are not respected by genealogists, we all get a bad name.

[kathleen m. wilkinson]

I greatly regret the decision to close access to these indices. I'm not foolish enough to think that I ought to have the right to access information about living persons. But when we're talking about records that go back many decades and even centuries, whose privacy are we invading? I don't know how I will be able to continue research my Irish relatives who emigrated to New York and can't help but think they would want me to "find them" through these records. In short, I think the point of view responsible for this action is myopic at best.

[Michael E. Pollock]

This is but another example of how government overreacts to a perceived problem and in the process fails to address the true root of the problem. Identity theft has as its roots the fact that banks commonly made a practice to use "mother's maiden name" as part of their securiy when the reality has always been that such information is too widely available if one knows where to look. Rather than force banks to adopt a different protocol,Government response was to block access to but ONE source for such information, vital records.

As for people with "legitimate" reasons for having access to such information still having that "access", guess again. I was recently hired by an attorney in Maryland to assist him in locating the heirs of a man whose administrator he represented. The deceased was born in Virginia and we needed a copy of his birth certificate to establish his true parents because the administrator was a life-long acquaintance of the deceased who was the age of the deceased's "mother" and knew the mother had "adopted" him--my use of quotes is to acknowledge the adoption was without court sanction. I went to the Bureau of Vital Statistics to request a copy of that birth certificate wih certified copies in hand of: 1)the death certificate of the deceased; 2)the orders of administration from Baltimore, MD; and 3)a letter on the attorney's letterhead identifying himself as counsel of record for the administratior and delegating authority on behalf of himself and the administrator to request the birth certificate. I was REFUSED the birth certificate not because I was not entitled to the same, but on the grounds I could not prove the identity of the attorney!

Government ALWAYS overstretches its "authority", or at least tries to do so. When a friend arranged to have vital records for the city of Richmond filmed by the Family History Library, the FHL contacted the Virginia Bureau of Vital Records to inquire what restrictions, if any, it would be obliged to place on making the records available to patrons and was MISINFORMED by BVR that none of the deaths could be made available because of a current 100 year restriction. WRONG. These were city records which PREDATED that restriction. Fortunately, enough people complained to the Virginia Attorney General that he intervened with a ruling that BVR did not have authority to restrict access to these records because, as noted, they predated the 100 year restriction and were local, not state, records.

Though the restriction on deaths is only 50 years, there is no publicly available copy of the indexes after 1952 and of the actual death certificates after 1939 (at leasts as of the last time I checked), ostensibly because of a budget short-fall, but I suspect the true reason is that BVR is unwilling to relinquish control of the records and the fees it charges for access to the same.

Michael E. Pollock

[Bob Murphy]

Wait just a minute! Why so much acquiescence to public figures saying we don't have any right to view public records? These are records that have been collected using our tax dollars, and the public should have every right to view them. The issue of identity theft via the viewing of public records has been largely debunked. Let's get real here! Like California, Vermont has complete openness to all birth, marriage, divorce and death records. Having lived here for nearly 70 years, I have yet to see evidence of rampant identity theft or other problems related to public records access.

[Marcia D. Melnyk]

I don't see how access to the indices can result in identity theft or violation of privacy. Indices only list the name, date and place of birth or death (if we're lucky). Control could be placed (and technically already is) to determine an individual's right to the information with time periods in place to prevent getting birth certificates of living people. A copy, clearly marked for genealogical purposes only would prevent thieves from using the certificate for identification purposes. I spoke with the VR dept. in VT some time ago and they stated that when an person gets a certified copy of a record they take a copy of the researcher's driver's license or ID to to create a paper trail and protect themselves in the event of identity theft. Good idea! Of course VT has always been a forward thinking state! Many individuals NEED these records, both the indices AND the copy for medical and legal reasons such as estates and heir searches. Genealogical copies are issued by many states rather than a certified copy and they are clearly stamped "for genealogical purposes only" and cannot be used for identification purposes. Since dates of death, birth and social security numbers are available on-line in the SS death index why would a thief go to all the trouble we genealogist go through to get a copy of a record? Some states, Massachusetss included, have library copies of all drivers licenses issued - the registry sells this info, so I can find a person's birth date, address and ss number quite easily. Let's get real. If someone wants to steal your identity there are easier ways to do so than deal with the bureaucrats whom our tax dollars employ. If their logic was sound the US post office could say that leaving mail in your mailbox can result in identity theft so we should all have to pick up and drop off our mail at the post office. Thieves like to go around and take mail from boxes. This nets them credit card statements, our checking account numbers, and our insurance carriers. My theory is that the public employees want to get paid for doing less work, after all most are either under contract or union members. If genealogists have to "go away" it makes their jobs that much easier. Sort of like the clerk who tells you "all the records burned in a fire" to make you give up. Just my opinion.

Marcia

[Bob Greene]

New York City births, deaths and marriages for some of those dates are also available at the New York Public Library on 5th Avenue at 42nd St. in Manhattan. I'm not sure of the dates available, but I found the 1977 death of a cousin and a 1969 birth of another. There are several bound volumns of New York City Vital Records or Health Department records. The books are only available at that one library, and one of the books is missing.

[Helen Boyden]

I was born in New York City in 1937. Why should anyone be allowed to view my information in an index? My parents were born in NYC in 1904 and 1907 and are both deceased. Their birth records are readily available at the NYC Municipal Archives as would be the death records of my grandfathers who died in 1926 and in 1945 and others who died as far back as the 1850's. MY parents and grandmothers did not die in New York city. I have not used the Municipal Archives for about ten years, but when I did I found the personnel on the first floor and upstairs very helpful.

[Jan Meisels Allen]

In order to obtain a birth record under the NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, if you were not the subject of the requested certificate (or their legal representative), one had to prove the person was deceased, usually by providing a death certificate. The Department was not providing birth records of living persons to those who should not have them. This new limiting of access of the indices, puts a chilling effect on the individual's genealogical research.

[Marilyn]

I agree with Bob. Here in Michigan viewing the births after a certain date is off limits, but the rest is open to anyone to use. There are some county clerks, however, that restrict access to ALL births, contrary to how the restriction was written. I suspect that those states/counties with restrictions are making money from fees that they do not want to give up.

[Red Sanders]

Might this just be another excuse to fleece the public? From what I have read, New York and especially New York City, are operating at a high level of creativity in creating new taxes.

[Lorenzo]

There are various records available through the LDS - (URL's upon request). We have been trying to buy the index films for several years and got a verbal OK, but the NYC end never followed through.
One example is Births reported in the city of New York, 1881-1965 - FHL US/CAN Film 1322486. I can guarantee you that there are 44 years old alive today who appear in that index! Did NYC think about the fact that they already have let these be filmed New York, New York : Recordak Corporation, 1963 ? Will the LDS have to return them? Obe of the links is to §3.25 Inspection of records and proceedings of the Department.

I am flummoxed. We can't see the items in NY but we can order them to be sent to thousand of FHC's?

[bob spearin]

Sounds like a scheme to close the budget gap.

[Oxa]

The title of this article is a bit misleading. They aren't restricting access to the vital records, merely to the indices. But if you want to generate a stir, increase traffic to your website...

[jacqui]

As a researcher in England I think it is a ploy to make money in these hard times in the same way that some record offices here have started charging for taking a camera in etc.

Of course our system is different with a national registration body the General Register Office of which the BMD indexes have largely been transcribed by volunteers and put online for the period 1837-1983 see

http://www.freebmd.org.uk/

It isn't complete but it means you don't have to go to a main library to consult the index books or fiches. Obviously if you want something between 1983 and 2005 you do or you look it up on Ancestry or findmypast. There was a big fuss when the Family Records Centre moved to the National Archives and they took away the original book indexes but copies exist now in 6 main centres in England for the ones for England and Wales.

And yes it does make a nonsense of the security question what is your mother's maiden name? (as from 1911 or maybe 1913) the indexes give the mother's maiden name as do the marriage indexes with the spouse's surname. But it is only the indexes not the actual register entries which are publicly accessible and if you have a common name to research you are in for a long job! In these cases the mother's maiden name or spouse's name is your only salvation.

Considering how much other and much more personal information is held by any of the banks and credit card companies and government offices I really think BMD indexes are the least of our worries as regards identity theft. The next step will be prohibiting dates of birth and death on gravestones, no mention of spouses or children and no birth announcements or obituaries in newspapers!!!!!

[Francis LaLonde]

I don't know how the State of New York operates, but are those same records also available at the State level? I'm living in Michigan, and the State Archives contain copies of vital records from the various counties (I'm unsure of the time-frames covered). Just an idea.

[Math Impaired]

No. New York City has always maintained their own separate copies. And NY state is just as hard to get records from - not deaths or marriage for 50 years and no birth certs for 75. And it take a year to get them.

NY - land of the fee and home of the knave.

[Anne Peterson]

I know these are not indexed but might birth and death notices be found ion microfilm n the vital records area of the daily newspapers of New York City?

[Suzanne G.]

The city of New York's website also doesn't answer every question. I am trying to obtain a copy of a birth certificate for my grandmother who was born in Manhattan in 1922. She is now deceased. How do I go about getting that copy when there is no one to sigh and notorize a letter saying I am authoirized to get this information. They do not make it easy, I am afraid if I send in the required fee I am still going to get denied for insiffient information and then have to reapply and pay again.