I found this by accident while visiting a the Ohio site today: > >> Major Changes to Ohio Vital Records Access >> >> >> We lost on Ohio House Bill 95. >> >> >> On 5 June, the Senate approved House Bill 95 (it was approved by the Senate >> Finance Committee on 3 June). With HB95, there will no longer be >> uncertified >> copies of vital records available from the Ohio Department of Health and >> the local vital statistics registrars. Also, certified copies will have >> an additional $5 surcharge (making the cost of a certified copy a minimum >> of $15, as the local registrars will also no longer be allowed to charge >> less than the state). >> >> >> House Bill 95 will go into effect 1 July 2003. >> >> >> You can read the bill as passed by the Senate at: >> <A HREF="http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/BillText125/125_HB_95_PS_N.html">http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/BillText125/125_HB_95_PS_N.html</A> >> >> >> The pertinent sections are 3705.23 and 3705.24. (It >> is a huge page; be patient while it loads.) >> >> >> Because this language matches >> the House version of the bill, there is little hope that it would change >> in the committee working to reconcile the House and Senate versions. >> >> >> The >> Ohio Genealogical Society Board of Trustees approved a resolution >> explaining >> the ramifications of HB95 to Ohio genealogists. Copies of this resolution >> was hand-delivered to every Ohio Senator's office. Representatives of the >> Board met with representatives of the Ohio Department of Health. Included >> in the resolution and in the discussions were good, reasonable, logical >> explanations as to why eliminating uncertified copies will do nothing to >> prevent identity theft. We gave them possible alternatives so that >> uncertified >> copies would no longer be a financial hardship on the agencies involved. >> Even with these actions, as well as the countless phone calls, letters, >> and e-mails to the Ohio Senate from genealogists and organizations from >> across the state and the nation, the bill went through unchanged. >> >> >> It is >> likely (even probable) that the next step will be to restrict access -- >> either with a time restriction and/or an access restriction (only qualified >> parties can get a copy of the record). People have reported that local >> vital statistics registrars are stating that they are not allowed to issue >> copies except to the person or the next of kin. HB 95 made no such >> provisions. >> However, these instances of restrictions need to be noted so that those >> agencies can be properly informed on what the current requirements are. >> >> >> It >> is a very sad time in Ohio genealogy. Unfortunately, this may be only the >> tip of the iceberg. >