Do you think it is wrong that adoption agencies use language to make adoption feel more natural to the?

Cybil_Bennet

What is unnatural about adopting? Natural mother sounds more like she's a "natural" at being a parent, and that may not be the case. Calling someone the "mother" to the adoptive mother is offensive, implying that she is secondary, unimportant, or unreal. Birth mother is a perfect term, because she gives birth, then walks away - she provides no emotional or physical support, and has nothing to do with the child other than some DNA.

Would you rather these pregnant women have abortions instead of giving up the child to a loving family? Check your nearest big city for the number of children in foster care/orphanages, obviously there are a lot of bad and/or incapable parents out there, so I applaud those who are smart enough to place the child in a better home from the start rather than abuse them for life! At least adopted children have a good shot at life and have parents who are pre-screened and financially and emotionally stable.

People like you are why kids grow up to have issues about being adopted! These children are the bottom line, not these parents who were reckless enough to have an unplanned pregnancy in the first place! If you want your baby YOU KEEP IT, if you have other desires, are unable, or unwilling, DO WHAT'S BEST FOR THE CHILD! Either way, unless you are involved with adoption in some way, you have no real business saying anything negative about it all because you have never been put in the situation!

MamaKate

Yes. I do think it is wrong.

I will never understand why there is a need to make EITHER set of parents "less than" or "more than" by using offensive terminology. As far as the children are concerned, they have TWO sets of parents who are all important people in their lives. Why anyone needs to argue that, or manipulate that using language will never make sense to me.

kateiskate

I agree with SJM. The "birth mom" is the child's mother. The adoptive parents can become parents after relinquishment. End of story.

Kathy B

I actually think it's just as wrong, if not more, that a PAP couple needs their hand held with terminology to 'soften' the process. I know who and what I am and don't need anyone to tell me what that is. Calling another woman a birth mom, biological mom, natural mom, etc, is completely irrelevant to me. I don't base my feelings, emotions and self-worth on terms used by other people. I have more self worth than that and if someone doesn't, they have no business adopting in the first place.

So, yes, I think it's wrong to use certain terms to make the PAP's feel better about the process, if that is their purpose. However, just because an agency chooses to use certain terms, does NOT mean that it's to coddle PAP's. Maybe it's just what THEY are comfortable using.

If they look for terms to avoid discomfort, then I would appreciate it if they found terms to use that would respect EVERYONE involved in adoption, not just the ones who write the checks.

SJM

If adoption agencies were honest, instead of using 'birth mother' they would call her the child's mother. That's what she is, even if she's considering adoption. Until and unless she relinquishes, she is very simply the child's mother.

monkeykitty83

Up till relinquishment, I think they should be referred to as "expectant parents" or just "parents." While calling them biological parents or natural parents is technically accurate-- they will remain such even if they end up parenting, because they will always have a biological/genetic connection-- I think it would be better to help everybody involved remember that they are THE parents until their termination of parental rights is signed and the revocation period has passed.

They should be referred to as "expectant parents," and then just as "parents"... because legally and morally, they are. At that time, we should also be referring to "prospective adoptive parents."

Before the baby is even adopted, he/she has only one set of parents. Navigating the relationship with a second set of parents comes later. Not to negate adoptive parents, obviously, but they don't have a parental role BEFORE adoption, while someone else has legal parental rights.

Shannon

I think that there should be four terms involved: Mother, Father, Adoptive mother and Adoptive father. Of course Parents and then adoptive parents would be correct as well. Placing an extra word onto "mother" or "father" does cater to the prospective adoptive parents and yes it is wrong.

It has nothing to do with natural bonds. It has to do with respect. Too many adoptive parents disrespect their child's parents (and their adopted child) by placing extra words on top of "mother."

It is one thing for your adopted child to call you mom and feel natural saying it. It is another thing to try to replace the child's mother by refusing to acknowledge her as such.

Jennifer L

So are adoptive parents unnatural, or not real?

I think that both sets of parents are equally "real" and equally "valid". One doesn't have to diminish the other. Of course there is a natural bond that occurs in-utero. That doesn't mean that a person is unable to form other bonds with human beings that didn't give birth to them as well.

The idea is to find terminology that respects both parties. I don't think that "birth parent" is the right terms to use, but I don't think that "natural parent" is the right term either.

ETA: Let me put it in a different context. I have one child from my body and two children from adoption. Should I then refer to my oldest as my "natural" child and my younger two as my "Unnatural" children?

carefree in another life!

Yeah now they are going by initials Birth mother= BM medical terminology=bm=bowel movement That is so wrong!

Opedial

Yes, it is advertising pure and simple. Is McDonald's burgers really 100% juicy and does Koolaid really quench our thirst?

If adoption agencies are looking for money, they have to sell their "product", which in fact are children.

Is it wrong? Heck yes!

Independ"ant"

The agencies and organizations are trying to normalize adoption and appease the buyers so the deals get sealed.

Its a multibillion dollar business.

philosophy major

It's all how they try and sell their pitch and get what they want. biological parent or birth parent sounds a lot less attached and loving than saying their MOTHER and FATHER.

sunny

Every good sales organization does it. The adoption isdustry are VERY good marketers.

They put Tony Soprano to shame.

Nurse Autumn Intactivist NFP

YES!!!!!

We are not selling 2009 Toyota Camry's here, this involves REAL people and REAL bonds

Jennifer- you said "So are adoptive parents unnatural, or not real?"

No one has said tht you are not "real" you are very much thier parent. However, you ARE unnatural. You can not be the natural parent. Nature intended for your children to be raised by the mother that gave birth to them, however that is not possible, so that is where you step in. I am NOT diminishing your role, and you are very much their mother, however, you are not "natural". That is like an adoptive mother saying "They are saying that I didn't give birth to them, that is so wrong, I AM thier mother" Well yes, you are their mother, but you did not give birth to them, and there is nothing wrong with admiting that. It is the way thing are and claiming to be the natural mother does not change the facts.

Indian-vision

I agree with angelandabby and Jeniffer. Its a question of"persepective". Where i come from i had never heard of BM= bowel movement and i initially used it for birth mother till some one nicely told me that is what it means in their country. I've never used it since.

But i have seen blogs by birth mothers that refer to themselves , feel comfortable and say to them birth mother does not demean them like some here feel. After all giving birth is something so special and amazing and something not every one gets the experience of.

I do feel natural implies AP are unnatural and real implies AP's are imaginary and will notuse those.

Mrs. Hardy

I agree with Indian-V.
I am an adoptive mom. My son's birth mom has only one thing "over" me.... she gave him life/birth!!! We both love him the same =so we are both his mothers! Birth mom is simply a distinctive term. Those of us mothers who did not birth our children highly respect the lady who did do the "hard" part for us.
When my son is old enough to talk, he will call his birth mom: "Julia Mom". We think this respects her as a person.
The adoption agencies have no idea what the birth-mother's name or the adoptive parents' names are going to be. They have to come up with something to distinguish between the persons involved... untill names are known. Once names are known, first names are used.
Don't "kick" the ones trying to negotiate placing a child with a family...
the adoption agency (if it is a good one) is simply the "middle man".

icehockeymom7

I guess I really don't see the difference between calling a birth mother a "natural mother" or a "birth mother". They have the same connotation to me. I think it's probably subjective to the person who is hearing the terms. I don't think hearing "natural mother" makes me think of a natural bond any more than "biological mother" makes me think of a biological bond. It's kind of all semantics....everyone reading it knows who you are talking about in the triad, so I guess I don't really see why it matters which term you are using.

big c

no not at all

R.M.G!

No, I do not think it's wrong at all.
There should be distinctions between the "biological" parent(s), and the adopting parents. The bio-parents are, for any number of reasons, giving up their legal/natural Right to the child. The adopting parents, for whatever reason, are choosing to take on all the privileges and potential burden of raising a child, hopefully motivated by love & a great desire to nurture.
Why do you seem to think there is a problem?

x0tofux0

thier is nothing wrong with adoption its completely natrul becuase when thier wasnt medicaine as well people die and thier kid had to go somewhere suchas adoptive parents plus thier is not a mother child bond well its not that specific at least the child bond closest to people during the first year so people who are around it frequently will be close to them 4ever usually ps im adopted

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: