(From the Natural Families’ Perspective)
Adoption language is becoming very controversial. There are two sides to adoption language: Positive Adoption Language, and Honest Adoption Language. Positive adoption language is the dehumanizing of mothers and family members who fall victim to agencies and lawyers who profit by baby selling, at least$30,000 per healthy white infant. They would like people to use terms such as: â€œBirth mother, birth father, birth family, birth parent, birth childâ€ for people who are the adopted personâ€™s natural family, and to use terms such as: â€œParent, mother, father, mommy, daddy and childâ€ for the adoptive family. This bias tries to control the idea of adoption, and put it into a more natural setting, while alienating the natural family and the child being adopted.
According to the staff writer, Michael Riley of the Asbury Park Press:
Remember that all of us have birth parents, but not all of us live with them.
But most people never know any of their family as birth family members. They know them by the adoptive termsâ€¦ does that mean, that they are all adopted, and never knew it? Does that mean that all people were adopted, unless they referred to their natural family as birth families? What about birth father? How many fathers over the country have actually given birth? Positive doesn’t seem to necessarily equate to what is real.
According to a group called, Origins (Canada) who are a group of mothers who have lost children to adoption, the adoption industry:
…has deliberately constructed and marketed a lexicon that is meant to marginalize natural mothers and dehumanize them, giving legitimacy to a form of inhumane exploitation that would otherwise be seen as cruel and unnaturalâ€¦. The language thing is much more than a gimmick or novelty. It is a tool of oppression. Groups that control the lexicon can control a societyâ€™s thinking subversively.
OriginsUSA, and other Origins Affililates prefer to use terms such as natural mother and adoptive parent, feeling that these terms are non biased, and that it is honest in its relationship to a child. A writer, Laurie Frisch, of OriginsUSA, states that:
We must change our habits and begin to respect, acknowledge, support and value the true, natural family. The courts and the media are at great fault for using biased language. The term â€œbirth motherâ€ makes people think a mother is just the packaging a baby comes in, meant to be tossed aside.
While the people who profit from adoption are attempting to put a positive spin on adoption, the natural families suggest that a great number of people, the adopted person, the natural family, and even the adoptive family are harmed by adoption. The adopted person and natural family for the loss of each other, and the adoptive family, because they buy into the false belief that the child is really theirs, thereby living a lie. Many adoptive families find that after adopting, they go through a period of depression when they realize that the child they adopted was second choice, and that they will never have a child that comes from their dna, and of their blood.
Stay tuned for Part II, which talks about the babies’ point of view of losing his or her mother.