Intrepid Murmurings

When you start really learning about adoption, you realize a lot of the language used to describe it is rather negative. As are some people's connotations with adoption, especially birthmothers. There has, however, been quite a lot of reform in the world of adoption (as well as some shifts in social beliefs) in the last 30-50 years or so, and a lot of attitudes have changed. "Unwed mothers" are no longer shunned by society across the board. A woman who has had a child outside of marriage is (hopefully!) not considered "damaged" goods for life, nor is someone who has placed a child for adoption in the past. There is still a lot of room for growth here, but there does seem to be fewer reasons these days for an expectant mother choosing adoption to hide her pregnancy and then never speak of it again.

The same goes for adoptive families; because children of adoption are no longer stigmatized by society for carrying "bad genes" or thought to inherit the "devient" behaviors of their birthmothers (and the fact that infertility is now seen as a medical condition, not reflective of a persons worth or mental status) there far fewer reasons to "pretend" an adopted child is a biological child or to lie about adoption. These have all helped push open adoption forward (there are so many other reasons as well, which I won't tackle here). Unfortunately, the rising support and acceptance of adoption has not translated into a public understanding of adoption issues.

But back to the language. I know some folks get their knickers in a twist over having to be "PC". Words are just words, they can have many meanings, isn't one as good as the next? Not really. The connotations inherant in a word can be really demeaning. Changing the language can make an impact over time that helps move us all forward. In my doddering about the web, I've found a couple of sites that give some good, basic information that I wish more people would see.

This one describes why the term "give up" or "put up" for adoption is better replaced with "placed" a child for adoption, or the (albeit more wordy) "created an adoption plan". Birth mothers do not "give up" on their children, nor do they toss them out like used housewares or old clothes. The term "put up" kinda makes me think of lining a row of kids up on a stage for inspection by the highest bidder. I know (not too long ago) I used to say it the other way (most people do!) and now, every time I hear it, I think about how it sounds.

I've also discovered several interesting articles about how to talk about adoption in schools. As a teacher, I did a fair bit of learning about adoption and adoption language, as well as all sorts of family structures, but I wish now that I'd known more. It is extremely important for teachers to know this stuff, as the classroom, especially in the early years, is often the first place kids encounter the concept of adoption or meet peers who have been adopted. It also might be the first place an adoptee is aware of and exposed to hurtful or confusing comments about adoption, from kids (and adults) who really don't know any better.

So here are a few links. One is an article from Tolerance.org (an excellent resource I first learned about in grad school that tackles a whole lotta anti-bias issues) about classroom assignments that don't always work for adoptees, and other issues they face in school. Another is excerpts from a guide called Teachers Guide to Adoption by Robin Hilborn. There is a great chart about positive adoption language in this guide, which I will put below (I like how it explains why certain terms are not so great). The third is a really touching article from AdoptiveFamilies.com titled How I Explained Adoption to the First Grade. The author makes a good point about how important it is to talk pointedly with the students about the issue, while not making the adopted child(ren) in the class the subject of the lesson or discussion. That, of course, is an important thing to consider when discussing all issues in the classroom...

Avoid this	Prefer this	Why
Real parent	Birthparent, biological parent (birthfather, birthmother, birthdad, birthmum)	Are there "imaginary" parents? Adoptive parents are just as real as biological parents.
Natural parent	Birthparent; biological mother; woman who gave birth	Lack of a blood link does not make an adoptive parent less of a parent.
Natural child	Birth child, biological child	Ditto. And are there "artificial" children?
Your own child (vs. an adopted child)	Birth child, biological child	All your children are your own, adopted or not. Genetic relationships are not stronger than adoptive ones.
Illegitimate	Born to unmarried parents	Circumstances of birth should not stigmatize a child.
Unwed mother	Birthmother, birthmum	"Unwed" or "unmarried" is a moral judgment.
Give up, give away, surrender, relinquish, adopt out, put up for adoption	Place for adoption, or (better) choose adoption, make an adoption plan	Birthmothers love their children but can't raise them. They choose what is best for their child and stay in touch with them after the adoption ("open adoption").
Keep the baby	Parent the baby	"She decided to parent the baby rather than choose adoption."
Foreign adoption	International, intercountry adoption	Some say "foreign" has negative connotations.
Hard-to-place child	Special needs child	Less damaging to the child's self-esteem.
Adopt-a-road, adopt-a-park, etc.	Sponsor-a-park, befriend-a-park	"Adopt-a-" programs misuse "adopt" as a marketing ploy to raise money. They deform the meaning of adoption.

@ 05:59 PM PDT [ Comments [2] ]