Advertisements
I had a dream last night. As an interior designer on the side, I viewed a birthmother as the architect in the development of her fetus. When the baby is born, the woman is the biological mother. She doesn't need a bunch of labels to apease the adoptive family, agency, socially, etc. Whatever THAT woman chooses to refer to herself should be respected.
We are WAY too caught up in identifying roles here! It reminds me of the corporate world too. Titles mean everything....Manager vs. Director.
We are way too analytical, philosophical, and caught up in the "names of the 21st century" for adoption.
Let's move on with more important issues pertaining to adoption. Like focusing on moving on with our lives and nurturing people close to you. Spend less time on this darn computer (me included). There is TOO much we could be doing with our time that is better than debating this never ending debate. I compare it to when a child is a viable human being or the abortion debate....come on, you're never going to get everyone on the "same page". But that's ok! Just respect people's opinion pertaining to their OWN situation! :)
Like
Share
Advertisements
I grew up thinking of my 'biological' mother. I unconsciously changed the label at some point to 'birth mother'.
When I speak with her, I call her Ginny. When I think of her, I think of her as Ginny, my mother.
When I speak with my adoptive mother, Joanne, I call her mother. When I think of her, I think of her as my mother.
When Ginny and Joanne are together, they call me 'their' daughter. No one is confused. We are all an extended family.
Using the word mother to describe my relationship to Ginny is, simply, the truth. Using the word mother to describe my relation to Joanne is also the truth.
Using the same word does not mean that our histories or our relationships are the same. Use of the word mother for Ginny exerts no influence on my relationship with Joanne.
What is the point of this continual debate and so much territoriality and hurt feelings? Children love. Unconditionally, and without limit.
Isn't this "name calling" somewhat like how we call our mothers-in-law? From the day I was married I chose to call mine "Mom", the same as I called my own mother, because I loved her and felt it would be easier to start that way than to change later and have to explain why. Now my two daughters-in-law call me "Julie". I don't question it. It is really the child's choice and maybe a reflection of the casual attitude of society these days where we use first names much more than last with titles. I sign gift cards to them as a couple "Mom B" but personal notes to the wives "Julie" to honor their choice. They can call me "Noodle Noggin" if they like. I am way more concerned about the quality of the relationship.
It is easy to say the child will decide, but I could see the hurt in my son's birthmother's eyes when he didn't go to her when someone said "take this to Mommy". My son is 3, and for him and his birthparents it has been better to change what he refers to them as to their first names and it has helped them to define the roles in their own minds (having recently been adopted out of foster care).
For younger children it is just easier to define roles with names - my children know my name - my stepchildren call me by my first name - but when your child falls and scrapes their knee - they don't want two people running to the call of "Mommy"
I am not suggesting that if he began to call his birthmother "mom" or "mommy______" that I would be upset. I believe that it is his decision just like stepchildren should choose what they will call their stepparents, but I do believe that it is natural for most children to call the people that they live with "mom" and "dad" and birthfamilies should not attempt to squelch that or confuse the child with multiple names.
Jen