Why do SW's continue to use the term "birthmother"????

Question

I know there are some SW's on this site and it has been mentioned before that it's sooooooo incredibly incorrect, and yet it continues. Why?

Answer 1

I don't know what SW's call them today- but the "mothers" of our two adopted children called themselves Birth moms.

Interesting how a true statement gets a thumbs down- THIS IS TRUE IN MY CASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Answer 2

I don't see why it should be offensive. Women who give their children up for adoption are mothers, who give birth.  Women who adopt children are mothers, through adoption.  Perhaps you could explain in an addendum why this is so offensive? Not trying to be smart here, just trying to educate myself. Thanks!

Answer 3

They use Bio mom and dad here in my province when talking about adoption I suppose to separate the adoptive parent from the bio parent.  For our children (two months to go!) we are not sure what we will use, we are putting thought into it and want to do what is right.  We also have to know that the bio parents in this case had their parental rights taken away (for good reason) so maybe that is different than when talking about an infant from birth.

Answer 4

as someone who has given a child up for adoption, the term birthmother has never bothered me. it never dawned on me there was any reason. it is a way to easily distinquish between the the mother raising the child and the mother who gave birth. both are mothers. i willfully chose to allow someone else to raise my child. i want my son to have a happy life with people who love him. i trusted them to care for him and provide for him. it would be confusing to refer to both of us as mom. i am happy knowing that he does know he has a mother who wanted a better life for him than she could give. as well as a mother who is providing that. they are acknowledging the fact that i am a mother. nothing about the term birthmother sounds the least bit offensive to me. it accuratley states exactly who i am to my son. i am the mother that gave birth to him.

i am certain it is different for mothers who had their children taken from them. i thought i would share my thoughts from my prospective though.

Answer 5

As a social worker we use the term that our agency tells us to use.     I work in with the elderly now and we don't call our clients clients they are consumers.  When i worked in a CMHA apartment they  weren't clients but residents.  Your work place dictates what you reffer to your clients as in your notes and to them they tell you in training  what you are supposed to use.

Answer 6

I don't know.   If you want to differentiate then they could use 'mother-to-be' and 'prospective adoptive parent'  but I guess they aim to minimize the chances of the mother-to-be changing her mind.  It's very subtle, but this language is coercive, no doubt about it.

Here's what 'mothers' have to say about it

http://www.originscanada.org/birthmother...

Answer 7

No appologies but

*yawn* *Yawn*

Yeah, its like a brokern record in here. So ALL of us social workers are out to make money huh? Erm.....english adoption agencies are NOT like american ones.

We use the term birthmother, because once the adoption has gone through, then that is all the "breeder" is. Birth mother.

Answer 8

industry propaganda...

also, grammatically correct ( the term is actually, "definition") doesn't trump the cultural meaning of the term.  i have yet to read any of my childrens' birth certificates, crib cards, and prenatal/post-partum reports which refer to me as a "birthmother." including the child i considered placing for adoption.  as a matter of fact, the ONLY place i see it used is *gasp* in the ADOPTION INDUSTRY...

i guess it woud sort of hurt business if when paps show up with their hopes for a new baby and a checkbook, to be told that "we have a pregnant women who MIGHT place her child for adoption."  so from a business perspective, i get it.

i just wish people would stop hiding behing the "what's the big deal, myth" and "dictionary.com" definiations in order to defend what it really is... a business and marketing strategy.

also, the term is a misnomer when applied to a woman who is currently pregnant.  as is in pre-birth matching.

it's tautamount to referring to a male parent as a "stud." because, by definition, a stud is a male who impregnates.  

now, if we called expectant fathers that, would that be socially accepted?  no.

so, i totally agree with you (the questioner).

Answer 9

Uh, because we need a way during the course of our day of work to distinguish who we are talking about - birth mother or adoptive mother.

No put down, no ill intent, no bad feelings - for either mother.  As an adoptee, birthmother and adoptive mother, I am called all three.  And I'm not shaken by it.

But, gee, am I supposed to be offended that someone called me a "SW"?  In referring to a social worker as an SW, are people being manipulative and just wrong?  

And if the argument is that a birthmother is not a mother yet because she hasn't given birth, then I am really confused!

Answer 10

It's NOT incorrect, it is a personal preference.  Some people don't like it, but some people don't like the other terms as well.  Get over it!

Answer 11

Sorry, but could you define SW?

Ah, thanks. I probably should have been able to figure that out.

Answer 12

They persist and insist on misusing the term "birthmother" because they earn their living off persuading women (and men) into giving their precious children to someone else.  Telling a woman that she is an expectant mother or a mother-to-be isn't very persuasive is it now?  Labeling her with the "birthmother" predefines her role in the infant sales transaction.  It doesn't give her much emotional wiggle room should she have the audacity to change her mind after she gives birth and wants the raise HER own child.

Pre-birth matching and using the "birthmother" label are just a small part of the predatory courting and grooming techniques that adoption workers (I refuse to call such people social workers.  It is an insult to real social workers.) use to convince women to surrender their precious children.

Answer 13

I never knew there were different terms for a woman who gives birth but does not parent the child. I call myself a birthmother and my husband(we got married later) her birthfather, not because he gave birth but because we made her and gave her up together. I hope that makes sense. This was back in 1972 and this is how they labeled us.

Answer 14

Because they're working for the industry and making money off of the industry. If there wasn't an industry, and if they called mothers "mothers" and encouraged parenting, they'd be jobless.

There are over 3000 adoption agencies in the United States. If our adoption laws reformed and it went in the direction that australia did from being one of the worst child rights countries now to a more honorable one, they only have a handful of adoptions a year. All non profit agencies there are illegal now too, Sigh* maybe one day....

My point being, calling mothers MOTHERS, instead of birthmothers is a step towards that reform. Honesty first and the rest will follow.

Answer 15

When I was a county social worker with DCFS, we didn't call women who hadn't relinquished or otherwise lost their parental rights "birthmothers."  We called them mothers.

I realize it's different for adoption social workers.  Agencies want those mothers to get accustomed to accepting themselves as birthmothers rather than what they actually are -- mothers.  It's manipulative and wrong.  They even call them birthmothers when they haven't even given birth yet!

eta:

You are correct.  SW is social worker!

Answer 16

hmmmm.... I as an adoptive parent, the childrens "real" Mom...would like to know what the correct term to use or to refer to the "birthmother" as.

Answer 17

I'm sure they do this so a pregnant woman will begin to think of herself as a "birth mother," i.e., a woman who has already relinquished her born child for adoption.  It's never anybody's choice but hers, and the choice cannot legally be made until after the baby is born.  

To call a pregnant woman a birth mother is inherently coercive.  How can she or anyone else know she will relinquish her child until she has carried it to term, undergone labor, held her baby in her arms?  It's like walking into an Army recruiting station and being addressed as "Soldier" before you sign anything.  

For people who don't find this offensive--if you weren't adopted, do you call the woman who gave birth to you your birth mother?  Of course you don't.  You call her your mother.  If you have children you raised yourself, do you call them your birth children?  I doubt it.

Answer 18

Why is the term incorrect?  Would it not imply a mother related to a child by the act of giving birth?

When something is gramatically correct I fail to see how it's offensive or wrong.

Answer 19

It's her only 'function', giving birth.  Like a can opener.

It dehumanizing,

Answer 20

I understand the coercion comments that are made with regards to using the term birth mother, but on the other hand, isn't using the term "mother" incorrect also?  Taking adoption out of the equation, aren't most pregnant women considered a "mom-to-be" before the child is born?  So if we are referring to the incorrectness of terms, isn't using the term "mother" incorrect for ANY prospective parent - regardless of bio or adoptive?  

I don't mean any disrespect by my answer.  I'm just curious as to why one part of the word is so wrong but yet the other is not.  I personally use "bio" rather than "birth" because that is what my son's bio family preferred, but we did not know them prior to our son's birth.

Answer 21

Because sw who work in adoption have to do everything that they can to separate mothers and infants. "Birthmother" is just one more way to make their (sw) dreams come true. They use it as a coercive tactic - encourage young women that they are indeed nothing more than incubators - and wa-la they get an infant to sell.

And the "birthmother" term goes on into the adult life of the adoptee. My son was told by his adopters that I was his birthmother for years and years and years, so even though that is not a term I would use for myself, it is something that the adopters have made sure that my son understands and uses.

It is a way to ensure that adopters who are not very secure in their reasons/ways/means of getting an infant can continue to separate the mother and infant - at any price.  Years into "their" "child's" life  they can still believe the infant was born "as if their own".

Adoptive mothers who are secure simply don't do this; unfortunately, they are far and few between.