Comments on: Can We Assign Our Own Titles, Please?

By: ChristineL

ChristineL — Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:08:33 +0000

Shell - I understand.
Three generations in my family have been involved in fostercare - from 'stolen generation' through to my care.
I have worked very hard to make sure that my babe is not scared about losing me. She has two mums. Lucky girl.
I'll be beside her as she comes to terms with the mother who gave birth to her, and when she tells me to back off, I will. No problems about titles.
So maybe the system needs to put the child first? CRIKEY! There's a thought....

By: Shell

Shell — Sat, 28 Jul 2007 13:58:53 +0000

Christine, I was taken from my mother at age two and later adopted. I too said things to me a-mother, like I want you to be my mommy forever - I was a kid, I wanted to have one mother.

I was actually terified of being sent away - not scared of my mother, but just scared of losing the family I had come to know as my family. I would have felt this way no matter who fostered or adopted me.

But...thirty years later I had to go back to my mother (after years of feeling abandoned and now scared of being rejected by her)- I had to be with her and my people. It had nothing to do with the family that rasied me. Nature dictated that I return home, or what was left of it at that point, anyway.

it's good you are maintaing a relationship between mother and daughter.

By: Christine

Christine — Sat, 28 Jul 2007 13:32:34 +0000

I should clarify. I'm actually a foster mum. In my case the little one's mum wasn't able to take such a noble view of looking after herself or her baby.
I took on a little one at 2 with serious health issues, and all the trauma of two years of physical and emotional neglect. So for my babe, 'mum' means rescuer and trust and health and happiness. There's a heck of a lot of trust associated with the name 'mum' now.
I have applied to adopt my little one, in response to her four and a half year old assertion 'mum, I want to be with you for ever, and ever'.
So that was the point of my post. I'm sorry if I waded into all the angst about names.
I don't agree with labels. And that's what you are all debating.
The FACTS of my child's life are that she was born to a lovely mum, for a number of reasons she doesn't live with that mum anymore and she lives with another mum. We still regularly see mummy who had 'babe' in her tummy and we see her because she loves 'babe'. I work hard to connect them because I agree that 'babe' and her mother will need to find some common understanding and they need a relationship going forward.
But no one will dictate the descriptions thanks. No one is going to label anyone while I'm still standing.
We're all equal, just different. I take my cues from my little one.
That was the point of my post. I work out what matters to my little one. That's what guides me.

By: Shell

Shell — Sat, 28 Jul 2007 11:29:55 +0000

Yeah, jenna....sorry you and your daughter were sucked in by the adoption machine.

That's it exactly - the adults who could have offered support and guidance to help you and your daughter get started in life, were actually working against the both of you.

They not only took a child from her mother, they also took away your daughter's right to be with you, raised by you and her people. Tragic.

But that's how adoption operates - destroy one family to create a new one. These people know how to break down a mother's confidence and self-esteem - and they can this do oh, so, nicely -hell that can get a mom to think she's a saint for surrendering her baby.

By: Jenna Hatfield

Jenna Hatfield — Sat, 28 Jul 2007 03:24:50 +0000

How does this make a woman feel about being a mother to her own child when others have decided before her baby is even born that she is only the birth mother to her daughter or son.

For me? Very confused. I was bonded to my daughter because I loved her, so very much and with my complicated pregnancy, laying in bed hooked to monitors for much of the time listening to her heartbeat, I couldn't NOT recognize how important she was to me in those ways. But hearing from my agency that I wasn't anything more than a way for her to be born into another family was so confusing and diminishing. I mean, they were the adults who hadn't screwed up and should know more than me, right? So they must have been saying something of merit, right?

Gah. *beats self with broom stick* The things we learn too late.

By: Shell

Shell — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 23:35:28 +0000

Heather, I agree. We never see ads by adoption agencies that say, "Are you a mother or an expentant mother considering adoption?" She is labled a Birth Mother right away. Why? As if she has already made the decision to surrender. It is absolutely a coersive term.

How does this make a woman feel about being a mother to her own child when others have decided before her baby is even born that she is only the birth mother to her daughter or son.

I didn't grow up with the birth mother term - I heard biological mother every now and then, but that never sat right with me. I always knew my mother was my mother - how could she not be? You can't change nature.

Thanks, Jenna. Glad you liked hearing my perspective.

By: Julie Crowley

Julie Crowley — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 21:14:39 +0000

Wow I wrote one post about this, already this week…

http://stepparent.adoptionblogs.com/index.php/weblogs/adoption-label-debate-original-vs-new-an

but I may have to write another one! Jenna I think you did a great job on your blog, as usual.

By: Heather Lowe

Heather Lowe — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 20:37:19 +0000

Snazzlepup,
“If you’re claiming that a significant number of people who use the term “birthmother” intend it pejoratively, then I completely agree with you that it is now tainted and needs to be quashed.”

Not perjoratively, but coercively. As Jenna explained, agencies use this term before it is factual in order to detach us from our children so that we are more likely to surrender them.

By: Jan Baker

Jan Baker — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 18:30:17 +0000

Whew, I have to write a post too to talk about this!

By: Jenna Hatfield

Jenna Hatfield — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 14:34:57 +0000

Nicole; if semantics determine how you attach to someone, we’re in trouble over here because our son just learned that “Daddy” also responds to “Josh” (after some of my yelling from the basement to throw me down the laundry) and is amused at Josh’s reaction to the name from his own son. I wonder if it means that he’s not attached to him because he calls him by his first name. I mean, after their ALL DAY cuddle and wrestle fest yesterday… it could be “possible,” right? Pfft.

Shell; as I’ve said in the past and will say until I’m blue in the face, adoptee input is so vital on these various topics (while realizing that all adoptees are different and therefore have different experiences and reactions). I thank you, immensely, for sharing that with us. While I’m sure there are some people who will be made to feel insecure by your own opinion, I think it shows a nice spin on the whole topic and this string of discussion is made better by having shared it. Thank you.