[ajjhmf]

OK, here's my 2 cents...

I think that using the term birthmother before a person gives birth or has signed TPR isn't right. Just as adoptive mother isn't right beforehand either. But I also don't like the phrase 'potential.' Because, just because a young women is considering adoption, it doesn't mean she's going to place. Also, I think it can be very leading... like you're letting someon down by parenting. Does that even make sense?

So, my feeling is this... a pregnant mother is just that, a pregnant mother. All pregnant mothers have options and just because they are considering adoption doesn't mean they are 'potentially' a birthmom, KWIM? My personal feeling is that a women should be a pregnant mother (woman) until the time she makes her final decision.

Blessings,
Jenny

[votemom]

i don't understand why it is offensive. the person who gave birth and who is the blood/genetic/biological mother to the infant cannot be called the birthmom?

i don't mean to stir the pot, i guess i just don't get the issue.

the facts are the facts. if a woman gives up her child for adoption, it doesn't change the fact that she was the source of life for and gave birth to that child. nothing can ever change that fact.

[Lissa]

I have no experience with domestic adoption, but as the mother of a child adopted internationally while I have used the term birthmom it is not a term for which I'm very fond.

I have never met the woman who gave life to our daughter. But when and if I do, I will address her as Lydia's mother as I hope she will also address me. Until we meet she is her faraway mom and I am her mommy near.

[healingfeeling]

Originally Posted by Lissa

I have no experience with domestic adoption, but as the mother of a child adopted internationally while I have used the term birthmom it is not a term for which I'm very fond.

I have never met the woman who gave life to our daughter. But when and if I do, I will address her as Lydia's mother as I hope she will also address me. Until we meet she is her faraway mom and I am her mommy near.

Lissa, I love "faraway mom and mommy near"...so precious.....

Brandy to answer your question....

when my mom was in the home for unwed mothers back in the day she was considering adoption for me even though she did not choose adoption in the end....in NO WAY, SHAPE or FORM was she my birthmother even for that minute she considered it.....i don't even like the term "expectant birthmother or potential birthmother"....it just seems unnatural to me and takes away from that special bond that mother and child share...

[BrandyHagz]

Votemom, I urge you to re-read my post. I was not talking about nor do I want to debate the use of the term birthmom post placement.

My question is in regards to the name PRE birth and PRE placement.

[dmca]

prebirth:MOTHER
after adoption: place title here
If we can make it clear, perhaps some people who are waiting to adopt wouldn't feel like they have been "fooled" by the MOTHER deciding to keep her child.
The poster who said that it was coercive calling the mother a birthmother before birth has a strong point.
It places the MOTHER under obligation she may not want to fulfill, and places the people who want to adopt under "premature or false hope."

[Lylac]

My feelings are,
#1 You can't be a "birthmom" while your still pregnant, that implies that you've already given birth.
You are an expecting mom.

#2 considering an adoption plan, means just that..your thinking about possibly placing your child.
You are still the childs mom, until if/when you make a decision and act on it.

#3 If you chose to place your child, your still his/hers/their mom, just not the legal mom.
When I say legal, I mean the mom that is responsible for the day to day care, and the one that makes the decisions about things.

That would be like a smoker, thinking about quiting. You couldn't call yourself a non-smoker until you actually quit.

[bromanchik]

Originally Posted by BrandyHagz

If you can call a pregnant women a mother before the act of giving birth, it certainly stands to reason that you could call a pregnant woman considering adoption a birthmother before giving birth, so why the split hairs?

We can look at it from a legal standpoint: Considering adoption is not relinquishing, it is just considering adoption. Legally the parents are the pregnant mother and the father. Period. In the eyes of the law they are parents until the papers are signed and they are legally responsible in making any and all decisions regarding the baby.

Or you can look at it in terms of role. A pregnant woman is the mother because she not only gave the child half her genetic make-up, but in "mothering" the child, she is parenting. If the expectant mom is not parenting the child, than who is?

Or you can ask "Why do people believe that considering adoption makes an expectant mother "less than"? After all birthmothers have less rights, responsibilities and a totally different role than "mothers". I do not believe considering adoption should take away that role or those rights and responsibilities.

[FelAd]

Originally Posted by BrandyHagz

If you can call a pregnant women a mother before the act of giving birth, it certainly stands to reason that you could call a pregnant woman considering adoption a birthmother before giving birth, so why the split hairs?

I think that a pregnant woman being called a mother (provided she isn't going to have an abortion) is something that is going to happen, whether she picks adoption or parenting. Whether she is a mother or a birthmother doesn't matter, she will be a mother to this child. (Some would also argue that she is already a mother, because she is nurturing her child within her womb).

However, before she signs the adoption papers and terminates her parental rights, she is "Considering" adoption, and is entitled to change her mind, if she so chooses. Therefore, because she hasn't signed those papers, she still has the option of being a mother, and the term birthmother would not apply to her.

Also, it can be a real letdown for adoptive parents, if they call a woman a birthmother before she decides to be a birthmother, and then changes her mind to parent.

[sammyhas3]

I was going to be a MOM before I signed adoption papers...... I am still a MOM. I may not be a parent to this child but I will always a mom....... I am a parent to Two other childern that I raised and a mom to the daughter I am reunited with. Just a mom, why do they have to but a Lable one me because I chose something I thought was best ?.......... so I will always be a Birthmom to all my childern

[AMom2Two]

Originally Posted by BrandyHagz

If you can call a pregnant women a mother before the act of giving birth, it certainly stands to reason that you could call a pregnant woman considering adoption a birthmother before giving birth, so why the split hairs?

For me the pregnant woman is carrying a child therefore the title of mother is valid. She is with child. She is mothering the child in womb.

However, a birthmother can only be when she relinquishes her child. It's the act of relinquishing that makes her a birth mother. I feel that it should not be used PRIOR to placement. She is an expectant mother considering adoption.

I don't think the tem potential bmother makes the adoptive parents feel any more entitled to the child. I think that is a false statement. We've been counseled well that it is the expectant mothers baby until she signs away her rights PERIOD!!! Calling her an expectant mother/birth mother won't change a thing for the acouple, but for the expectant mother, the term birth mother could make her feel pressure to place.

Again, I don't think it should be used prior to birth. Our agency used expectant parent.

[Scarlet Moon 13]

Originally Posted by BrandyHagz

In an attempt to create a more positive environment for all of our members, I have been advocating for change within the site regarding the use of the term ‘Birthmother’ when discussing or addressing a pregnant woman who is considering an adoption plan.

One of the people I have been speaking with came back with the following statement, which is why I wanted to bring the statement to you:

If you can call a pregnant women a mother before the act of giving birth, it certainly stands to reason that you could call a pregnant woman considering adoption a birthmother before giving birth, so why the split hairs?

So, if we can call a pregnant woman a mother before giving birth, why do we have an issue with calling a birthmother a birthmother before she has terminated her rights?

This isn’t my opinion on things – again, this was presented to me when the discussion was opened up by someone who is not a part of our business, but by someone who does work in the industry and genuinely wanted to know what my answer was to that question.

This topic isn’t a debate – I’d rather not see this thread turn nasty, but rather give me ammunition for a discussion that will be forth coming in the weeks ahead.

At this point, I have expressed the opinion that all change comes with opposition – that in the end, someone will rally against it for the sole purpose of ‘this is how it’s always been’. At this point, I have had some favorable feedback on my request – but I would like additional information that I can take to the meetings regarding this topic.

My plan is to copy and print out your comments – as members of the adoption community (not just our community, but the adoption community at large) and take them with me to our meetings so that the people I work for and work with can see that this isn’t just a one woman campaign for change, it’s a campaign led for and supported by those who are members of the triad.

Again, I ask you not to turn this into a debate…simply state your opinions and move on – if you’d like to debate the pro’s and con’s of adoption terminology or the use of coercive language in adoption, please create another thread to do it in.

Thanks so much!

a pregant woman is an expectant mother..
a mother to be.
Whether that is going to be the outcome or not.

a birth mother is a woman young or old who has "given" away a baby to "adoption".

to a perspective adoptive parents, she may be a perspective birthmother..

but until the day she signs the final papers and her baby is gone from her life, she is just an expectant mother.

The entire time I was pregnant, he was MY baby, it didn't matter that I wasn't going to be allowed to keep him. While he was in my body, he was mine. He in no way belonged to any other mother until she took him home from the hospital.

I personally beleive that telling someone thinking about adoption or calling them a birth mother before the adoption is just another means or coercion. Another way of making her feel less able.

A way to convince her before the baby is born that the baby in her body is no longer hers..

I understand that some women really don't want their babies, for the few who feel that way it won't matter. I fully understand not being old enough, not being in a postion to raise your baby and having to give the baby up to adoption. I know what it is like to between a rock and hard place with no where to go.

But I see "no reason to take away the little time the perspective mother has, as the mother of her own child", by calling her a birthmother before the birth of the baby.

For those few times that she deicides at the last minute to keep her child, she needs to know she is still the mother of the child. Not the birthmother.

my opinion..

[pg13209]

I am posting on behalf of my bmom. When I asked her this question she said " I was your mother from the first time I knew you were inside of me. A mother makes decisions for her child in her life. My decision was to place you for adoption. Therefore, I was your mother before I had you and your bmom after. I no longer had the rights to make decisions for you."
This is the difference. When a expectant mother is pregnant it her her decision what to do with that pregnancy, what to eat etc..... So she is the mother all the way up until she decides to sign TPR.

[intladoptionblog]

I've been thinking about this for a while, so will drop in my .02 by starting out with a caveat: this is just IMHO.

Expecting means just that, you're expecting a child / expecting to be a mother. A pregnant woman is no more a mother (unless she has other children, of course) than the man whose seed got the process started is a father at that stage, or his mother is a grandmother.

It's all very romantic, of course, like writing your name with your boyfriend's last name before you're married, and a lovely sentiment, but not yet a fact.

Conversely, one can be a mother without ever having been pregnant, but once again, not until there's a child to be a mother to.

"Mother" like "father" and "parent" are also verbs.

When I was pregnant I washed baby clothes and gazed longingly into the empty cradle and dreamed of the day the baby would be in front of me, instead of inside of me. I was a different person than the non-pregnant me, certainly.

When we had our referral for our first adoption I washed baby clothes and gazed longingly into the empty cradle and dreamed of the day the baby would be in front of me instead of in an orphanage in another country, and I was different than the pre-referral person.

In neither case, however, was I a mother until I mothered.

Mothers are mothers when they mother. Birth mothers are birth mothers by virtuing of giving birth, the defining moment in mothering.

A pregnant woman is that, or expecting. A pregnant woman considering adoption is that.

[SchmennaLeigh]

I am still a Mother, 100%, to the child I miscarried earlier this year. She is always with me, in a different but similar way than the Munchkin.