Insight! Open Adoption Resources and Support
Committed to providing the most current, accurate and thoughtful information on open adoption.

A Few Words on Words in Adoption

In adoption, as in life, it is not always what we say, but how we say it that matters. This is, in part, because words in and of themselves, are only tools. Tone, body language and, most importantly the context we use, often reflect our underlying meaning. It is also important to note that personal experience and understanding also effect how words are heard. Therefore, any discussion on adoption language has to take in to account both how the words are used and how others interpret them.

Look in any dictionary and you will find at least two definitions for many words. Add to this the emotions, past experiences and associations that one individual has with a particular word, and it is often hard to discern what a person's definition of the word is. Too often we assume that our definition of a word is the same as everyone else's.

History

Just as there has been an evolution in adoption practice, so too has the language of adoption evolved. Take, for instance, the word "illegitimate". It is a word rarely used in adoption today, but as the following excerpt from The Willows, a commercial maternity home in Kansas City, MO, illustrates it was used freely in 1926.

"Here again you may have some scruples about illegitimacy because certain facts are unknown to you. To begin with, here in our home, we have only illegitimate children for adoption, the offspring of young women of good families who thru lack of proper supervision or misplaced confidence, have erred against society," and "And remember since high grade married people are not giving up their children for adoption, your baby will be of illegitimate birth." The Willows Magazine, 1926.

Let's take a look at more recent developments. In 1979 Marrietta Spencer, a Minneapolis social worker, wrote an article entitled "The Terminology of Adoption" for the Child Welfare League of America. It laid the groundwork for her work on "Constructive Adoption Terminology", that would later evolve into Pat Johnson's work on "Positive Adoption Language" (PAL) and Speaking Positively: Using Respective Adoptive Language (RAL). All of these works were developed to help adopted people, birthparents, adoptive parents and adoption professionals find the right words to convey the reality of their adoption experience.

Finding simple terms that apply to everyone's experience is obviously a challenge, and I would say an impossibility. In the first place, not everyone has the same experience with adoption, and, as mentioned previously, words often hold different meanings based on an individual's experience with it. Another difficulty is that terms that elevate one person's experience, often diminishes someone else's. Speaking thoughtfully is not only about relating our own experience accurately, but taking other's experiences into account as well.

Another factor to take into consideration is that some words, even if used with the best intentions, have an effect on how people view themselves, others and their actions. A primary example of this is the use of the word birthmother to describe a pregnant woman considering adoption for her baby. Using the term birthmother in this way is inappropriate, as in adoption circles a birthmother is someone who has relinquished her rights to parent her child. Many birthmothers have stated that being given the title birthmother before their decision was final acted as a form of subtle coercion in that they began to see themselves as birthmothers prior to making a final decision. Additionally, prospective adoptive parents who are "matched" with these expectant mothers, may also have a harder time accepting the mother's decision to parent her child if they have already believe her to be a birthmother. In fact I have heard a number of pre-adoptive parents refer to a pregnant mother as the birthmother of their child, or simply our birthmother.

Other words are simply loaded. Take, for instance, the use of the word family. In adoption language it is a word that is often preceded by another word…adoptive family, birth family, and foster family immediately come to mind. For those who in these families, these descriptions of their family can seem diminishing. They see themselves as family, pure and simple.

Part of the problem is that many hold dear in their hearts a "Leave it to Beaver" image of what family is. The general public, while enamored of the nuclear family, need only look at their own families to see that the definition of family is changing. One child's familial connections may include parents, step-parents, grandparents, god-parents, foster parents, aunts and uncles, step-brothers and sisters, and in the case of adoption, birthfamily.

It is important in adoption to define exactly what an adoptive family is. For years, adoptive parents were told that they should "take the baby home and act as if they were born to you." The theory was that by severing all ties with the birthfamily, adoptive parents would be able to create a family "all their own." Babies were seen as "clean slates" and genetic influences were considered minimal at best. The only importance birthparents held during those years were if the adopted child started acting out as a teen-ager. The adopted child then turned from "one of their own" into "a bad seed".

back to top

Legally, the language was, and continues to be, language that insulates the adopted person and his or her adoptive parents from the birthfamily. Nowhere is this better illustrated than in the sealed records laws that most states still hold near and dear to their hearts.

In more recent writing, Pat Johnson, in her article Speaking Positively: Using Respectful Adoption Language states: "The reality is that adoption is a method of joining a family, just as in birth." While she goes on to say that "the impact of adoption must be acknowledged" nowhere does she discuss the connections in adoption. The fact is a child comes into their adoptive family bringing with them a whole set of family members that they are connected to by birth. This is true whether or not the child's birthfamily is known or unknown. The child will always carry these connections in their cells, in their shape of their jaw, the way they laugh, in their temperament and talents. It is, therefore, important to use language that honors and acknowledges all the connections in an adopted person's life.

Adoption language that is inclusive acknowledges that, unlike birth, building a family by adoption extends the family beyond the child him or herself. In both international and domestic transracial adoption for example, the whole family becomes a transracial family. Or, in the words of Beth Hall and Gail Steinberg, the authors of Inside Transracial Adoption , "When a family adopts members of different races, each person receives the opportunity to understand and experience life from a new point of view never before imagined. The family as a whole has the chance to move forward to develop its own new form." I would say that their philosophy of transracial adoption is a good starting point for those in all types of adoption to embrace. Adoption should expand our view of family, not restrict it to what we believed family to be. In that way everyone who is a part of the one adopted is embraced and everything that it is a part of the one adopted, whether it be culture or country, talent or temperament is honored.

Unlike most articles on adoption language this one will not end with a little chart that diagrams old and new terms. Instead, I will offer you a few questions to hopefully help you think about the meaning of the words you use in adoption.

1) Do you or others use the word with a silent, but intended, only in front of it? [As in "She is (only) his birthmother." Or "They are (only) his adoptive family."]

2) Does your language honor the connections that exist? [For example, calling an expectant mother, or an adoptive mother, "mom".]

3) Do you use qualifying language inappropriately to diminish others? [As in "She's not one of their own, she's adopted." or "He's not her real father."]

4) Do you use terms in a derogatory manner as a way of diminishing another's role? [Such as calling a birthmother a "host mother", calling a birthfather a "sperm donor", or calling adoptive parents "the adopters".]

5) Does your language reflect the reality of the situation, both legally and practically? [For example, Pat Johnson, using RAL, refers to the term reunion this way. "While children adopted at an older age may indeed experience a reunion, most adoptees join their families as infants, and as such they have no common store of memories or experience such as are traditionally shared in a reunion." Personally I find this description diminishing of the connections between an adopted person and his or her birthfamily. We often go to "family reunions" where the connections between people are based on extended family ties and not on a previous extended relationship.]

6) Do you use words that have other, more common associations? [On the internet one of the acronyms used for birthmother is BM. Prospective adoptive parents are sometimes referred to as PAP's. Need I say more?]

7) Have you asked others involved how they would like to be addressed or referred to? [Many adopted persons I know prefer that term to adoptee According to Dr. G. William Troxler , "The term "adoptee" is a linguistic diminutive intended to keep adopted people servile. That is to say an adoptee is in a position of subservience just as an employee is to an employer or as a lessee is to a lessor." Other see no problem with referring to themselves as adoptees.]

8) Do you continue to use language that others find offensive? [If you know, for example, that your daughter's birthmother really dislikes the term "our birthmother" when she is being referred to, than to continue using the word would be insensitive..]

Adoption language that is honorable, respectful and thoughtful honors all the connections inherent in adoption. Whether those connections exist through law, blood or love.

back to top

Duplication Policy - Articles, stories, poems and other written materials can be copied for one-time personal use only. Professionals who wish to use these articles in their practice must contact Brenda Romanchik at 248-543-0997 for more information. All materials on this site hold copyrights and cannot be used without permission.

Copyright 2001-2010 Insight - last updated March 31, 2010

Brenda Romanchik ~ 248-543-0997 ~ brenr@openadoptioninsight.org