Language in general is revolutionary and more awareness ahs become of the fact that adoption triad members are varying and sometimes conflicting perspectives in regards to the term birth mother, natural mother, and first mother.

I think that there are several adoptive families that understandably do not want to feel different. They may dislike having their status repeatedly pointed out to them.

Whether we like it or not, adoption is not the same as having a natural or biological family. The fact is that adoption is not going to go away and adoption related losses need to be acknowledged. Correct me if I am wrong but given a choice wouldn’t an adoptive mother preferred to give birth to their own biological child and most natural mothers in the closed adoption era placed their child for adoption because they were unsupported and had no other viable option. My point is that adoption was a solution of last resort for a sizeable percentage of adoptive and natural parents but is also a valid and wonderful way to form a family.

For an adoptee, one of the most controversial issues they are faced with is what to call the woman who carried them for 9 months, gave birth to the child, and signed adoption papers. They are faced with several terms such as natural mother, birth mother, biological mother, first mother, and real mother.

I can’t speak for all adoptees but I think it is safe to say that a majority would agree that and adoptees parents in the everyday sense of the word are those who raised him or her. I know there are some that will disagree but I have to say that it is my opinion that referring to the adoptee’s first parents as the man and woman who shared in the adoptees conception minimizes and disrespects the significance of the this first relationship and bond between the adoptee and his or her natural parents. The term that an adoptee chooses to refer should not be used as a smokescreen for marginalization.