A Natural Mother

Posted on

As most of my regular readers know, I refer to myself as a mother, or in relation to adoption, as being the natural mother of an adoptee (or natural mother, for short).   I reject the term “birthmother” to refer to myself, and “Birthmothers as Incubators,” explains the reason for this in more detail.

But the term natural mother may not be one which is familiar to you.  Let me explain a bit about it.

What is the origin of the term natural mother? Before the term birthmother was invented, the term natural mother was used throughout adoption-related literature. It was in the first modern child adoption law (Massachusetts, 1851) and is still in the laws of several states including California, Florida, Virginia, and Texas.

Some say the term natural parent means that the adoptive parents must therefore be unnatural.  I call this “playing the opposites game.”  By this reasoning, the opposite of birth parent is death parent.   Obviously, forming a false black and white dichotomy is no reason to reject the term “natural mother.”  (That is, unless you have adopted a child and really do enjoy being called a “death parent”… )

Instead, more accurately, the adjective “socially-created” contrasts with  “natural.”  Calling someone a natural mother refers to motherhood by the laws of Nature, while the adoptive mother is a mother by the modern legal and social process of child adoption.  It respects the reality that legal child adoption did not exist prior to 1851 (see “Why Adoption Is How it Is”).

Choosing to use the term natural mother to describe one’s self is a way of saying, “I am a mother, too. I never ceased having a mother’s love for my lost child.”  In using the term natural mother for her instead of birthmother, others are saying to her, “I respect you as a mother; you are not an incubator.”

Reclaiming the term natural mother—honouring ourselves and each other as being mothers and refusing to be defined/dehumanized as being walking incubators—is an empowering way to reclaim our dignity, pride, and humanity. And as Wade (1997, pp. 23-24) states, “resistance to violence and oppression is both a symptom of health and health-inducing.”

Reference:

  • Wade, Allan. 1997.  ”Small Acts of Living: Everyday Resistance to Violence and Other Forms of Oppression ”  Journal of Contemporary Family Therapy 19:23–40. doi: 10.1023/A:1026154215299
Advertisements

58 thoughts on “A Natural Mother

    von said:
    December 31, 2011 at 9:58 pm

    So important to reclaim words for ourselves. I am a bastard and a proud one.

      Elizabeth McBride said:
      December 31, 2011 at 10:14 pm

      I admit, as an adoptive mother, I have a hard time with the term bastard. But several of my friends are founders of Bastard Nation and I understand taking the word back for yourselves. And I will use the word when I’m talking with those friends but never with my 3 adult children or other adopted adults.

      7rin said:
      December 31, 2011 at 10:21 pm

      Trouble is, bastard isn’t always accurate either since it doesn’t cover the poor gits whose parents actually were married but still decided to abandon their kid?

        von said:
        January 1, 2012 at 9:38 pm

        I wasn’t talking about others just myself and I am definitely a bastard. I called my mother, my mother and my adopters parents, since they are dead more frequently adopters these days.Works for me.Words can be so punishing!

    Elizabeth McBride said:
    December 31, 2011 at 10:11 pm

    I tend to call my 3 children’s first mothers as their mothers when I’m talking to them, but I admit I have used the term birth mother when talking with others. I am more sensitive now that not all such mothers like the term so I try to use natural mother more. We still have been unable to find my 34 y.o. son’s mother, she has the very common name of Maria Garcia but I did finally find her hometown in Colombia so I haven’t given up yet. I found my 32 y.o. daughter’s mother when my daughter was 15. Sadly her mother had died but she now has relationships with her grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins. I found my 29 y.o. son’s mother in Colombia when he was 15, corresponded for a year, first visit at 16, met father at 17, and now visits about once/year. I love his mother and she loves me. This is the way it should be.

      Ana said:
      April 28, 2012 at 2:20 am

      Did you use a service to find your adopted childrens’ parents? I have a five year old girl adopted from Bogota and think it might be easier to go ahead and start the process of finding them now.

    7rin said:
    December 31, 2011 at 10:18 pm

    I disagree, utterly and emphatically.

    Natural mothers are moms who know what they’re doing, and who know how to parent their kids. Natural mothers can be, but aren’t always, a child’s biological parent. My amom was a natural mom, but never created any kids of her own. Me, my bmom, and my mat.bsis, are all biological moms, but to not a single one of us does being a mom come naturally. We’re all inherently bad at it, and not a single one of us should’ve had any kids at all.

    If you wanna get accurate, stick to biological and non-biological – it doesn’t get more accurate than that.

      Adoption Critic responded:
      December 31, 2011 at 10:38 pm

      7rin, I think you are using a different definition of the term “natural.” I would use the words “able,” “instinctive,” “capable,” “talented,” “skilled,” or “gifted” to describe what you are referring to. I do not like “biological” because it refers solely to gametes and reproductive organs, like what we study in biology class.

      BTW, it sounds like my own mother and your natural mother would get along famously — I was also raised by someone who had no business having children, no interest in children, and absolutely no empathy for any other human being. But she was still my natural mother, unfortunately, even if she was never a “mom” in the emotional sense of the word.

        7rin said:
        December 31, 2011 at 11:46 pm

        But you were talking about accuracy, not what you do and don’t like.

        You can’t have it both ways, either you want accuracy, or you don’t? Biological has never – ime, obviously – been misread as meaning anything other than biological. It’s not in the slightest bit ambiguous like ‘natural’ is.

        My ‘natural’ mother is my amom, not my bmom – hence the problem with ambiguous descriptions. Our bmoms’d still prolly get along though. **hug**

          Adoption Critic responded:
          January 5, 2012 at 6:06 am

          Ah! But regarding accuracy, the terms “biological mother” and “biological father” are now often being used to refer to the egg and sperm “donors” who contributed to an artificial conception! 🙂 Interestingly enough, I mentioned the term “birth mother” in conversation a few years ago, and the person I was talking to (a university educated, upper-middle class, well-read, well-travelled 40-something-yr-old) assumed that I was talking about a “surrogate mother.” So, I think that “natural mother” is perhaps as accurate as any. 🙂

            7rin said:
            January 9, 2012 at 6:38 am

            Lol. Yeah, I’ve heard similar – I still think biological is the best term though, at least until they start breeding us non-biologically. 😉

              jnsmom said:
              January 9, 2012 at 1:38 pm

              @7rin, if my son had your attitude I would have nothing to do with him. As a mother of the BSE and spending hundreds of hours researching what adoption is truly about, I can honestly say I am apalled at the way you discount the extortion and coercion mothers faced to have their children taken for benifit of infertile people and pure profit.
              You mother may have convicned herself it was in your best interest because she was most likely told that as a coercion tactic.
              Studies have shown that 97% of mothers did not want to lose thier child – and were lead to believe they didn’t have legal rights or resources to “fight”.
              My poor son had to grow up in a household of people that were not like him, didn’t look like him and didn’t understand him because they had no natural connection to him. He has paid a awful price for that. And for what? So an infertile woman could try to feel like a mom because she couldn’t deal with her own destiny – the one God chose for her, no children.
              Like it or not, adopters were the receipients of the crimes and theft. And had no concern of the mechanics behind the scenes that caused a baby to be delivered to them.

              naturalbornwoman said:
              January 10, 2012 at 12:20 am

              totally agree jnsmom

              Elizabeth McBride said:
              January 9, 2012 at 4:21 pm

              jnsmom, God has nothing to do with why some couples cannot conceive. I was not infertile, my husband had mumps as a teenager and was thus sterile. Was this God’s doing? No. If God were responsible for who gets pregnant and who doesn’t I can’t believe He’d allow alcoholics to get pregnant and give birth to babies with FAS, or drug addicts whose babies are born in withdrawal. Or 12 y.o. girls whose father rapes them night after night.

              naturalbornwoman said:
              January 10, 2012 at 12:18 am

              yes awful things happen to girls they are raped but should we punish them further by removing their babies and make them suffer wanting their babies for the rest of their lives…..every woman is entitled to their own babies…..people in your situation look at every excuse in the book to take a baby from its mother for your own needs……your husband was infertile from mumps there fore you cant have a baby…..what gives you the right to take someone elses sorry but god does put babies in womens bellies we are all part of creation…..we are all born here none of us are adopted……even adoptees have a mother or they wouldnt be here…..the adopter is not the mother…..they were the ones in need of children so they were taken from the mothers …….why not love the mother of the children you so desperately wanted is it too hard to love the mothers of the children you took into your homes that is not showing compassion at all …..taking babies from their mothers and then not wanting anything to do with the mothers is inhumane and not good for the children or their mothers……children do have mothers youknow even if you do adopt they still have mothers we are all born here……people say oh they are too young to have a baby well whats the solution then take their babies from them there is a word for that and its called stealing…..yep stealing children and newborns and calling it adoption…..thats really what adoption is and its about time it is exposed for what it is and who is exposing it the women who gave birth the mothers of course…..you have to give birth to be a mum there is no other way…..taking a baby from the mother does not make you that childs mother they are the carers of someone elses child that is what it amounts to…..adopters should never have been able to own children no one owns their children theyare born to us to raise and cherish our gifts from god…..so there…..

      Sam said:
      February 6, 2013 at 5:57 pm

      I am my child’s mother. Thanks.

      Unnatural mother said:
      November 27, 2013 at 4:37 pm

      Thanks for that! It’s almost like the term natural mom is a rationalization of a desire to claim the outcome of a child you had no hand in raising. I think I’ll switch to bio-mom. It is the most accurate.

    jnsmom said:
    December 31, 2011 at 10:45 pm

    A natural mom can only be the mom that gives birth to the child and shares in the long heritage and family roots that got them that far. Adopters simply can’t be that – it is impossible. They can be a “mom” and/or “mother” in the sense of a full time care giver, but unless they gave birth to a child they have not natural or bioligical connection.
    Motherhood can be instinctive also, which arises out of the gestation and birth of a child. Adopters may be good care givers, therefore called or feel they have earned the term “mom” or “mother” – fine. Just can’t usurp mother nature – an impossibility.

    gypsyqueen1 said:
    January 1, 2012 at 4:01 pm

    “Some say the term natural parent means that the adoptive parents must therefore be unnatural.”

    And why does every thing have to be about adoptive parents and making them unnatural and/ or how they feel? People are so quick to slap the ‘birthmother’ label on a mother, but balk at being called “adoptive parents”, as if they are the only parents of the child they are privileged to raise.

    They are NOT the natural parents. They are the adoptive parents, who are caring for the child of another woman, a NATURAL mother. Those are the facts, that can’t be erased away with a signature on a piece of paper.

    I think we can call ourselves whatever we want and if someone doesn’t like it then tough luck.

    myst1998 said:
    January 2, 2012 at 1:29 am

    Great post and it echos everything I have always explained to those who insist on using the abhorrent terminology adopters prefer.

    I agree, why should we be dictated to and have language changed just to nurse the insecurities of a bunch of people who just cannot be honest with themselves about their reasons to adopt? There is no such thing as a “birth” anything – that word simply refers to bringing a child into this world. I find it ludicrous that in the world ouside of adoption there is no prefix added to the word mother and it is generally accepted that the mother is the one who gave birth as in the NATURAL sense. Enter adoption and everything normal gets turned upside down to feed the egotistical and dishonest institution that adoption is.

    If people don’t like the term Natural Mother they can suck it up.

    Kathymom said:
    January 3, 2012 at 3:18 pm

    I am the first mother to my daughter, who was lost to adoption. I did not “choose” to lose her; I was convinced that I must. I always felt it was the wrong idea. Being called anything but her mother is so hurtful. I loved her for the nine months I carried her; for the 29 hours of labor I had to birth her; and for the 26 years I was separated from her. I searched and found her and we’ve been in a relationship for 13 years.
    I know that many adopters and adoptees prefer to use the birth-term. I think doing that only shows your anger towards your natural mother. Anger is natural but you should be big enough to admit you have it. I think using the birth-term somehow makes the natural mother “less than” your mother. Using the birth-term puts your mother down. That is your anger showing.
    My own daughter, when I asked her not to call me the birth-term, said that’s all she’d ever heard me called! Well, now we mothers who were first, are speaking up and asking to have more respect, to be called something else. All those years ago, we were shown so much disrespect and shame that we came to believe the lies. We were not bad girls, we were just young, vulnerable girls. We deserve respect. Now and forever.

      naturalbornwoman said:
      January 4, 2012 at 3:27 pm

      yes i wish my daughter to call me mum and turn her back on the people that raised her….she is not theirs she is mine…..they have had her for 33 years now i wil have her for the rest……i want my daughter so many adoptees say their mothers didnt want them….well i am a mum and i am not saying that because i told them i wanted my baby after she was born…..it didnt make any difference though they didnt respect my wishes…..i was taken to signpapers after i said i wanted her …..why did they do that…..how disrespectful towards me and my daughter……total disregard to her and my right to be with each other……she has no rights to be with me while she is with her bogus parents……they have denied my child her right to be with me her mother…….

        Adoption Critic responded:
        January 4, 2012 at 6:10 pm

        “she has no rights to be with me while she is with her bogus parent”

        Actually, Julie, if your daughter lives in Australia as you do, she has every right to associate with any other adult she decides to. She has a right to be with you, if both you and she so choose. The steps are: search -> reunion -> relationship -> restoration. But you cannot order or command an adult to do your bidding. That is against the law.

        And, as an adult, your daughter also has the inalienable right to decide who she considers to be her parents and treat that way. You are her mother, you know the truth. But it is impossible to expect our children, who may have been raised all their lives with lies, will know this truth. Your daughter grew up thinking you had abandoned her, which was absolutely not the case. In some cases, like the mother of 7rin who also commented here here, that is very true — as I recall, she was truly abandoned by her mother. But most of us did not abandon our infants. I hope that you and your daughter can build a relationship together. From experience though, I can tell you that it needs to be a relationship of equals, with full honesty, no demands, and no expectations.

          7rin said:
          January 9, 2012 at 6:31 am

          “7rin who also commented here here, that is very true — as I recall, she was truly abandoned by her mother”

          Just to clarify: According to her, she abandoned me because she loved me. She told me herself – she actually said “I did it because I loved you”. I still count it as abandonment and always will, since you don’t abandon your kid/s if you love them, you fight for them and strive to find ways to keep them and raise them as best as humanly possible.

          So no, if you ask her, she’ll never call it abandonment – but me, the one who it was done to, will never call it anything other than abandonment, since that’s what it is when you palm your kid/s off on to someone else to raise.

        7rin said:
        January 9, 2012 at 6:37 am

        “she has no rights to be with me while she is with her bogus parents”

        Y’know, if my mom came out with crap like that to me, our reunion (that only happened ’cause like you, she abandoned her daughter – me) would be instantly over, since she gave away any option to say such stuff the day she abandoned me.

        I only hope for your daughter’s sake you don’t come out with such crap to her – and if you do, I sincerely hopes she tells you where to get off. Hel, I don’t tell my 21 year old daughter that I didn’t abandon who she can and can’t associate with. I’d never speak to someone who tried to tell a 33 year old (guessing from the numbers you’ve used in your reply) who they can and can’t associate with ever again.

        If you truly wanted to keep your daughter, you should’ve refused to sign the papers. I’m guessing from what you’ve said ^here that you didn’t refuse – thus you were complicit in the abandonment of your daughter.

    Lorraine Dusky said:
    January 6, 2012 at 2:12 pm

    You are right that natural mother seems to be the correct one, even though I use all the terms, sometimes interchangeably.

    . What totally galls me is when adoptive parents, who know I am the one who had a child–can’t even stand when I refer to my daughter’s adoptive parents as her “adoptive” parents. They are her parents, as one amom told me once. I see this woman because she is a neighbor, but I never have thought of her in the same way again.

    Where do this get this right to so boldly say what they know must hurt? She is the adoptive mother of a Chinese girl and will always be. She is a good mother, but seriously, why consciously hurt a my feelings? I guess we are such sinners that it’s all right t say anything, we deserve to be embarrassed and hurt whenever.

      teddy1975 said:
      January 25, 2012 at 8:34 am

      A problem with “natural” is the meaning related to illegitimate, out-of-marriage, which is often, but not always the case with adoption.

    Tamara said:
    January 8, 2012 at 9:49 pm

    As an adoptee, I love the sound of natural mother. Having always felt “unnatural” by way of being adopted, different, sometimes feeling like an alien, and always set apart from other “normal” people. It makes me the same as everyone else, I have/had a NATURAL mother, I am the same as anyone else.

    I also grew up with the B-mother word and didn’t know it was a derogatory term until I was educated by blogs and moms. However, when we know better, we need to do better. I don’t equate my status as an adoptee reason or justification to continue using a hurtful term.

    Tamara

      naturalbornwoman said:
      January 9, 2012 at 12:07 am

      thankyou tamara for sharing that my daughter said the same that she felt like an alien growing up adopted….she used the biological mother term and i just said i am your mum and thats that…..she hated being adopted i was able to put her straight and tell her she was born……and i am her mother…..i asked the adoptive mother why she couldnt have children she said something about acid killing off the sperm before she could conceive……also she said her husband had a vasectomy after he lost his job this was later on down the track after they adopted the two babies……shesaid the last thing they needed was more children…….oh well they didnt need any more so he had a vasectomy…….gosh ……why did he bother i mean those children were not born to them those children already had a mum and dad they must have had them for so long that they actually thought they had given birth to them……scary stuff isnt it……thanks tamara for your respect to us women who gave birth to you …..the mums….

        Tamara said:
        January 9, 2012 at 12:58 am

        Dear “Mums”, and Thank you for being here, and allowing me to know my own Mother, who unfortunately passed before I found my family. I was completely in the dark about her, and her pain and experiences until I met other natural Moms. You have my respect.

        Tamara

          julie said:
          February 22, 2012 at 5:31 am

          thankyou tamara i had that feeling about our children we lost they have nothing but the utmost respect for their mothers who gave them their life…..thankyou so much

    vernice said:
    January 13, 2012 at 7:58 pm

    I don’t get it? You chose not to raise your child ( in most cases) and you want to be seen as “mom/natural mom” and do not respect the aparents for doing you job?

      jnsmom said:
      January 13, 2012 at 9:18 pm

      97.1% of the time the real mothers wanted to keep their children. They were now given that opportunity because needy infertile couples wanted to have children to raise. The profit in adoption is huge due to this.
      So how can you say real/natural mothers should be grateful to the very people that behind the scenes set in motion their needs for profit.

      Adoption Critic responded:
      January 13, 2012 at 9:27 pm

      I think that perhaps the fact that most of us (98% by the largest study) of us did not “choose” to give away our babies, may put this into perspective, that you are wrong that we chose not to raise our child. And the decision to call ourselves “natural mothers” has nothing to do with adoptive parents. They are still adoptive parents. They adopted a child through a legal/social process which began with the passage of the first child adoption law in 1851. But them raising that child does not mean that we are not mothers, fathers, parents as well. It is not one or the other. Us being parents does not mean that they are not parents — that is not my decision to make. Adoption exists today not because of unwanted babies, but because society deems some women (richer, older, married) to be better than others; a baby-selling market exists — an industry that convinces/pressures/forces mothers to surrender their infants — and this market has 50 yrs of research on how to separate mother from baby and make the mother think it was “her choice,” and an adoption business can make $30,000 and more per infant they can obtain and “broker.” That is a big financial incentive to coerce a mother to surrender. Should we honour adoptive parents for doing a job that we would have given anything, would have died, to have been allowed to do? No, they should be thanking us and apologizing for having taken this away from us once they personally learn that it had been taken by coercion. Some adoptive parents do, you know.

      But about coerced surrender, you can read my own story in this blog, typical for the 1950s through 1980s on how young single mothers were treated when targetting for “harvesting.” We did not “choose” adoption. If you look under the “Topics” page on my blog, for “Adoption Coercion”, and statistics on coercion, the coercion checklist, and mothers’ stories, you can see how much mothers loved and wanted to keep their babies.

      gypsyqueen1 said:
      January 13, 2012 at 10:18 pm

      Vernice, you and so many others make it so cut and dry. It is anything but…

      First and foremost, we ARE natural mothers to our children. What would be sufficient for you, that we ceased to exist altogether? I suspect that is the main problem for so many of you, that you know YOU are not the natural parents so feel the need do dehumanize and degrade those of us who are. You want respect, but give none to the women who lost so you could gain, the natural mothers of the children you covet.

      Secondly, most of us did not choose to live a life of pain and regret at losing out children. We, (I myself) were brainwashed and coerced into thinking we were doing the right thing when in fact it was far from being the best thing for our children and ourselves. Not only that, but I have to live with the knowledge that I allowed my child to be adopted by people who blatantly deceived me to ensure the procurement of my infant.

      AdoptionCritic said it very eloquently and there is not much more I can add to that, except for the fact that this is just a myth perpetuated by the industry and adopters alike, that we did not want our children. It makes it easier for you, I am sure, to live with the crime of humanity you and your baby brokers have worked together to ensure….the separation of an infant and his NATURAL mother.

      naturalbornwoman said:
      January 14, 2012 at 12:19 am

      couples applied for the job they couldnt have kids so it was an option for them adoption is an option for infertile couples thats about all it should never be an option for a baby who has a mother…..demanding children …..oh and then turning around and accusing the mothers of not wanting them ….how criminal surely you can choose not to adopt so babies get to stay with their mothers…….how do you think they get babies for you when you apply to adopt its up to the brokers to finda baby for you…..babies are born and should never be separated from their mothers if people really loved children they would love the mothers and leave the children with them where they belong……owning children legally is not good for children ……hiding their families from them is not good for them its all about selfish adopters……its never about the children……what about a childs right to be raised by their mothers……so often the children are forgotten in this……its the children who lost their mothers and had to fill in the needs of selfish couples unable to have them who apply to adopt……adoption is supposed to be there for children in need not for couples in need of children……thats why it has to be abolished and changed to legal guardianship……..

    Carolynn said:
    January 16, 2012 at 5:49 pm

    Wow…I vow never to adopt. These BIRTH MOTHERS want to blame the adoptive parents? Seriously?Let me get this straight… adoption agencies try to rape your pockets & then you get negative stigmas & attitudes from the BIRTH MOTHER and in some cases the adopted child? You talk about what God intended for infertile couples, yet you have birth a child out wedlock. This is not what God intended for children. Tisk…tisk…don’t be so quick to judge. Reading how the adoptive parents are painted as villains in so many articles has totally changed my opinion of Adoption. Why pay a ridiculous amount of money to an agency who exploits childless couples to receive such animosity? Life is too short to voluntarily add this kind of stress. To dedicate your life to a child, raising them & financially supporting them only to have the BIRTH MOTHER and/or child harbor such feelings…So Not Worth It! You’re just a selfish as the adoptive parents you speak of. How ungrateful! YES I SAID IT! I thought about adoption and was searching for ways to help our child understand our decision to adopt, their birth mothers decision and all the hard trials when i came across this garbage. I knew we’d be up against obstacles, but the lack of regard for the adoptive parents experiences and struggles with infertility….I didn’t expect. It’s one thing for outsiders aka society to criticize your family for being “different”. But to receive criticism from a child or BIRTH MOTHER that some adoptive parents go into debt ($40,000+) to give a loving home? That’s Crap! Why voluntarily put a target on your head for everyone including the child to stone you to death, I’ll pass!!! Thanks for the article and thoughts. I am forwarding your thoughts to other “would be adoptive parents”. It’s just not worth it! Conclusion: I will actively & aggressively pass word along to financially stable couples NOT to seek adoption using your site as one example not to fall for the trap. I will advocate that they enjoy their child free marriage, with the dog & extra vacations from their expendable income. I don’t feel sympathy for any of you anymore. According to most of you, you don’t want our sympathy anyway soooo YOU WIN! LOL…I will never adopt. Actually I feel a burden has been lifted off my chest. Thanks again & Best of Luck to all you “Angry Adoptees” 🙂

      gypsyqueen1 said:
      January 16, 2012 at 6:16 pm

      Oh you poor, poor altruistic adopter wanna be… Get over yourself, puhleeze…

      No one asked for sympathy from the likes of you, that is for sure and I am ever so glad to hear another holier than thou self righteous narcissist won’t be adopting. YAY!!!!!!!

        Carolynn said:
        January 17, 2012 at 4:40 am

        LOL….YAY!!!!!

      jnsmom said:
      January 16, 2012 at 8:45 pm

      Adopters don’t pay to give a child a loving home. They pay because they want their need meet, the desire for a child they cannot have on their own. And if they didn’t offer up so much money for this the adoption industry wouldn’t be a billion dollar a year business. Without the profit, the adopters paid baby seekers wouldn’t be in business to steal from, extort and/or coerce the mothers to surrender their children.

        Carolynn said:
        January 17, 2012 at 4:50 am

        I totally agree with you. They prey on unsuspecting mothers and then dangle the child in front of childless couples like meat over a Lion’s Den. It’s unethical. I’ve always been a strong person with tough skin and life hasn’t always been peachy. I’ll be fine. You don’t get everything you want in life and my will not to be exploited far outweighs my need (as you’ve stated) to parent a child.

      Adoption Critic responded:
      January 16, 2012 at 9:13 pm

      Carolynn, yes please tell your adoptive parent friends about this. Unfortunately you, and likely they, have been reading too much material put out by adoption agencies. That $40,000 fee? That is the incentive that agencies have to coerce mothers to surrender their infants, and coercion it is. And the reason for it is that in North America, it is not illegal for an agency to sell infants at a “market price.” In many other nations, this would be recognized as being human trafficking. I would like to think that you have the morality to not wish to engage in human trafficking, most people do, but unfortunately the adoption industry pulls the wool over most people’s eyes by making it look every so beautiful and special.

      Did you know that for most mothers who have lost children to adoption, there was no decision? It was not their choice, because there was no freedom of choice for them. Whenever coercion enters the picture, freedom of choice is removed. And why is this? Well, according to Adoptive Families magazine, back in 2000, there was a market demand of an estimated 40 couples vying for every healthy newborn available for adoption purposes. It is not a “decision” if the mother cannot recover first from giving birth so she is not affected by pregnancy and birthing hormones. It is not a decision if pre-birth contact with PAPs causes her to fall in love with them due to soaring oxytocin levels.

      No, I am not a “birthmother” because I am still a mother to the son I lost to adoption. Never have been, despite the capital letters you use in your comment.

      I highly recommend having a child of your own rather than adopting, even if you have to go the IVF route to do it. That is the advantage of not waiting until your eggs have rotted, but having a child while in your 20s when your body is at its peak fertile period — you don’t have to buy someone else’s child or contribute to the consumer demand that drives the adoption industry.

      BUT regarding being child-free, many friends and relatives of mine have remained child-free and have enjoyed their lives. They have even had the freedom to love their nieces, nephews, or friends children if they so wanted to, without feeling pressure to adopt and raise a strangers’ child to substitute for the child of their own they could not have. There is nothing wrong with that decision either.

      I commend you for deciding not to adopt. The adoption industry is extremely unethical, profit-driven, and it exploits both the natural parents and the people who want to adopt. I recommend learning more about it, and why we who have lost children to coerced/manipulated adoption have NO interest in being “grateful” to those who had the money to buy our child. Are you interested in learning more? If so, I can provide links.

        Carolynn said:
        January 17, 2012 at 4:42 am

        Thanks! You guys can have each other.

      Sam said:
      February 6, 2013 at 6:02 pm

      The only people who are “exploited” by others are the NATURAL MOTHER and her infant. You adopters exploit yourselves if you are stupid enough to buy an infant from a baby broker.

      anyaish said:
      January 3, 2014 at 4:45 am

      I am presently holding a beautiful, blue-eyed, strawberry-haired infant. I cannot go out in public without a stranger coming up to me to tell me what an adorable baby I have. I am not married to her father. I am not very old, do not have the best job nor the most money. I will probably not enjoy vacations or expendable income for the next twenty years. And you know what? I’m glad. I’m sooooooo happy that she is in MY arms right now and not yours. Nasty INFERTILE. Yeah, I said it – INFERTILE. Can’t have what came without effort to me. And it’s soooOooooOoooo unfair. You’re more deserving. Yet a soundly sleeping little bundle of love does not grace your arms. I have won. I hope you never are allowed to adopt a child – it seems evident you wouldn’t be respectful of that child… that child who you’d, perhaps, expect to be sympathetic to your inability to make a *real* child of your own? Right on. Also, I am endlessly grateful to people who put out blogs like this. Their stories, realities, are available to me and prevented me from potentially making a decision I surely would have regretted. INFERTILE, my beautiful baby is mine. And you haven’t one at all. Please do enjoy your vacations and your dogs.

    Elizabeth McBride said:
    February 21, 2012 at 5:02 am

    For some reason I just tonight received a reply from Naturalbornwoman made on Jan 10, 2012, more than 6 weeks ago. Newsflash, no one owns their children. You do not own your children, I do not own my children. One of my children was literally dropped off at an orphanage with no information. Another one was taken to the orphanage by his mother. She and I are now friends, and she has told me her story from her own mouth. And one was placed for adoption because the mother’s blood, natural parents forbid her to bring her baby home. So much for the bonds of blood. I found the natural parents for 2 of my children when they were minors, they’ve long had ongoing relationships with their natural families. Lucky for all of us we love one another.

    Naturalbornwoman, your daughter is 33 years old. She does not belong to you or to her adopters. She’s an adult and is free to have whatever relationships she wants with whomever she wants.

      gypsyqueen1 said:
      February 22, 2012 at 2:40 am

      Elizabeth, you may like to speak for the mother’s of the children you covet, however you don’t and won’t speak for me or countess other mothers of adoption loss.

      Newsflash, no noone does own their children (funny you mention that though, because the adopters who hoard my child sure act like they ‘own’ him), but a child that comes from my body is my flesh and blood, not yours. So much for the bonds of blood? That’s why you are here with your attempt to denounce it, right?

        Elizabeth McBride said:
        February 22, 2012 at 4:03 am

        Gypsyqueen, iI agree with you, no one owns a child, not you, not me, not anyone. That is what I told Naturalbornwoman (above). Children are not property though they are sometimes treated that way, as are women. Of course a child who comes from your body is your flesh and blood. Anyone who says differently obviously knows nothing of biology. I speak for myself. I covet no one’s children. My children’s natural mothers speak for themselves. I’m sorry you somehow lost your son, and hope someday he is back in your life.

          Tamara said:
          February 22, 2012 at 5:57 am

          I’m not even sure who I am responding to at this point, these notifications have been popping up in my email all day, and in trying to not get triggered, I have been deleting them. However, I find I cannot anymore.

          How do I give an example of the mindf*ck that all this who owns the kid thing is. First off, I thought that slavery was outlawed by the 13th amendment… the adoptress is right, no one owns anyone. However… belonging to someone is a different concept. Belonging to a line, or a heritage, or a village, or a tribe. It can’t be replaced, and it can’t be faked. It can’t, for lack of a better word, be “adopted” just because you wish it was so, or because you don’t wish it so, but you know of no other options. (that secrecy thing is a real bitch, believe it.)

          Anyhow, as an adult adoptee, I find it not only highly insulting to be that piece of flesh that completed someone’s family, but incredibly insensitive to the lovely human being(s) who made that possible for those who had “more” in the way of money or status or circumstance. Your family was built on someones pain. If you can’t own that, you are doing a diservice to their child (whom you claim as yours) How dare you minimize that fact. That’s right, I said FACT. Even a natural mom who dropped of thier child at an ophanage experienced pain. How dare you judge the circumstances of the woman who, in my adopted mothers words “gave me the greatest gift of my life” and in the next breath, called that “gift giver” a 14 year old little slut. I know that is an extreme visual, and will probably cause many who should look at their behavior and thinking, excuse themselves from the conversation, but any shade of that rather obvious and callous example is insidious and painful to the object of everyones desire.

          RESPECT. Where is it? Where is the respect, even if you disagree, or your own very powerful insecurities get the better of you… where is the respect for the person who suffers still so you could have a faux experience at their expense? I am your child 48 years later, should you continue to lie to yourselves, and to him/her. You are disrespecting their MOTHER. Wake up. My mom died before I found her, but she has my Love, and my respect for her pain.

          Tamara

            Elizabeth McBride said:
            February 22, 2012 at 6:32 am

            Tamara, I’m sorry your mother died before you could be reunited. The same thing happened with my daughter. It was so sad when I learned her mother had died. She died in a car accident 7 years after she had her daughter. She had a premonition of dying and so left a letter for her daughter. It doesn’t come close to replacing a reunion but my daughter is very glad to have this letter. Her mother had entrusted it with her brother, who kept it and when I located the family he gave it to his niece.

      Adoption Critic responded:
      February 22, 2012 at 3:33 am

      My experience learning that adoption is all about “ownership” came from the people who adopted my son. About 18 months into my reunion, in 2001, when they were forcing him to end all contact with me, the adoptive father sent me an email stating, amongst other things: “R is a member of this family and will NOT be shared in any way, shape, or form” and “R has only one mother, Karen, and only one father, myself.” 😦

      The interesting thing is that many adoptive parents in various support groups and boards have heard this story, and NONE of them have ever expressed the opinion that it was wrong. Elizabeth, do you agree with what they did, that they had the right to say this? Will you be the first adoptive parent to say that they were wrong? If so, you are one in a hundred.

      The night before they sent this to me, they also held him and emotionally tortured him for 4 hours one night, until 4 am, until he finally told them what they wanted to hear: that I was not his mother. I only found this out a year later, as for an entire year he was too traumatized to speak of it.

      So, I learned first-hand that adoption is all about ownership, who has the “papers” given “title” to the person who was adopted. Like a “Certificate of Title” when you purchase land, it goes into your name and proves “ownership.” This, to me, is adoption. It is all about keeping the natural mother separated from her child, “less than” the adoptive mother, without any relevance in her child’s life. 😦

      Elizabeth, hearing that at least one of the natural mothers of the children you adopted was coerced into surrendering that child, would you support that mother adopting-back her child if both of them wanted it?

    Elizabeth McBride said:
    February 22, 2012 at 4:11 am

    Adoption Critic, the natural mother of my daughter, who was in my mind definitely coerced, is deceased. Her daughter, my daughter is 34 years old. We didn’t learn until 15 years after the adoption that her mother had died a few years after the adoption. I did ask, at the time of adoption, if her mother would be interested in an open adoption, which was not something practiced at the time, and was told by the agency oh no, that is not a possibility. I seriously doubt her mother was even asked.

    How old is your son? His adopters sound like a nightmare. The reality of adoption is that every adopted person has two sets of parents, it is illogical to deny that. I hope your son can escape that kind of control.

      Adoption Critic responded:
      February 22, 2012 at 5:58 am

      Hi Elizabeth. Thank you for asking. My son just turned 32 yesterday, which was a difficult day for both of us (as always). The day he was born, and the day we were separated from one another minutes later.

      That incident I describe above occurred when he was 21. We had been in constant contact up until then, from the time we reunited (a day before his 20th birthday), but after that evening of the 4 hours of abuse, I did not see him for 4 months. He told me he emotionally cut himself off from everyone during that time. After 4 months, we resumed contact.

      But he was never allowed to spend much time visiting us though, even on school breaks. They never approved of him visiting us (we lived in towns 5 hours apart). That September, when he was 22, after staying with us a week (the longest stay ever — most times he was only allowed 1 or 2 days), he decided to make it two weeks — and they told him when he arrived back that they wished he had never come to that family.

      Another incident happened on Thanksgiving Sunday in October. While visiting us that weekend, he came down with a 103-degree fever (influenza) and wasn’t well enough to make the return drive back to them that evening. They marched down to their local RCMP and tried to get me arrested for kidnapping. Now, these are very intelligent people — it wasn’t due to ignorance that they did this. The man was a high-school vice-principal and math teacher until he retired, and she was a department head at a local technical college. Both have Masters degrees. But kidnapping? I guess it was that ownership thing again.

      On a visit that Christmas, 2002, he made the decision not to return to their house. They told him that he has been kidnapped and brainwashed. I guess, he is not living up to what adoption promised them — a child “as if born to” them. 😦 And, of course in their eyes, it is still all my fault for “interfering” in his life (a.k.a. reunion, which they also told me was just a fantasy of mine). They still do not recognize my existence, or that I am in any way related to him. Nor do they believe they have ever done anything wrong. My son says that they need to admit responsibility for everything they have done to hurt he and I and apologize for it before he has anything to do with them again. I am not holding my breath.

        Tamara said:
        February 22, 2012 at 6:07 am

        I’m so proud of your son. He beat Stockholm Syndrome. Funny how that is what they are accusing you/he of, isn’t it? Exactly what they did. Biology wins.. and the love of a Mother wins. xoxo Bless you in your reunion.

        Tamara

        Elizabeth McBride said:
        February 22, 2012 at 6:25 am

        Here I thought your son might be a minor, the way his adopters were acting. For God’s sake he’s an adult and is free to have a relationship with anyone he chooses. They may be highly educated but there must be some mental health issues there. That is just bizarre to accuse you of kidnapping an adult. He doesn’t need their permission for anything. Don’t they understand that in negating you they negate him? I would say he’s better off without them. Are there any other children in the family? q

          Tamara said:
          February 22, 2012 at 7:33 am

          “Don’t they understand that in negating you they negate him?” …. this is so much more common than any human being with a heart, soul or conscience would tolerate, and yet it is encouraged and propigated daily and without restraint. Every single thing that is said or intimated to the adoptee about their parents is internalized and translated into “that’s about me”.

          HUGE hugs to “adoption critic” and her son! I live vicariously through you, and am rooting for your 1000%!

          Tamara

          naturalbornwoman said:
          April 28, 2012 at 1:59 pm

          yes they are adults now but so am i what about my rights to my child i am her mother i went to collect her from the hospital 10 days after her birth with my parents her grandparents they told me she wasnt there when i met her 18years later i found out from the female adopter that shewas in fact still in that hospital….oh i had no idea where she was cause adoption blocks the mothers name right out of the childs life….the worse part is the adopters know the mothers name and when i child wants to search they dont tell them that info…..great lot arent they these adopters who covet babies……oh and adoption is in no way a loving compassionate act there is nothing loving and compassionate about taking a little baby away from the mother it has known for nearly a year…..the greatest trauma done to children was the separation….it was a huge trauma for these children…..to use children to fill in the needs of the childless is against humanity…..in fact it left the mother childless….and a non person….we lost ourmotherhood and ourbaby…..we didnt ask to sign papers our babies if they were given tous after birthing them as the law required would have been taken home by us…..they had no right to ever mention adoption to any woman who had just given birth…..if they did as thelaw required and not ever mentioned adoption to a mother who just had a baby there would be no babies to adopt…..itwas all for the infertile couples……it was their need no one thought about what was in the childs best interest…….its always inababys best interest to be with their mother……no one has two sets of parents it impossible to have two sets of parents we all have one set of parents…..the adopters were born here too all of them have a mother…..perhaps they should put themselves in the shoes of thechildren….howwould they like to find out the people they had called mum and dad for all those years were in fact not their parents….how would they liked to have lived a lie…..i mean when it all boils down toit how many of us really know if the person we are calling mum and dad are really our mum and dad……cause adoptive parents have a birth certificate which states they gave birth tothe child they adopted……that is absolutely disgusting making out they are the birth parents….blasted liars and the legal system all set up forthem they had all therights on their side and the child……themother who laboured forhours got no baby and no rights toher own child……heartless uncompassionate uncaring couples …..who never gave one thought to the babies mother…..just took her baby and forgot about her left her torot in the street not knowing where her baby is…..you know what you did youadopters you know full well you went and picked up the baby from the hospital……i spoke to an adoptee recently she was one of three she is the oldest and whenthey went to get her brother after he was born she just thought thats theway it happened…..they just went to the hospital picked him up and took him home…..when she had her own children she soon learnt the truth and reverted back to her real name and fleed the adopters for fear of losing her children…..oh yeah theft big time…….walking intohospitals picking up babies and running off with them and calling it adoption……it was theperfect crime…..absolutely criminal until you get found out….allthose stolen children are nothappy…..its stealing no two waysabout it when you take a baby from a mother its stealing…..no different to taking a baby out of a stroller in the street and registering it in your name at the bdm dept thats exactly what happened………and they have been caught big time……bout time they were too cause babies belong with their mothers and fathers

    Becky searching for her birth mother said:
    May 15, 2013 at 8:48 pm

    This was really interesting to read from your post to all of the comments. I feel like it changes my look on looking for my birth mother.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s