A Gift of Hope Adoptions

The concept of open adoption is simultaneously understood and vastly misconstrued. Openness in adoption refers to the level of contact between the birth family and the adoptive family. In the US historically adoptions were closed; there was no contact between either party. The birth mother gave birth and the child was whisked away never to be seen or heard from again, and from the adoptive parents point of view a baby magically appeared in a bassinette and a smiling nurse or social worker handed him/her over at the appointed time. This has (thankfully) fallen out of favor in the adoption community, although the stereotype still persists. Now birth parents usually participate in the selection of the adoptive family and maintain some sort of contact during the child’s life, whether via updates such as photos and letters, through social media, phone contact, or in person visits.

The level of openness depends on the type and frequency of contact between the birth and adoptive families. The confusion comes when someone tries to call one type of adoption an “open adoption.” Openness is really more of a range or a scale than a defined type of adoption. The more contact you have the more open it is, rather than x y and z = an open adoption. So if you hear someone say “I want an open adoption” that usually means “I want some form of contact in my adoption relationship.” So the real question is, “What type of contact and frequency of contact do you want?” At A Gift of Hope Adoptions rather than asking whether a particular client wants an open, semi-open or closed adoption we ask what type of contact do you want before, during and after the placement. The reality is most adoptions are classified as semi-open (or semi-closed, depending on your personal philosophy). It is also important to note that the level of openness changes during the lives of those involved; contact is more fluid than set in stone. Being flexible and attentive to where the other party is in their own personal process is essential to an effective relationship.

Another misconception comes with advocates of either side. As I said, most adoptions fall in the semi-open range, and this is usually the best case scenario for everyone, particularly the child. Many parents forget that the point of adoption is for the best interest of the child. If the point of adoption is to find a family for a child who needs one, then it is vitally important that we provide that child as complete a history as we can. Everyone is curious to know where they come from, and as parents we are obliged to aid our children in identity formation, whether that is comfortable for us or not. Completely closed adoption cut off a child from his or her history, and while completely open adoptions may or not be in the child's best interest depending on the circumstances (ie if the birth parents are out of the picture for abuse/neglect reasons) that child still deserves to know why adoption was the best option, as is maturity appropriate of course.

Of all the terms we define Birth Mother might have the most synonyms and be the most controversial. You will see it written in many forms – birth mother, birthmother, first mother, biological mother and natural mother are a few of the most common. Simply put, a birth mother is a woman who has given birth to a child. In the adoption world however, a far greater meaning is placed on a birth mother, as usually a birth mother is a woman who has placed her child for adoption.

Seems simple, but the history of the term is fraught with controversy. The history of adoption and many legal documents use the term "natural mother" to differentiate between a woman who has placed a baby for adoption and a woman who has adopted that child; however, modern adoptive parents object to the term because it makes them the "unnatural parent." Legally, when you adopt a child that child becomes your responsibility as if he/she/they had been born to you, and you raise that child as naturally or unnaturally as any other child, depending on your parenting style. Understandably, no one wants the label "unnatural mother" so the term birth or biological mother has been used for some time. Birth mother seems to be the most common term, even with the rise of Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART). ART can involve donor eggs, sperm or embryos, which means the birth mother is possibly not the biological mother, but still the legal parent (usually).

So where's the controversy and why do we hear more "first mother" and "expectant parent" labels as preferable to "birth mother"? The term "first mother" is more common among women who feel that they were forced to place their children for adoption and regret that decision later. Often it is used among women of the Baby-Snatch Era (BSE) of the 50's, 60's and 70's where single mothers and women who gave birth out of wedlock were stereotypically frowned upon. These are the stories of a teenager who went to visit an aunt out of state and came back later a different girl, as she had given birth and placed a child for adoption unbeknownst to any of her friends. Usually these girls felt they had no other choice due to pressure by family and society, but later regretted both the circumstances and the secretive nature of everything, particularly if they desired contact with the adoptive family and their child. They prefer "first mother" because they don't see themselves as a voluntary birth mother, feeling instead they would have raised the child themselves given the option and support. Indeed some object to the term birth mother because they feel it softens the picture and obscures the nature of the circumstances surrounding the forced adoption.

While the situations of the BSE and any adoption where the birth mother feels forced or coerced are undeniably regrettable and wrong, most private adoptions (meaning no state involvement due to abuse or neglect) are in fact voluntary now, and most have some degree of openness where the birth mother is allowed to choose the adoptive family and keep in touch in most cases. This is a positive shift in my opinion, and makes adoption a more real option for women in crisis pregnancy situations. However many are claiming that women are not "birth mothers" until they have actually placed a child for adoption – until then they are expectant parents. I see this line of reasoning, as it theoretically takes the pressure off a woman in a situation where she is deciding whether to raise her child or make an adoption plan. However, no one is a birth mother until she actually gives birth anyway, so I think that probably a more accurate term would be "prospective birth mother" or "potential birth mother" – often abbreviated as PBM – for a woman who is actively making an adoption plan for her child while still pregnant. After all, those who raise their biological children are also expectant parents when pregnant, but occasionally a tragedy such as a miscarriage makes them not birth parents. Again, it's merely a question of semantics.

I should note, I tend to separate it as "Birth Mother" rather than birthmother partly for grammar reasons but also out of respect for all mothers. Both a birth mother and an adoptive mother are mothers and should be respected as such, even if their parenting takes on vastly different capacities. We always tell our birth moms that even by considering adoption they are being the best parents they can be, because they are actively considering what will be best for their child. I think no one can argue that putting your child first makes you a good parent, even if that means making the difficult decision to allow someone else to raise your child.

Are you considering adoption as a potential birth parent? Feel free to check out our waiting adoptive families, and get more information about our services or speak to a counselor by filling out our contact form.

So it seems kind of obvious, but I thought it might be instructive to start the Adoption Glossary series with the definition of adoption. Adoption is the legal process by which you become the parent of a child who is not your biological child. This means that you assume all rights and responsibilities for that child as if he/she/they are born to you (this is actually the phrase you hear at many court hearings – “as if they were born to you”.) The child is the legal heir of the adoptive parents and has all the rights and privileges inherent to being someone’s child.

Sounds simple enough, but I assure you the process is never quite as simple as the definition. Now that we know what adoption IS it is equally important to make sure we know what it IS NOT. Adoption is not informal; it is an inherently formal process that has to be recognized both legally and socially. While you hear that in some cultures adoption is informal or kinship adoption is common, when it comes to some of the most important aspects it must be formal to truly be adoption. For instance, if an adoption is not formalized or finalized, the child may not inherit your property when you pass away. You may not be recognized as the parent for medical or educational decisions. The bigger issue is if your authority as a parent is not legally defined, the status of the child is not either. Anyone, whether birth parents, other relatives or those outside the family, could claim that the child is better off with them and fighting that could be costly both monetarily and relationally. Most agree that a stable family unit is best for a child's development, and adoption ensures that your child is recognized as your child. Adoption is not guardianship – when an adoption is finalized the adoptive parents are the legal parents, and the birth parents are not. The birth parents cannot “take the child back” or request the child be returned unless they can prove fraud or duress. That does not mean that contact is not an option, but it does clearly define who is the parent and who is not. Parents, this means that you must raise this child as your own and put the child’s best interests ahead of your own. What we must all realize that at the heart of adoption is the child and his/her/their best interest.

Bottom line: adoption is about finding the best family for a child who needs a home.

For some college glory days denotes winning a football championship or partying harder than the frat. I was a debate nerd. My glory days involved coming up with ridiculous advantages to nonsensical cases and convincing a judge that what I said not only made sense but would perfect the world in a way my opponent never could (crop rotation as an advantage to legalizing marijuana! state pride – we don’t care about your square – as a reason to keep the electoral college! don’t allow dihydrogen monoxide in the Middle East, it causes more wars than oil!).

In case you are wondering I did argue all those points, and won most of them too. Debate is theoretical by necessity, however one thing that does actually translate to the real world is definition of terms. If you don’t define your terms you don’t really know what you are talking about. There are repercussions to not knowing what you are talking about, and a lot of heartache could be avoided if terms were understood to begin with. So in adoption, where a lot of people say a lot things that mean different things, I thought it might be helpful to define as many terms as possible. So there is a new category “Glossary” that contains posts to help you figure out exactly what that strange acronym is or why that argument on Facebook was so heated. Got a term you want defined? Suggest it on our Facebook page and we’ll get right on it. I hope this helps you determine if adoption is for you and if AGOHA is the agency for you.