Real Mother
Ξ December 2nd, 2009 | → 3 Comments | ∇ Mumble |
Lately Radio 4 has been pissing me off – in the last week there’s been ‘articles’ where they’ve been talking about adopted children, and in which they persist in using the term ‘Birth Mother’.
What’s incorrect/wrong about using the term ‘Real mother’?
Actually, it’s even more interesting, that they’ve always [in everything I've heard] referred to the father as ‘the Father’, why not the ‘biological father’, ‘father by association’, ‘father by marriage’ and still they do seem preoccupied about all this ‘Birth Mother’ tree-hugging crap!
Call me an old fuddy-duddy, but I can’t see why the woman who actually gave birth to a child cannot be the ‘real’ mother, and why the woman who now has care of the child can’t be a ‘Foster Mother’?
Surely ‘Mother’ should be the woman who gave birth – whether she deserves to have custody of the child or not – and likewise, the ‘Father’ – deserving or not – IS the the man whose DNA is inextricably linked to the child?!
I reckon this is the ‘pc’-state going madder than a box of frogs [no, not the French]. THEY feel they’re the ‘carers’, so therefore, THEY ARE the Mother/Father now [check the OED!] Um, sorry, you’re wrong; laudable as it certainly is, you’re the Foster Parents!
on December 3rd, 2009 at 8:44 am
Peet –
I think you miss the point. ‘Birth mother’ isn’t tree hugging, it’s just giving some consideration to the adoptive mother. The implication of calling a birth mother the ‘real mother’ is that the person who has brought a child up, has given them their best years etc. etc. is not the child’s real mother. Most adoptive mothers, I suspect, consider themselves to be the child’s real mother, rather than a person who the child may we have never even met.
A foster parent is an entirely different thing to an adoptive parent. They would never consider themselves a mother or father of the child. But adoption is a legal process of replacing parentage. Legally an adoptive mother IS the child’s mother. The OED may give the biological definition, but we don’t live in a purely biological world (luckily).
I also haven’t really come across the different treatment of father – it is usually ‘biological father.’
End of reply rant!
on December 27th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
Hi Brian.
Yes, I realise what the thinking is – regarding the consideration being given to the woman caring for the child – but I still hold the view that ‘Mother’ [like it or not] describes a child’s genetic mother.
Obviously, for an adoptive parent, an alternative label will be difficult to get right [and will almost certainly be a bit weird], and so it’s easy to see why adoptive women prefer the moniker applied to them.
I wonder whether ‘mother’ is defined as the genetic parent, or whether it’s the adoptive parent?
P.S. thanks for pointing out my error regarding ‘Fioster’ vs. ‘Adoptive’ – duh!
on January 4th, 2010 at 12:23 am
I’m adopted. So is my sister. My real mother is the mother that raised me. My real father is the father that raised me. The mother that gave birth to me and the father that inseminated her are merely my biological parents. They only matter when a doctor wants to know my family history. They only reason they matter at all is that in 1962 nobody thought to save the biological parents medical history for the child. So when a doctor ask that, I answer ‘I don’t know, I’m adopted’. That’s the only downside. While having a babe is certainly a ‘big deal’ (at least for the woman) it utterly pales in comparison to actually raising a child – by orders of magnitude – in both effort and importance.
So I disagree with you. The mother that gave birth isn’t the ‘real mother’ or simply the mother. The people that raise the child are the ‘real’ parents. Its nurture over nature here… not the other way around.
Other than to prove who fathered a child, or what woman had a child, the only value DNA has is for medical purposes.
If you want to call the people who supplied the DNA ‘father’ and ‘mother’ go right ahead. But to quote you “Um, sorry, you’re wrong”. What makes a parent a parent is who raises the child, not who supplies the DNA.
Note – Brian Clegg is quite correct. There is a world of difference between and adoptive parent and a foster parent. Fostering is almost always temporary and happens with children after they have spent material time with a parent or parents – often 10 or more years.
While adoption as a legal dimension (which is quite important in today’s society), its most important aspect is the raising children.