The Origin of the Word “Birthmother”

Pearl S. Buck Uses the Term Birth Mother in 1956

The first known use of the word “birth” as a descriptive and identifiable adjective for a woman who has lost her child to adoption is attributed to Pearl S. Buck in 1956. In the June issue of Women’s Home Companion, Buck wrote a piece called “We Can Free the Children”. Buck, clearly talking about unwed mothers and the feelings of society uses “birth” as a separate word, but as a designating factor.

What chance has the child born out of wedlock to find a wholesome family and community life if his mother keeps him? The California citizens noted shrewdly that, while persons are eager to adopt children, though born out of wedlock, yet society as a whole condemns the unwed mother. If it is better for the child born out of wedlock to stay with his birth mother, what
can be done to change social attitudes toward her and her child?” p. 63

Later on, in 1972, again Pearl S. Buck employs “birth” to make the distinction between the natural mother of a perspective child and the future adoptive parents, in this case herself. I Am the Better Woman for Having My Two Black Children,was published in Today’s Health, January 1972, 21-22, 64

“My husband and I thought our family of five adopted children was complete when she first came to us. Her birth mother was a girl in a small town in Germany. Her father was an American soldier who was killed. He was black. The German mother said his black child was despised in her town and had no future there. She begged his university president in Washington to find the father’s family.

I was a trustee of the university. We tried to find the family, but they had disappeared without trace. What then should we do with the child? From experience we knew that the little black children from Germany had difficulty adjusting to black mothers.

The president looked at me. “Would you. . .”

“Of course I will,” I said. “We’d love to have another child.”

Pearl S. Buck was a great proponent of adoption, being an repeat adoptive parent herself. While she does seemingly have some compassion towards natural mothers, and did adopt children that were considered “unadoptable”, the fact stands that the use of the word “birth” was coined for mothers of adoption loss by an adoptive parent, not taken and made self identifiable until later on.

Marietta Spencer: Social Worker Coins Positive Adoption Language

Minneapolis social worker Marietta Spencer is attributed to beginning the trend of “positive adoption language” (PAL) which completely endorsed the use of the word “birth mother” as the “proper” and correct way to address a mother who had lost her child to adoption. Positive Adoption Language (P.A.L.) is a concept pioneered thirty years ago by Spencer who was a social worker at the Children’s Home Society of Minnesota, not a mother of adoption loss. The actual date of publication of PAL is not yet defined, but it is thought that while the public exposure to PAL might be after the birth of CUB, the ideals and concept of PAL and the widespread usage of “birth” terms was talk about and molded behind the scenes before in the late 60‘s or early 70‘s.

It was refined in the last decade by many pro-adoption advocates.

“P.A.L acknowledges the thoughtfulness and responsibility of birthparents who make an adoption choice. Negative adoption language tends to judge birthparents harshly or portrays them as victims. ”

Now it sounds all very nice until one actually looks at the list. Adoptive parents become the one and only “Parents”. Real parents are “birthparents”, as are natural parents only “birthparents”. PAL was made to allow adoptive parents to talk out any and all negativity to the process of adoption with their needs in mind. If term usage might honestly convey mothers of adoption loss as victims, as many were and still are, then people might have to think twice about their feelings or about the very foundation of adoption. As so clearly stated “Birthmothers are just that and no more or less. They are not the “NATURAL” or “REAL” mother. If they were it would make the adoptive parents “UNNATURAL” and “UNREAL” parent. Think about that for a moment.” Of course, if one wants to follow that line of thinking, the opposite of “birth” is “death”, but no adoptive parent walks around thinking themselves as “death parents”. That doesn’t sound nearly as pretty.

PAL has become Respectful Adoption Language ( RAL). As quoted by Patricia Irwin Johnston, an infertility and adoption educator:

“those of us who feel that adoption is a beautiful and healthy way to form a family and a responsible and respectable alternative to other forms of family planning, ask that you consider the language you use very carefully when speaking about those of us who are touched by adoption”

In other words, the people for whom adoption is “beautiful” want to use terminology that makes it sound nice and pretty. To note, PAL and RAL are endorsed by agencies, social workers, facilitators, lawyers, and other adoption professionals, plus adoptive parents.

CUB: The Adoption Industry Lays Down the Language Law

Often attributed to the invention of the name “birthmother” is Lee Campbell at the beginnings of Concerned United Birthmothers ( CUB) and here is where the true bone of contention begins. Documented by Rickie Solinger in “Beggars and Choosers”, the Cub story goes down in history like this:

“According to Lee, in the summer of 1976 “we agreed on ‘birth parent’ and birthparenthood.’ We didn’t want to upset adoptive parents with ‘natural.’ And ‘biological’ now made us gag. ‘Biological,’ we felt, was descriptive of a mechanical incubator or unfeeling baby machine. ‘Birth’ was the key. With ‘birth parents’ as one word….. we were like other one-word progenitors, like grandparents.”

Which would almost be fine if it was a true self indefinable decision, but it was a compromise at best. Stating herself that “We didn’t want to upset adoptive parents with ‘natural.’”, means again, that this naming was based on the feelings of others who had more power. And more power they did, indeed, have.

As remembered by Betty Jean Lifton in an open letter to Joe Soll on CUB boards in 9/06,

” …. The reform movement tangled with the issue of language as early as the seventies. Lee Campbell, the founder of CUB, just reminded me that I argued for the term ‘natural mother’ because it was the one used in all the historical texts. It was the term I used in my memoir Twice Born, which came out in 1975. And I still prefer it. But somehow the struggle with the agencies and adoptive parent groups narrowed down to ‘birth mother’ and ‘biological mother.'” ….

The industry said CUB could only use the terms “birth” and “biological”. CUB chose “birth.” as a lesser of two evils. Most people preferred Natural, since that was the term used historically and on most of the legal records, including relinquishment papers, but adopters didn’t like it, so it was dropped. Natural moms rendered powerless to even chose a collective name for themselves based on the feelings of those who benefited from them to begin with. This is why the “birth terms” represent powerlessness, silence, and polite obedience to the system — shutting up and being good little breeders who won’t make waves, don’t make trouble, and don’t have a voice. The aims of CUB at that time was to not be threatening, to gain a measure of respect, and gather the support of adoptive parents and professionals to fight for open records and know one’s adopted children. Thirty years later, these battles are still not resolved and still very much an issue with member of the adoption arena.

Honoring the Birth Compromise?

Now the argument can be made that “birthmother” is now an accepted and recognized part of our society and also that one should “honor” the fight of the early pioneers who fought to get any recognition to the plight of mothers of loss. While the concepts are noble, the actuality of it is not. “Birthmother” was not only chosen as a compromise. Buck used “birth” as a descriptive adjective, while CUB made it a name for mothers of loss because it made a nice acronym.

As reported by an adoptee after speaking to Lee Campbell herself at the 2006 CUB retreat in Florida . “Basically, she ( Campbell) says that the name was biological parents but she didn’t like it. She was on the phone with another and talked about it and came up with birth parent. As they discussed it they bean to name CUB and came up with “Birth Parents United in Concern” but the acronym was BPUIC, so she decided to join the first two into one word so that it had the same feel as grandparents and tied it to the family name. The problem with that was the acronym became BUIC and she didn’t want it to be associated with a car so the redid the order and came up with Concerned United Birthparents…… Okay, she clarified that she believes she was the first one to put it together as one word birthparent so as to make it similar to grandparent and give it the same style of family tie.”

While the respect of one word, like grandparent, might have been hoped for, the real reason for dropping the space between the word had to due with advertising and name recognizably. Again, it sounded better.

Know the Truth About What Words You Use

As Rickie Solinger said in her keynote address at the Shedding Light In Adoption 2006 conference in NY,

“Language is a way for a powerless group to reclaim power and fight exploitation and oppression.”

Part of that fight is knowing the truth. Know the roots and meanings of a word before you take on that mantle. Know what the history really is and why it is accepted, and then decide if you want to wear the label.

About the Author

Claudia Corrigan DArcy
Claudia Corrigan D’Arcy has been online and involved in the adoption community since early in 2001. Blogging since 2005, her website Musings of the Lame has become a much needed road map for many mothers who relinquished, adoptees who long to be heard, and adoptive parents who seek understanding. She is also an activist and avid supporter of Adoptee Rights and fights for nationwide birth certificate access for all adoptees with the Adoptee Rights Coalition. Besides here on Musings of the Lame, her writings on adoption issue have been published in The New York Times, BlogHer, Divine Caroline, Adoption Today Magazine, Adoption Constellation Magazine, Adopt-a-tude.com, Lost Mothers, Grown in my Heart, Adoption Voice Magazine, and many others. She has been interviewed by Dan Rather, Montel Williams and appeared on Huffington Post regarding adoption as well as presented at various adoption conferences, other radio and print interviews over the years. She resides in New York’s Hudson Valley with her husband, Rye, children, and various pets.

9 Comments on "The Origin of the Word “Birthmother”"

  1. I’ve spent some time this evening reading your posts. I’m so sorry for the terrible journey your adoption experience has been for you. I am an adoptive mother of 3, and have a very open relationship with 2of my kids’ first families. The only reason we don’t have a relationship with the third is because she lives in Ethiopia, and we have no information about how to contact her. I want you to know that not all adoptive parents are insensitive to first mother’s feelings and needs. Would it still be your opinion that the term “birthmother” is negative, if it is a term that my children’s first mothers are happy and comfortable with using? Thanks for your honesty in your posts!

  2. Hi Heather,

    I would only question if the mothers KNOW the reasons why they are being called it. I don’t hink many of us do and that is the issue. We get told that’s what we are before we are actually birthmothers! As with all things in adoption one can only make a true informed choice, even if it is about a name, if one KNOWS the truth and has all the infomation to make that choice.

    For the record, while I am fully aware and actualy hate ther term I still use it in all my writing because THAT’s how people can find me.

    And there are many adoptive parents that I trully adore..agree with and we fight these issues together.

    And actually, my adoption journey was pretty much story book.. it all worked out the way it was suppose to.. and THAT is something to seriously consider.

    Thanks for coming by and reading! Hope to see you soon!

  3. I have never actually heard the term ‘natural mother’ birth mom or biological mother are the only two terms I’ve ever heard. I know when I use it there is no offense meant whatsoever.

  4. I’ve recently come across the information on Pearl S Buck, and how the term birthmother was coined. I’m struggling, as a natural mother, to figure out where I fit with all of this. I am a birthmother, but not by the definition they attach to it. If that makes sense.

    Anyway, thanks for the read!

  5. Well, biological has the word logical in it. Thus, adoptive parents would then be bio-ilogical. I think I could actually live with that term…lol

  6. Helen Kindel | July 4, 2013 at 12:01 pm |

    Is there no help for a mother when a child finds her and starts a painful and negative campaign against her, the other siblings and other extended family members?

    This has turned into a nightmare. I am in my sixties. I have survived a Traumatic Brain Injury, the death of one of my sons since giving up my daughter for adoption.

    what about my right of privacy, and safety? I did not authorize her partner to have access to my information. If my daughter seeks her counsel that is fine, but how does that give others the right to come to my home, into my life forty some years later and accuse me of everything short of killing the President?

    Those documents were sealed for my protection as well. Where are my rights and my family being protected?

    • Hi Helen,

      I’m sorry that your experience has not been pleasant. Sadly, there are times hen an adoptee IS angry about the circumstances of their relinquishment and that anger does fall upon their mothers. There is nothing that says that anyone has to put up with abusive behaviors and there is nothing unhealthy for you to set boundaries in a relationship.
      If it is really an issue of being harassed when you do not want contact, then the same laws that protect the rest of the population are also there for you. Anti harassment, anti stalking, orders of protection if dangerous, etc. If it is an safety issue, then by all means, you should call the local authorities and make inquiries.
      That said, there is NOTHING that gives you a right to privacy from the child you gave birth to based on adoption law and, IMO, there should not be.
      It is a proven fact that HER records were not sealed for YOUR protection, but to protect the adoptive family. There are no promises of confidentiality that could be upheld, even if you were told that. You are her biological mother and are named on her birth certificate. That is public records until AFTER her adoption was finalized. If she had never been adopted, then then her birth certificate would never have been sealed and you would have no say in any of it as you already relinquished your rights to her. It would have ALWAYS been public record and open to anyone. So, as I said, no matter what you were told, that was not the case.
      Have you met with her at all, or have you refused, if you don’t mind me asking? Most adoptees, I know have NO desire at all to be a “nightmare” s you describe, but do have a great desire and, truly, a NEED, to know their stories, their medical information, to look upon their mother’s face to hear her voice, to just …know. I personally feel that no matter what your intentions at the time of relinquishment, that you expected, what you want now, you do OWE your child to met with them once; to be as truthful as possible with everything you know including what information you have on their father’s and to provide the answers that only you can. So, if you shut her down and never let this come to pass, then I CAN understand the anger.
      I hope this perhaps help some and things take a turn for the better….

  7. Ariel Miller | April 9, 2014 at 2:00 pm |

    I’m a natural mother who prefers that term, not birthmother. I agree that information is important in educated choices and without the whole story it’s manipulation towards vulnerable young women. Thank you for this article as I have already shared in online in posts about adoption. It is my hope to be part of the solution instead of part of the problem. The adoption industry needs reform. We assume many things when we feel we know better based on the information we have at the time. Viewpoints can change with new information. My views on adoption have changed so much as I have matured and revisited the experience. I’m no longer in support of infant adoption as it stands now. I support foster adoption and legitimate orphans finding families, regardless of age but no longer believe infant adoption is a good choice. I’ve researched early childhood development and the first 10 months of the human brains development are crucial for neurological health. The primal wound was something I was never told about. Infants are bonded to the mother from conception and for months after birth the see each other as one person. Separating a child from it’s mother at birth with separate them before their mind is ready to be an individual. This trauma will impact their identity forever and for this reason alone I changed my mind about adoption being healthy for infants. Had I been given this information before I made my choice then my choice would have been different. Without being told I feel I was lead to make a choice based on information that would benefit the agencies and the adoptive couple. This makes me feel lied to and used and honestly made me hate myself more for being such a fool and letting myself get manipulated. I already believed them when they told me “I wasn’t good enough and that others could do it better.” This is a belief I still struggle with to this day, over a decade later. I shy away from leadership roles and any kind of influence because I don’t think I’m worthy or will somehow fail. After all, if I was good enough then why give my child to strangers? That was a harder question to answer. I’m happy to report with truth comes freedom and now that I’ve been working on letting go of my self hatred I’ve been promoted to a leadership role at work and i’m no longer scared of my influence. I plan on sharing the information I was denied so other vulnerable women can be empowered. I can’t change others but i can change myself and share information I have. I hope to be someone other women can respect and listen to when I get the opportunity to share.

    • Hi Ariel, Thank you for your comment. That is probably one of the most succinct paragraphs that puts the WHOLE growth and understanding of the loss and what we were not told I have ever read! I am in complete agreement with you!! It is up to all of us to BE the solution and THANK you for being part. Yes, your voice DOES matter!!

Comments are closed.