This controversy illustrates the problems in adoption, as well as the fact that coining new words and phrases to describe ancient social practices will not necessarily alter the feelings and experiences of those affected by them.
In the 1970s, as adoption search and support organizations developed, there were challenges to the language in common use at the time.
Social workers and other professionals in the field of adoption began changing terms of use to reflect what was being expressed by the parties involved.
Language, at its best, honors the self-referencing choices of the persons involved, utilizes inclusive terms and phrases, and is sensitive to the feelings of the primary parties.
This can be evident in English-speaking cultures when there is prominent use of negative or inaccurate language describing adoption.
Some birth parents see "positive adoption language" as terminology which glosses over painful facts they face as they go into the indefinite post-adoption period of their lives.
"Honest adoption language" refers to a set of terms that reflect the point of view that: (1) family relationships (social, emotional, psychological or physical) that existed prior to the legal adoption continue, and that (2) mothers who have "voluntarily surrendered" children to adoption (as opposed to involuntary terminations through court-authorized child-welfare proceedings) seldom view it as a choice that was freely made, but instead describe scenarios of powerlessness, lack of resources, and overall lack of choice.
Some people choose to use "honest adoption language" (HAL) because it reflects the original terminology.
HAL does not honor the historical aspects of the early adoption reform movement who requested and worked years to have terminology changed from natural to birth.
Many women who have gone through the process and who are separated from their children by adoption believe that social work techniques used to prepare single mothers to sign Termination Of Parental Rights papers closely resembles a psychological war against natural motherhood; hence the term "surrender".
"[14] Advocates of inclusive language defend it as inoffensive-language usage whose goal is multi-fold: A common problem is that terms chosen by an identity group, as acceptable descriptors of themselves, can be then used in negative ways by detractors.
This compromises the integrity of the language and turns what was intended to be positive into negative or vice versa, thus often devaluing acceptability, meaning and use.
Inclusive adoption language is far more than an aesthetic matter of identity imagery that one embraces or rejects; it can focus the fundamental issues and ideals of social justice.
Language that is truly inclusive affirms the humanity of all the people involved, and shows respect for difference.
Inclusive language honors that each individual has a right to determine for themselves what self-referencing term is comfortable and best reflects their personal identity.