I'm laughing at myself for being bothered by this, because I so often nget irritated when people can't get over relatively innocuous terminology usage. However. We were foster parents in our former province, and are currently going through the process to get set up as foster parents in our new province. I'm filling out the application forms, and I'm really bothered by the part that asks for names and birthdates of adopted children, natural children, or children otherwise living in the home (ie: kinship arangements). The "natural" thing really squicks me out. In that colomn, I wrote, "DD, birthed by Selkat on xyz date", cause I really couldn't bring myself to let it go as is. And THEN, today, I met with our social worker, and her actually verbally used the words "natural child"!!!
I don't even know, maybe this is the new PC term, but it's really bothering me. I don't know if I should bring it up, or continue to address it the way I have been, by changing the words when I answer that sort of statement/question. I can't even really articulate what bothers me about the phrase - I think it's just that children ARE natural, no matter who is parenting them? Can someone say it better than that for me? Is "Natural" child the "correct" term?! Would you mention anything to the social worker? (He's a bit of an odd duck to begin with - his office is literally set up like an art gallery with framed works hanging on wires with gallery lighting, all within easy reach of a child and he totally flipped when dd, overcome by curiosity by the pretty, lit, hanging thing, touched one)
Also, a little off topic, but can anyone suggest a diplomatic way to move us through a little quicker? We were homestudied and veted and I've had supplemetary training in a few areas, and we've actually had a couple of placements in our old province. I've provided copies of homestudies, criminal records checks, etc, etc. They want us to take this region's training sessions, which we are keen to do, but the training is 9 weeks long and isn't offered until May, so we wouldn't even be through it until July... it just seems like they could use us before then, especially as we actually really enjoy the short term emergency placements. Any ideas?
Thanks.
I don't even know, maybe this is the new PC term, but it's really bothering me. I don't know if I should bring it up, or continue to address it the way I have been, by changing the words when I answer that sort of statement/question. I can't even really articulate what bothers me about the phrase - I think it's just that children ARE natural, no matter who is parenting them? Can someone say it better than that for me? Is "Natural" child the "correct" term?! Would you mention anything to the social worker? (He's a bit of an odd duck to begin with - his office is literally set up like an art gallery with framed works hanging on wires with gallery lighting, all within easy reach of a child and he totally flipped when dd, overcome by curiosity by the pretty, lit, hanging thing, touched one)
Also, a little off topic, but can anyone suggest a diplomatic way to move us through a little quicker? We were homestudied and veted and I've had supplemetary training in a few areas, and we've actually had a couple of placements in our old province. I've provided copies of homestudies, criminal records checks, etc, etc. They want us to take this region's training sessions, which we are keen to do, but the training is 9 weeks long and isn't offered until May, so we wouldn't even be through it until July... it just seems like they could use us before then, especially as we actually really enjoy the short term emergency placements. Any ideas?
Thanks.
) it asks for the number of live births, then asks:
Seriously.
