SANDS sorry if upsetting

I got more-or-less used to it: of my eight pregnancies, not counting almost-certain very early miscarriages I wouldn't have known about for sure before reliable testing in the second month, I carried three to term and was immeasurably glad for their living. The other five I tried hard not to let myself grieve too much about, because I had to go on with my life somehow and you can't be crying all the time.

If some damn man had tried to insinuate shortly after their deaths that they were not my children and that I was not their mother, though, I would probably have gone berserk and done him bodily harm.

Sending all the love in the world to the mothers on this thread who have lost children I can’t imagine your pain.

I lost my first daughter at six weeks due to SIDS. Afterwards, I was struggling to identify myself. I badly wanted to be a Mother, but as my baby was gone, how could I call myself one. This had such deep and profound effect on me.
After a lot of counselling, I eventually realised that I was still a Mother and nothing could take that away from me.
Had I read this bullshit though, how would that have impacted my mental health?
This utter nonsense has to stop - women, mothers are valid - stop trying to erase us.

Only certain prescribes petiole may be permitted. A certain pop star who recently said they wanted to be a mummy by 35 perhaps. Maybe they give out certificates or licenses for the word now.

And the whole 'pipe down ladies, the word mother still exists you know' crap I have seen on Twitter (including from Freddy).

If it exists, what is wrong with fucking using it then?

DocMarteens

I am absolutely stunned by Freddy McConnell's completely hypocrisy and self-centredness on this issue. So only Freddy is allowed to think that words matter and care about how Freddy is referred to, even when it is a complete objective falsehood? Imagine the lack of awareness you must have to actually go to court to be recognised as 'Father' when you have given birth to the child, and then be shocked and surprised that other people are upset because how they are referred to matters to them too.

The tweet was in reference to surrogacy as part of BLAW. That’s the context we should be looking at it and reading it in.

If that is the context in which it should be read then it emphasis the need to ban surrogacy and the insidious dehumanisation of women by surrogacy. It certainly doesn’t make it better.

So sorry for your loss from one mother to another.

I'm so pleased that SANDS apologised about this tweet. It really hurt me when I read about it in the paper.

The only thing I have from my baby is the experience of a mother - my body changes, the flutter in my tummy, the awful morning sickness. My memories are tied up with being a mother and then coping with my body changing again. It's not right that my experience should be erased for the sake of other people.

I know "non birthing parents" (fathers etc) and people who don't want to be call mothers will feel the loss but I'm sorry, that experience defined me and to have a charity that was there for me and I associate so heavily with that time, try to not use the word that is my only connection to my son. Well it brought me to tears.

Comedic value? A lesson in hypocrisy?

They’ve looked after goodness knows how many families who have suffered baby loss, and you’re calling their opening statements horrific because it tries to cover all the people they want to reach and help?

I’m shocked actually by the judgement on this thread.

They are really clear about respecting the word mother.

They’ve apologised for not including in that tweet.

Even as a bereaved parent who has used and valued their support, I don’t get to dictate to them who they can and cannot include in their messaging, or what words they use to describe them.

Not that I would dream of doing that, because they’re a charity entirely created to help families survive baby loss, which is profoundly awful and hard to get through. And they do an awesomely good job of it.

They’ve said sorry. You’ve made your point, and been heard.

Can they not be left alone to get on with their work now?

Sorry typed that reply ages ago and it has just gone up see that point has already been made.

I read this from a different angle although I see points raised here. I have been involved with this Sands and other babyloss charities on the past and know that there has been lots of awareness recently about same sex couples, largely female female where the mum who didn't give birth has felt alienated.. I read it as being about that - for context I am a bereaved mother and whilst I find lots of language in similar posts..I really don't here.

Given that this is part of a wider pattern - Tampax, cervical cancer charities, La Leche League etc - I think it's pretty sensible to suspect an agenda.
Have there been any changes in their senior management or trustees?

To be fair, I think their explanation of their policy on using the word 'mother' in their note on language is good - they recognise why some people don't use that word, but explain why they are using it.

However, they haven't followed that policy in the tweet

Their own stated policy is to use the word partner, so as to be inclusive of lesbians. So all those defending this new wokespeak on those grounds are demonstrably wrong.

This is not an innocent mistake, it’s wholly deliberate. Whether it is a general change in policy, and whether they will listen to the women who have wholly valid objections, remains to be seen.

I have had miscarriages. Nobody was pregnant except me and nobody's body miscarried, except mine. This was a unique experience and nobody else involved had anything approaching my experience. The father's input was not as involved and certainly not the wider family.

I looked on Sands website and just scrolled around. I was wondering if I was looking for the unique support, where I as a mother who had lost a child would easily see it. No matter what arrangement, there is always (and sometimes only) a woman who was pregnant, maybe not so much anyone else on the scene. But no. The staff are all individually outlined in a click. But no easy found click for mothers in particular. Maybe it is not really aimed at the mothers/bereaved mothers. It reminded me the separate group AA run for the wider family.

Call the office and tell them they near to hear from women (who birth)

She is the primary focus.

The mum who is grieving for the baby who was part of their body is the focus.

All parents are the focus. Sands choice.

Some people may not use the word mother not who the hell refers to theirself as a ‘birthing parent’. Maybe someone won’t want to be referred to as the parent ie a surrogate?

To be fair, I think their explanation of their policy on using the word 'mother' in their note on language is good - they recognise why some people don't use that word, but explain why they are using it.

However, they haven't followed that policy in the tweet.

One of the problems with twitter is that it doesn't allow you to target your message and it doesn't allow enough characters for nuance - which is perhaps why its unsuitable for this kind of communication. It's not as though most people even use twitter.

Not all lesbians... 🤔