Honor Blackman dies- news reader refers to her “two adopted children”

[LittleRa]

Not sure if this is the correct section but Bond actress Honor Blackman has died of natural causes aged 94. I happened to be reading the family’s statement online at the same time as the BBC news reader was reading it and I noticed the statement said she “will be greatly missed by her two children Barnaby and Lottie” whereas the news reader said she “will be greatly missed by her two adopted children Barnaby and Lottie”. Why?! A glance at her Wikipedia entry shows she adopted them in 1967 and 1968.

So the fact that the newsreader stated that Honor Blackman's children were adopted obviously takes precedence over reporting that she has died as that's not referred to in many of the posts.

RIP Honor

@AgeLikeWine Step children are not your children and neither are cats.

Some people are far too quick to take vicarious offence on behalf of others they have never met.

And some people with no experience of something, are quick to tell someone they have never met, what they should or shouldn’t find offensive sadly.

It’s interesting that those with no experience of adoption are the ones who don’t think this is an issue in any way.

Missing the point but was adopting really so difficult in the 1960s. I thought it was surprisingly easy right up to the late 70s.

I was 5 when my foster mum died and at the time I was told, repeatedly by school and the family I was forced back to, her death was meaningless because she wasn't really my mum, just "granny" ( she was my fathers mother who he hated). A therapist decades later told me the same thing and my grief was a horrendous thing for my "real" mum to witness.

I was 5. My world literally fell apart when she died over Christmas that year. Yet still no one understands that.

Opps hadn't finished! RIP Honor Blackman.

Well technically, step-children and adopted children are both children by socially constructed circumstances whereas biological children are a matter of biological fact. It's not to say that one is better or worse but they are not exactly the same thing much like another argument that has a lot or airtime on this board!

mnahmnah

I wonder if Sky got this statement from the BBC tv broadcast because in every other printed version of the statement in other papers, this was what was released by the family.

But adopted children are adopted children. I wonder if they are up in arms about this. Does anybody know?

It was a factual release by the family. No need to get knickers in a twist everybody.

technically, step-children and adopted children are both children by socially constructed circumstances
Adopted children are legally the adoptive parents' children. Usually step children are not, and sometimes they aren't even socially parented by the step parent. Adopted children have no other legal parents.
My DCs do have other parents but we are both their legal and their day to day parents.

My adoptive Mum (who I love dearly, but who is entirely crackers) introduces me as "my adopted DD" even now almost 30 years on. It's because she likes everyone to say "oh wow you're so GOOD for adopting a child". Fortunately I've stopped giving a shit and accepted that she likes to save and rescue things/people but it's ridiculous however it happens. My adoptive Dad has never in my life done it; people often tell me how much I look like him (which pisses my Mum off no end - she would love it even more if she'd been able to adopt a baby from another country/ethnic background to really tick off another box on the saviour chart).

Not everyone does stuff with malice; often it's just silliness and ignorance. They'll win every time.

@drspouse I didn’t suggest they were.

@AgeLikeWine you made a direct comparison.

drspouse - as your response acknowledges there are differences between step children and adoptive children but the formalisation of something in law does not make it any less of a social construct.

It also does not make adoptive children the same as step children.

I'm sorry you feel it's a negative but I really do agree with those who view it as a positive statement. It shows great selflessness on the part of the adopter and we could all do with a reminder since only 4.5% of children in care last year were adopted. If that statement prompts just one more individual or couple to adopt, I think any perceived slight is absolutely worth it.

I agree that it is unnecessary. It would never be published that 'x' person was preceded by two biological children so no need to state that they are adopted children.

At no point has anyone said that adoptive children are the same as step children.

I was adopted and I think what matters is what they think, the family itself, as some adoptees would mind and some would want to be described in that way. Bear in mind though that sadly many adoptions don't work out. Mine was awful, my adoptive mother was very abusive, physically and emotionally, and I would be furious and triggered to be referred to as her "child" and if I had to be referred to at all I would prefer to be referred to as someone she had adopted.
If someone asked about my "real" parents I wouldn't mind at all. There are many points of view out there.

I noticed that and it really jarred. Poor reporting.

I mean "her" child.

It was a factual release by the family this is the key thing, it really should be them who decides how to refer to it.

It shows great selflessness on the part of the adopter
No thanks, I'm not a saviour or a selfless hero. Just a woman who wanted to be a mum.

@fockle the family release didn't say this.