Why does media news and news articles point out......?

[Ghost Writer Rides Again]

when a child is adopted or biological (when parents has both)?? Cases in point: a man lost his family to a car wreck. He witnessed the accident and was unable to do anything when the van burst into flames. When this was shown on the news, the anchorperson pointed out that both his "biological child and his two adopted children were still in the van with his wife". Why point out the difference? All three were his children. I am just curious about why newspapers, and other media outlets always point out the adopted vs the biological children.

Have any of you come across this in your local news or local papers? It seems that they always go on about biological and adopted children. Obviously, I don't think its right and think that anyone who points out the difference should be smacked on sight.

 

[Jennifer L]

I don't make any distinction between my biological and adopted children. But, we're an ethnically diverse bunch, so it's not like it's a big secret. I certainly don't introduce "my adopted" kids and "my own".

Sometimes, I do think journalists need a crash course in adoptive friendly language. If the purpose of the article is to educate about adoption, I don't have a problem with it. But in the burning car crash example, it wasn't necessary or appropriate to make the distinction.

Smack on sight and all that! But I chalk it up to ignorance. Just like those "baby picture" projects in school that annoy my daughter to no end. Ignorance, I can forgive. Malice is a lot harder.