When is it appropriate for children in foster care to call carers “Mum” and “Dad”?

When Is It Appropriate for Children in Foster Care to Call Carers “Mum” and “Dad”?

Deciding what children in out-of-home care should call their foster carers has long been a sensitive issue for child protection systems, foster families and birth parents. As children form attachments in care, some naturally begin to use parental terms like “Mum” or “Dad,” while others prefer first names or culturally specific titles. Understanding when this language is appropriate—and how to respond—requires a developmentally informed, child-led and trauma-aware approach.

This article outlines the evidence and good practice guidance that supports children’s identity, attachment and emotional wellbeing.

The Child Should Always Lead the Naming Decision

The central principle is simple: children choose what they call their caregivers. Terms like “Mum” or “Dad” reflect the child’s felt sense of safety and belonging. When a child adopts these terms spontaneously, it is often a sign of developing trust and secure attachment. Professionals and carers should not direct children toward or away from these words. Instead, they should follow the child’s lead and make space for their emotional needs.

Developmental Stage Shapes Naming Preferences

Children’s naming choices reflect their age, stage and capacity to understand family roles:

  • Early childhood (0–7 years): Young children commonly use “Mum/Dad” for any primary caregiver. This is normal and does not diminish their relationship with birth parents.
  • Middle childhood (7–12 years): Children may hold multiple parental figures and blend naming conventions—for example “Mum Karen” or “Dad John.”
  • Adolescence: Young people often prefer first names but may adopt parental terms in long-term or guardianship placements where strong bonds form.

Understanding development helps adults avoid misinterpreting the child’s choice and ensures support is tailored to the child’s internal experience.

The Role of Placement Stability and Permanency

Placement type and duration matter. In emergency or short-term care, first names may provide clarity and emotional boundaries. In long-term, kinship or guardianship placements, parental naming often emerges naturally as relationships deepen. Encouraging or discouraging specific terms is rarely helpful; what matters is whether the naming supports the child’s sense of safety and continuity.

Maintaining Identity and Respecting Birth Family Connections

Children need to maintain meaningful ties to their birth families, regardless of placement type. Professionals must be mindful of:

  • the child’s ongoing need for identity continuity,
  • potential feelings of loyalty conflict,
  • the emotional impact on birth parents,
  • the importance of communicating with families in a supportive, non-threatening way.

Children can—and frequently do—have more than one person they call “Mum” or “Dad.” Good practice avoids framing parental naming as competing loyalties.

Cultural and Community Considerations

Many cultures—including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and culturally diverse migrant communities—have broader kinship systems in which children may have multiple parental figures. Carers might be called “Aunty,” “Uncle,” “Papa,” “Baba,” or other culturally specific titles. Culturally safe practice means honouring this diversity and consulting with elders or cultural advisors where appropriate.

Carers Should Never Pressure Children

Foster carers should not ask to be called “Mum” or “Dad,” nor should they imply that a child’s use of first names is less affectionate. Instead, carers should focus on meeting the child’s emotional needs and responding warmly to whatever term the child feels comfortable using.

Supporting Birth Parents Through Naming Changes

Birth parents often need guidance and reassurance when they learn their child is using parental terms for foster carers. Practitioners should:

  • explain the child-led nature of the naming,
  • normalise the possibility of multiple parental figures,
  • affirm the birth parent’s unique and enduring role,
  • maintain open, respectful communication.

Supporting parents well protects the child’s whole network of relationships.

Conclusion

It is appropriate for children in out-of-home care to call their foster carers “Mum” or “Dad” when the child chooses to, and when the naming supports their emotional safety, identity and relationships. Good practice balances attachment needs, birth family connections, cultural safety and the child’s own voice. Above all, children need the freedom to name their caregivers in ways that feel authentic, safe and emotionally meaningful to them.

Social Work Practice Note

Practice Note: Responding to Children in Out-of-Home Care Using “Mum” and “Dad” for Foster Carers

Purpose

To guide social workers in supporting children, carers and birth families when children choose to call their foster carers “Mum” or “Dad.”

Key Principles

1. Child-Led Naming

  • Children should determine what they call their carers.
  • Do not instruct or redirect the child unless there is clear harm.
  • Observe whether the naming reflects emotional safety or adult influence.

2. Developmentally Informed Practice

  • Young children often use parental terms for any primary caregiver.
  • Older children may use blended conventions (e.g., “Mum Kate”).
  • Adolescents may prefer first names unless in stable long-term care.

3. Consider Placement Type

  • Short-term care: Gently maintain clarity using first names unless the child initiates otherwise.
  • Long-term/permanent care: Parental naming may be developmentally normal and appropriate.

4. Identity and Birth Family Connections

  • Explore the child’s feelings about their birth parents.
  • Be mindful of loyalty conflict or fear of upsetting adults.
  • Prepare birth parents for the possibility of parental naming and explain child-led principles.
  • Reassure parents that their role remains central and valued.

5. Cultural Safety

  • Consult with cultural leaders or family members for culturally preferred naming conventions.
  • Respect kinship patterns where multiple parental figures are normal.

6. Guidance for Foster Carers

Encourage carers to:

  • respond warmly regardless of the term used,
  • avoid asking for parental titles,
  • avoid discouraging or shaming the child’s choice,
  • inform the caseworker if the naming is new, sudden or linked to emotional distress.

7. Professional Decision-Making and Documentation

  • Document the context of the naming, the child’s expressed wishes, and consultations with carers and birth parents.
  • Consider whether naming reflects attachment growth, anxiety, lack of clarity, or external pressure.
  • Support the child’s ongoing identity development.

Practice Summary

A child may call foster carers “Mum” or “Dad” when doing so naturally reflects their emotional security and developing attachment. Practitioners should ensure the naming is child-led, culturally safe, and aligned with the child’s identity needs while maintaining respectful, transparent communication with birth families.

Bibliography of Sources

Below is a mixed bibliography of peer-reviewed literature, high-quality reviews, and authoritative guidance relevant to naming, identity, and attachment in care.

Peer-Reviewed Literature

  • Ainsworth, M. (1991). Attachments and other affectional bonds across the life cycle. In Parkes, J., Stevenson-Hinde, J., & Marris, P. (Eds.), Attachment Across the Life Cycle. Routledge.
  • Barber, J. G., & Delfabbro, P. (2004). Children in Foster Care. Routledge.
  • Boddy, J. (2013). Understanding permanence for looked after children: A review of research for the Care Inquiry. London: The Fostering Network.
  • Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and Loss: Vol. 1. Attachment (2nd ed.). Basic Books.
  • Cashmore, J., & Paxman, M. (2006). Predicting after-care outcomes: The importance of ‘felt’ security. Child & Family Social Work, 11(3), 232–241.
  • Cooper, L., & Sturge-Apple, M. (2022). Attachment dynamics in foster and kinship care. Development and Psychopathology, 34(2), 447–465.
  • Cossar, J., & Neil, E. (2013). Making sense of adoption: Children’s perspectives. Child & Family Social Work, 18(1), 67–76.
  • Kiraly, M., & Humphreys, C. (2013). A tangled web: Parental contact with children in out-of-home care. Children Australia, 38(2), 73–85.
  • Schofield, G., & Beek, M. (2006). Attachment Handbook for Foster Care and Adoption. BAAF.
  • Schofield, G., & Ward, E. (2011). Understanding foster placement stability. University of East Anglia/Department for Education.
  • Sen, R., & Broadhurst, K. (2011). Contact and family relationships in adoption and long-term foster care. Child & Family Social Work, 16(1), 1–10.
  • Tregeagle, S., Moggach, L., & Fernandez, E. (2022). Attachment, identity and child protection systems. Children and Youth Services Review, 138.

Policy and Practice Guidance

  • Australian Institute of Family Studies (AIFS). (2018). Children in care. CFCA Resource Sheet.
  • Department for Education (UK). (2015). Children Act 1989: Permanence Planning Guidance.
  • Department of Communities and Justice (NSW). (2021). Casework Practice Framework.
  • Fostering Network (UK). (2019). Caring for a Child: Guidance for Foster Carers.
  • Office of the Children’s Guardian (NSW). (2023). Guidelines for Foster and Kinship Care.
  • Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care (SNAICC). (2018). The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Child Placement Principle.