When parents perpetuate abuse against their children, it is all too likely that they themselves were also victims of abuse. Children who have experienced maltreatment face significant barriers to flourishing when they reach adulthood, but with support and the right tools, it is possible for individuals to make different choices and break the cycle of abuse in their family.

This week, Naomi and Ian are joined by Savannah Nelson, an undergraduate student at BYU-Idaho and recent author of an op-ed for the Institute for Family Studies, “Ending the Cycle of Intergenerational Child Abuse.” Savannah discusses her personal connection to the topic, sharing how her mother overcame the abuse she endured from her parents and was able to make a different choice when starting her own family. She also shares what she has learned from her research, including how forming strong marriages is associated with lower risk of abuse, and how marriage and family education can be an effective tool for equipping parents to create healthy relationships with each other and with their children.

Resources

-Ending the Cycle of Intergenerational Child Abuse | Savannah Nelson and Timothy Rarick

-Married Fatherhood | Ian Rowe

Show Notes

-00:52 | How did you come to write about this topic?

-03:03 | What does it mean to be a “transitional character”?

-04:24 | What kind of process must an individual go through in order to become a transitional character?

-05:57 | How must a child make the choice to make a change even when the change hasn’t been modeled for them?

-07:17 | How can we help children who have experienced abuse feel confident that they are able to form healthier relationships in their own life?

-09:37 | What role does marriage play in breaking the cycle of abuse, and what do you think of the fact that more and more young people are not considering marriage or children within marriage as part of their future?

-12:26 | What resources are available through churches and religious communities to educate individuals on ending the cycle of abuse? Is this topic incorporated into family and marriage education in the context of the LDS church?

Concerns about a mental health crisis among young people have produced broad initiatives to improve overall mental well-being or “prevent” mental illness. But what evidence do we have that these programs are producing desirable outcomes?

This week, Naomi and Ian are joined by Carolyn Gorman, the Paulson Policy Analyst at the Manhattan Institute. In a new report to be released on September 12, Carolyn examines whether school-based mental health initiatives are useful for combatting mental health issues among kids. She explains that, in many cases, the continued effort to broadly incorporate mental health treatment, awareness, and “prevention” programs into school systems do more harm than good. In light of the recent Georgia school shooting, the current conversation around mental health continues to be a pressing one. However, as Carolyn notes, policies targeted specifically toward individuals with severe mental health disorders are more likely to affect change than broad funding for mental health awareness and prevention.

Resources

-A Better Youth Mental Health Policy | Carolyn D. Gorman and Scott Dziengelski

-Senate Gun Bill Includes Solid Mental Health Policies—But Must Focus on Serious Mental

Illness | Carolyn D. Gorman

Show Notes

• 00:40 | What were the findings of your research on the
• impact of current mental health policy initiatives on the well-being and
• educational outcomes of kids?
• 02:29 | What are the downsides of the prevailing approaches
• to mental health policy?
• 05:38 | You divide mental health approaches into three
• tiers. Can you break those down?
• 08:58| What is considered a mental illness and what is not?
• When are services at school appropriate, and where are the areas where schools
• are attempting to treat kids when they shouldn’t?
• 11:51 | What do you mean when you say the distinct goals of
• mental health and education are often in direct conflict?
• 14:28 | What is the right role for schools to play in the
• realm of children’s mental health?
• 17:16 | How do mental health professionals view the
• encroachment of mental health treatment into schools? How can we untangle this?
• 22:49 | How do social emotional learning programs
• exacerbating mental health issues?
• 28:11 | What are the final policy recommendations from your
• report, and is there any distinction in recommendations based on the age of the
• child?

Policymakers, researchers, and activists in the child welfare field frequently point to racial disparities within the system, as evidence of the systemic bias. But what are the true causes of these disparities? And how should governmental bodies tasked with protecting civil rights understand this issue?

This week, Naomi and Ian are joined by Rafael Mangual, Nick Ohnell Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, to discuss his recent resignation from the New York State Advisory Committee to the US Commission on Civil Rights after it conducted an investigation of racial disparities in the child welfare system. Rafael discusses the report published by the committee, which includes recommendations that would significantly diminish the power of the child welfare system. He includes data from his own research that challenges the findings of the committee and expresses concern that other state committees are going to engage in the same kind of work that is thin on evidence and heavy on ideology.

Resources

-Kids In Jeopardy | Rafael Mangual

-The Radical Push to Dismantle Child Protective Services | Naomi Schaefer Riley and Rafael Mangual

-Advisory Committees | US Commission on Civil Rights

Show Notes

04:00 What are the disparities in the child welfare system, and what are the potential explanations for them? How did the committee go about gathering information to answer that question?

11:30 How do committee members respond when alternative data is presented that suggests other causes for disparities besides systemic racism?

20:48 How would you respond to the claim that cash payments to families involved in child welfare will effectively address issues of abuse or neglect, and what do activists believe will be accomplished by this idea?

In 1996, Rev. W.C. Martin and his wife partnered with 22 families in their 100-person congregation to adopt 77 of the most difficult-to-place children in the Texas foster care system. A recent film, Sound of Hope: The Story of Possum Trot, tells the stories of these families and the inspiring results of their efforts.

This week, Naomi and Ian are joined by Joe Knittig, CEO of Care Portal and executive producer of Possum Trot. As leader of an organization designed to connect caretakers and resources in local communities to children in need, Joe was already well-versed in bringing communities together to support vulnerable kids. As executive producer of Possum Trot he hopes to broaden these efforts, encouraging faith communities across the nation to step up for kids in foster care.

Resources

-Sound of Hope: The Story of Possum Trot | Angel Studios

-How Churches Can Make a Difference in the Lives of Children Who Need Foster Care | Naomi Schaefer Riley

Show Notes

-00:40 | Tell us about your background and how it led to your involvement in the film?

-02:15 | How does Care Portal connect caretakers with children in need?

-05:49 | What is the story behind the Possum Trot? What are you hoping to accomplish through the film?

-08:03 | When the Martin family approached the state about adopting the most difficult-to-place children, what was the initial response?

-10:20 | The story of Possum Trot takes place in a historically black church community. How does this story contribute to the conversation around race in the child welfare system?

-13:55 | How could the film catalyze churches and faith-based organizations to become more involved in child welfare and the foster care system?

-16:17 | The film highlights the real struggles of fostering children. Is that part of the story resonating with audiences?

-19:04 | How can listeners see the film?

-20:18 | You are showing screenings of the film in church communities—what impact are you seeing?

-21:48 | How are the original families doing?

As the school choice movement has gained momentum in recent years, parents have become a political force to be reckoned with.

This week, Naomi and Ian are joined by Corey DeAngelis, senior fellow at the American Federation for Children and a visiting fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, to discuss his recent book, The Parent Revolution: Rescuing Your Kids from the Radicals Ruining Our Schools. The book highlights the key contributors to school choice’s spread across the country, the wealth of research on ways educational freedom benefits all children, and what is required to continue to advance educational freedom in the US. In this episode, Corey explains the important role of parents in the fight for school choice—particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic—the benefits of school choice for low-income communities, and the ongoing political shift towards school choice at the local, state, and federal levels.

Resources

-The Parent Revolution: Rescuing Your Kids from the Radicals Ruining Our Schools | Corey DeAngelis

-Why We Must Eliminate Barriers to School Choice Nationwide | Ian Rowe

-‘The Death of Public School’ Review: Find a Place to Learn | Naomi Schaefer Riley

-When Parents Do Know Best: Darla Romfo on the Viability of School Choice Programs | Naomi Schaefer Riley and Ian Rowe

Show Notes

-0:00:45 | What was your purpose in writing the book?

-0:03:24 | How did school closures and parents’ awareness of course content during the COVID-19 pandemic accelerate the school choice movement?

-0:07:13 | What does research reveal about the impact of school choice on upward mobility, and are “school choice alliances” growing in low-income communities?

-0:10:10 | Should school choice waivers apply to all institutions, or should there be limitations?

-0:14:08 | Which states are the “next frontiers” for school choice?

-0:16:57 | How does school choice help ensure high quality education options?

-0:20:36 | Would abolishing the Department of Education benefit or harm school choice?

The country’s youth mental health crisis continues to increase demand for psychiatric beds. Yet, the availability of residential treatment facilities, reserved for youth with severe emotional disturbances, is on the decline. What impact does this have on youth—including those in foster care--with high levels of need, and how do we ensure access to treatment for the children who need it most?

This week, Naomi and Ian are joined by Scott Dziengelski, a consultant at King and Spalding LLP and former director of policy and regulatory affairs at the National Association for Behavioral Healthcare, to discuss his recent report, “Deinstitutionalization Redux: The Decline in Residential Mental Health Treatment for Youth.” The report highlights the concerning shortage of residential treatment facilities and bed space for youth who need care. In this episode, Scott explains the current move toward deinstitutionalization, the effect of negative media messaging around residential treatment centers, and the crucial policy and cultural changes needed to ensure youth with severe challenges receive the care they need.

Resources

-Deinstitutionalization Redux: The Decline in Residential Mental Health Treatment for Youth | Scott Dziengelski

-How Foster Kids Are Being Damaged by a Lack of Home Care Facilities | Naomi Schaefer Riley

-Why Foster Children Are Sleeping in Offices and What We Can Do About It | Sean Hughes et al.

Show Notes

-00:58 | How did you get involved in children’s mental health policy?

-02:20 | What does the spectrum of need look like for children’s mental health, and which children are served by residential treatment facilities?

-05:26 | How do you interpret the data around the rise in children’s mental health challenges?

-07:34 | What led to the decrease in availability of residential treatment facilities?

-10:34 | Why are people advocating for the deinstitutionalization of residential treatment facilities?

-13:23 | Two congressional hearings on residential treatment recently took place. What impact will these have on the availability of residential treatment?

-16:55 | How does tying educational funds to children help when residential treatment is needed?

-21:18 | What is your recommendation on Medicaid dollars following children in care? How do we shift the narrative on residential treatment facilities?

-25:37 | Which states are doing the best in regard to residential treatment facilities?

The dramatic rise in substance use disorders over the past decade has altered—indeed, destroyed—many American lives, but how does this epidemic affect children? And who is ensuring their safety?

This week, Naomi and Ian are joined by Sarah Font, child welfare researcher and associate professor of sociology and public policy at Penn State, to discuss a recent published statement Sarah wrote on behalf of AEI’s child welfare working group. “The US Is Failing Substance-Exposed Infants” critiques policies which limit Child Protective Services’ responsibility to aid substance-exposed infants, and how voluntary “Plans of Safe Care” put in place by some states are insufficient to address the dilemma. In this episode, Sarah details the effects of drug exposure in infants, whether and how positive toxicology screens in new mothers and infants are reported, and what practices in medicine and child protection need to change in order to prioritize the well-being of children.

Resources

-The US Is Failing Substance-Exposed Infants | Sarah Font et al.

-The US Is Failing Infants Exposed to Drugs and Alcohol | Naomi Schaefer Riley and Sarah Font

Show Notes

-0:01:00 | How should we understand drug exposure among infants?

-0:01:34 | What are the dangers to children of substance exposure in utero and when a child is under the supervision of parents who are addicted?

-0:03:28 | Why is there a reduction in foster care placements when there is an increase in reported abuse?

-0:04:44 | What are plans of safe care intended to accomplish?

-0:06:29 | What was the rationale behind Mass General Brigham’s new policy on substance abuse reporting?

-0:09:16 | How have we lost our focus regarding the effects of drug policy on children?

-0:11:44 | Is the normalization of drug use working as a gateway to children’s drug exposure?

-0:13:34 | What are some policy changes that should be considered by states and medical institutions?

-0:16:11 | What states or localities can we point to as models for others to follow?

-0:16:57 | What happens when hospitals contact CPS?

-0:19:00 | What prevention strategies exist?

How has the Supreme Court’s decision on Dobbs v. Jackson affected foster care and adoption in the United States during the past two years?

This week, Naomi and Ian are joined by Herbie Newell, President & Executive Director of Lifeline Children’s Services, one of the largest adoption agencies in the United States. Herbie discusses how the recent limits on abortion access in some states have impacted adoption agencies. He highlights the cultural shifts that have emerged since the Dobbs decision, including the decreased stigma surrounding adoption. He also addresses the slight increase in foster care numbers following the ruling, and how to interpret it, as well as how we can create a more positive outlook on adoption as an option for mothers, fathers, and children in the United States.

Resources

-Doing Adoption the “Right” Way Can Work for Everyone Involved | Naomi Schaefer Riley

-Elizabeth Kirk on Adoption Post Dobbs | Naomi Schaefer Riley | Ian Rowe

-What is it Like to Place Your Child For Adoption | Naomi Schaefer Riley | Timothy P. Carney

Show Notes

-0:00:57 | How has the atmosphere around adoption changed post Dobbs?

-0:03:59 | How has the view of adoption shifted in the pro-life community?

-0:06:31 | Has there been an increase in foster care post-Dobbs?

-0:09:44 | How should we think about adoption as an option for mothers and how can we reduce the stigma women choosing adoption face?

-0:13:20 | What pressures might women feel in the adoption process? How do we address them?

-0:18:23 | Does adoption stigma drive single-mother households? How do we better involve men throughout the adoption process?