Are You Kidding Me?

Following the Dobbs decision, pregnant women uncertain about their future should be informed of all the options available to them, including adoption. For many, though, encouraging adoption is seen as coercive. Is this accurate? In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Kate Trambitskaya, CEO of Spence-Chapin Services to Families and Children. For over 125 years, Spence-Chapin has supported women in crisis through comprehensive counseling. Kate explains Spence Chapin’s recent efforts to explain the differences between private adoption and public adoption out of the foster care system. The former does not involve government intrusion. Rather, private adoption is an alternative to parenting. Every expectant parent deserves to know that at adoption agencies nationwide, there is a waiting list filled with stable families who are ready, willing, and able to adopt children.Resources:• Adoption After Dobbs | Naomi Schaefer Riley | City Journal• Birth Parent Support: The Spence-Chapin Way | Leslie Nobel | Spence-Chapin Services to Families & ChildrenShow Notes: • 1:40 | What has changed after Dobbs• 2:40 | Adoption as an empowering option• 5:37 | Comparing adoption at birth with adoption from foster care system• 9:45 | What does Legal Defense look like in the Foster Care System?• 10:35 | The benefits of Open Adoption• 14:55 | Is adoption an alternative to abortion?• 21:45 | Who chooses adoption?• 24:10 | Race and Adoption

What should kids be reading in school? A movement has swept through K-12 classrooms to cancel classic texts and replace them with more racially diverse voices. Yet the very authors these activists are seeking to eliminate from school curricula influenced prominent African-American thinkers like Martin Luther King Jr. and James Baldwin. In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Dr. Anika Prather, professor in the Classics department at Howard University and founder of The Living Water School. To “decolonize” the curriculum, eliminating works by Shakespeare and Socrates, explained Dr. Prather, is to create holes in our understanding of black authors and the interconnected history of people today. While these educators might mean well, their decision to stop reading the classics in the name of social justice will only prevent our children from forming a broader worldview. For a better understanding of how to teach the classics, educators should draw inspiration from Dr. Prather’s own classically inspired school based on the Sudbury model. Resources:• Living in the Constellation of the Canon: The Lived Experiences of African-American Students Reading Great Books Literature | Dr. Anika Prather• The Living Water School: A Classically Inspired School for Independent Learners in a Global CommunityShow Notes: • 1:45 | Background of the fight over literature education• 3:10 | Using literature to understand the Civil Rights Movement• 5:20 | Accessibility in Literature Education• 7:20 | The Harlem Renaissance and Classical Education• 9:30 | Decolonization Literary Movement• 13:20 | Background of the Living Waters School • 20:25 | Recommended Reading• 24:30 | Responding to Pushback • 29:15 | Chinua Achebe and the classics

The push for gender-affirming therapy for young people is driven by the empirical claim that if this type of healthcare is not made widely and readily available, kids who are questioning their identity are in danger of committing suicide. This emotional extortion has caused adults to see this care as the only solution to help these children. What does the data really tell us? In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Jay Greene, a Senior Research Fellow for the Center for Education Policy at the Heritage Foundation. Jay explains that previous studies making this claim fail to capture a representative sample of young people with gender dysphoria. In his new paper, Jay finds a 14 percent increase in annual suicide rates in states where minors are able to access gender-affirming care compared to states that prevent minors from undergoing this care without parental consent. Jay also suggests that the effort by guidance counselors, teachers, and school administrators to automatically affirm a child’s gender identity undermines parents and fails to address any underlying mental health conditions that would help everyone work together to determine what is in the best interest of each child. Resources:• Puberty Blockers, Cross-Sex Hormones, and Youth Suicide | Jay Greene | Heritage Foundation• When the State Comes for Your Kids | Abigail Shrier | City JournalShow Notes:• 2:28 | Claims regarding gender-affirming therapy• 6:37 | Problems with prior studies on gender-affirming drugs• 8:28 | Relation to severe mental health issues• 14:30 | Background of Dr. Greene’s study • 16:55 | Discussing Dr. Greene’s study and his findings• 20:40 | Comparing suicide rates across generations• 24:10 | Title IX and new Biden Regulations

Since research suggests that past maltreatment of a child is the best predictor of future child abuse or neglect, several states have enacted a program called “birth match.” This program compares the names of parents of newborns with lists of individuals who have previously killed or seriously injured a child or had their parental rights terminated. Are these programs worthwhile? Should other states follow suit? In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Marie Cohen, a child welfare policy analyst, researcher, and former Washington, DC social worker. Marie describes the birth match systems as they have been adopted by five states and explains the challenges she faced when gathering research for her latest report. Despite opposition to birth match from both civil liberties advocates and progressive activists, Marie says that the goal of the program is non-partisan— protecting children—and hopes that it will become more widely adopted. Resources:• Learning from the Past: Using Child Welfare Data to Protect Infants Through Birth Match Policies | Marie Cohen | American Enterprise Institute• Would a broader birth match have saved Antoine Flemons? | Marie Cohen | Child Welfare MonitorShow Notes:• 01:30 | What is birth match?• 05:25 | A name matches, what’s next? • 09:07 | Unofficial work-arounds seeking the welfare of the child• 11:25 | Birth match and civil liberties• 14:10 | The trouble with data• 16:50 | Opposition to child welfare services due to supposed racism• 20:06 | Potential for future federal action

Classroom instruction in the field of “Social and Emotional Learning” (SEL) has recently come under fire, particularly from conservatives. Critics see SEL as a mechanism for the government to indoctrinate students on controversial social issues. But should teachers abandon social and emotional learning altogether?In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Nathaniel Grossman, a research intern at the Fordham Institute and former elementary school teacher. Nathaniel explains how Social and Emotional Learning has always been a critical component of a child’s education. He highlights the importance of creating a comfortable environment in the classroom for children to express their concerns and to teach them how to function well and collaborate with others. He worries that some forms of SEL will run contrary to values students are learning at home. And he is also concerned that in the name of improving students’ mental health, districts are eliminating testing and other assessments. Lowering expectations for students, which in turn lowers students’ expectations of themselves, is SEL done poorly. Resources:• Schools have no choice but to teach social and emotional skills | Nathaniel Grossman | Fordham Institute• What It Will Take for Social and Emotional Learning to Succeed | Frederick M. Hess and RJ Martin | American Enterprise Institute• A Dubious Consensus on ‘Social and Emotional’ Learning | Frederick M. Hess | American Enterprise InstituteShow Notes:• 02:50 | What is Social and Emotional Learning?• 04:18 | Children will pick up social and emotional cues whether or not they are intentionally taught• 07:23 | Handling hot topics like gender identity and school shootings in the classroom• 11:30 | On sheltering students from potentially triggering standardized testing• 15:10 | The harm of lowering standards in the name of SEL• 18:45 | Evaluating students’ social and emotional skills

Every child in America deserves to know that a path to a successful life exists and they have the power to follow it. But instead, kids today are besieged by two incomplete, harmful narratives. The “blame the system” narrative teaches kids they are powerless against societal forces while the “blame the victim” narrative tells them that any undesirable outcome in life is a product of their own shortcomings, regardless of whether they have received any meaningful support along the way. There is a third way that keeps the individual at its center while relying on mediating institutions to guide and support young people.In this special episode, Ian discusses his new book, “Agency.” At each juncture of Ian’s career, he noticed that young people, in addition to absorbing a cultural narrative that devastated their chances of success, were growing up in communities with high concentrations of fragile families, lack of school choice, declines in religiosity, and significant unemployment. Rowe fully acknowledges the reality of societal barriers in disadvantaged communities. That’s why, in addition to a personal conviction in their own potential, kids need to embrace four building blocks that will lead to a life of human flourishing: Family, Religion, Education, and Entrepreneurship (F.R.E.E.).Resources• Agency | Ian Rowe | Templeton Press• Agency: A Book Event with Ian Rowe and Yuval Levin | American Enterprise Institute• Critical Race Theory Distracts from Widespread Academic Underachievement | Ian Rowe | NewsweekShow Notes• 02:55 | July 11, 2016: The moment Ian realized schools were not enough • 08:55 | Young people are trapped between two harmful narratives • 11:30 | Agency: The force of your free will guided by moral discernment• 13:25 | Breaking down the F.R.E.E. framework• 25:50 | F.R.E.E. is universal and timeless• 28:30 | This book is for anybody who has the ability to shape the moral character of young people

In public schools across the country, “circle conversations“—where teachers ask personal questions of their students—is just the latest example of American classrooms focusing on everything but academic instruction. Should American teachers remain purely educators or evolve into something akin to therapists?In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Daniel Buck, a Senior Visiting Fellow at the Fordham Institute, teacher, and author of an upcoming book on the philosophy of education. Daniel explains how teacher training now focuses on restorative justice ostensibly as a way to create more “safe spaces” for students. Instead, these practices have led to an uptick in bullying, classroom disruption, and more time in suspension, as well as less time devoted to reading and doing math. Daniel is encouraged by the recent surge in local activism among parents who want schools to prioritize teaching. But he worries that some critics may overplay their hand by accusing teachers of “grooming.”Resources:• ‘Community Circle’ Classroom Fad is Likely to Do More Harm Than Good | Daniel Buck | New York Post• In Defense of Suspensions | Daniel Buck | Fordham Institute• Not Everyone’s on Board with Turning Schooling into Therapy | Robert Pondiscio | Fordham Institute• The Pedagogy of the Depressed | Robert Pondiscio | Fordham Institute

Description:Suicide rates in adolescents have tripled since the start of the pandemic, and 1 in 5 kids will not make it out of their childhood without a severe mental disorder. How should we address this mental health crisis to better prepare children for adolescence? In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Erica Komisar, a clinical social worker, psychoanalyst, and author of Chicken Little the Sky Isn’t Falling: Raising Resilient Adolescents in the Age of Anxiety. Erica explains how children experienced intense losses and periods of neglect and sometimes abuse during the pandemic, on top of the typical challenges already associated with growing up. While parents should ideally play a primary role in their child’s wellbeing, Erica believes K-12 schools are not doing enough to help children. She advocates for each child to receive thirty minutes of therapy per week from social workers in order to provide the foundation of emotional security that kids need for future independence and self-sufficiency. Resources:• Five Steps Schools Can Take Now to Boost Youth Mental Health | Erica Komisar | Institute for Family Studies• Many Teens Report Emotional and Physical Abuse by Parents During Lockdown | Ellen Barry | New York TimesShow notes:• 01:35 | Covid-19 has amplified preexisting youth mental health issues • 05:45 | How do we draw the line between the role that parents and schools have in children’s lives?• 08:00 | Schools should have armies of social workers• 16:45 | Kids are going into adolescence more neurologically fragile • 19:10 | We treat young children as if they’re older and a project a sense of independence that they’re not prepared for

Description:Starting in the late 20th century, Scandinavian countries began opening up parental leave for fathers, with Norway eventually establishing at least four weeks of parental leave for fathers alone. This approach has now caught on throughout the post-industrialized world. How have these policies affected family bonding and the well-being of children?In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Kay Hymowitz, the William E. Simon Fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a contributing editor of City Journal. Kay explains that the goal of these policies was to create more gender equality by allowing women a quicker return to the workforce. In reality, mothers remained taking care of the children, and the attempt to re-order gender relations has only confirmed the existence of the natural differences between mothers and fathers. Resources:• What we know about paternity leave | Kay Hymowitz | Institute for Family Studies• Mom genes: Inside the new science of our ancient maternal instinct | Abigail Tucker | Gallery BooksShow notes:• 00:45 | The history of paternity leave• 02:40 | The “use it or lose it” approach• 10:20 | Who pays for these expansive paternity leave policies?• 13:55 | Acknowledging that women have a unique bond with their child• 18:25 | Bureaucratic efforts to redefine gender roles

Description:Controversial ideologies about race and gender are making their way into K-12 classrooms. This kind of watered-down Marxism—in which everyone is designated either oppressed or oppressor—is at odds with the longstanding American principles of equality. How should school choice advocates respond to these harmful developments?In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Jay P. Greene, senior research fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Education Policy. He describes the history of the education reform movement, including the point at which he believes the leaders lost the chance at having more support among the American public. He outlines why a focus on equity and social justice has prevented a bipartisan coalition for education reform from forming. Now, he argues we should focus on a new education reform movement, one that appeals to all families who are displeased with current trends in K-12 schools.Resources:• Time for the school choice movement to embrace the culture war | Jay P. Greene | The Heritage Foundation• Does school choice need bipartisan support? An empirical analysis of the legislative record | Jay P. Greene and James D. Paul | American Enterprise Institute• How responsive are researchers to the education policy agenda? Trends in education research from 2005 to 2019 | Jay P. Greene and Frederick M. Hess | American Enterprise InstituteShow notes:• 02:05 | Education reform is doing great but the movement is dead• 05:05 | What was the turning point for the education reform movement?• 17:30 | Charter schools are reliant on others to open, which has led to an education system favored by progressive elites• 20:00 | How do we broaden the appeal of school choice?• 24:10 | The new watered-down Marxism that is infiltrating our institutions