Are You Kidding Me?

Description:The American child welfare system is bent toward protecting adults, not children. Kids in danger are treated instrumentally to promote the rehabilitation of their parents, the welfare of their communities, and the social justice of their race and tribe—all with the inevitable result that their most precious developmental years are lost in bureaucratic and judicial red tape. In this special episode, Naomi discusses her new book, “No Way to Treat a Child.” She explains how the driving policy of the child welfare system today is family preservation, even when remaining with biological parents poses a risk to their safety. She advocates for civil society to play a greater role in child welfare and emphasizes the need for increased support for foster families. And she encourages states to do a better job recruiting and training caseworkers and utilizing data analytics to better understand which kids are most at-risk.Resources:No Way to Treat a Child | Naomi Schaefer Riley | Bombardier BooksHow the woke takeover of child services endangers abused kids | Naomi Schaefer Riley | New York Post

Description:Oregon Governor Kate Brown recently signed a law eliminating the requirement that high school graduates be able to demonstrate an ability to read, do math, and write at a high school level. Proponents of the law claim it would promote “equitable graduation standards” that will benefit Oregon’s students of color.In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Rick Hess, a Senior Fellow and director of education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute. Rick explains that schools across the country have an obligation to ensure that all of our children—no matter their socioeconomic background or race and ethnicity—have the basic skills for successful citizenship. He also observes that just two decades ago, policymakers on both sides believed that we were not doing low-income or minority students any favors by ignoring educational deficiencies. Resources:When educational equity descends into educational nihilism | Rick Hess | Education WeekAim high: How can we prepare students of all races to achieve greatness? | Ian Rowe | EduwonkShow notes:00:55 | What is Senate Bill 744 in Oregon?03:30 | There used to be a bipartisan consensus in education04:35 | How would Governor Brown explain this policy?06:45 | Mediocrity in education is painless in the short-term but devastating in the long-term12:45 | Which educational institutions are upholding legitimate academic standards?15:05 | School boards still have a voice in shaping curriculums

Description:Prior to 1972, putting up a child for adoption did not require the consent of an unmarried father. Despite a Supreme Court case changing the law, many birth fathers are still unaware that they must register on a putative father registry in order to have input in their child’s future.In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Ericka Andersen, a freelance writer, digital marketing professional, and host of the podcast Worth Your Time. Ericka explains that the historical background prior to 1972 combined with the unfair stereotype associated with birth fathers often results in the birth mother alone making the decisions for her child. Ericka notes that most people are just as curious about and in need of a relationship with their birth father as they are their birth mother, but they rarely have access to the necessary information to make those connections. Resources: Bringing birth fathers back into adoption narratives | Ericka Andersen | Christianity TodaySorry, Harvard, fathers still matter—including Black fathers | Ian Rowe and Brad Wilcox | USA Show notes:01:25 | Why are birth fathers typically not involved in the adoption story?03:20 | How do we make sure birth fathers are involved in the adoption process?06:15 | Giving birth fathers a voice would be better for everyone08:55 | Keeping the best interests of the child in mind when the birth father shouldn’t be involved10:50 | Why does the putative father registry differ by state?14:45 | The role of religious institutions in the adoption process

Description: Every year, 23,000 children will age out of the foster care system without a loving family to take care of them. How can child welfare agencies, government, and public policy help these kids achieve upward mobility and ensure that they learn the important skills needed to have a successful life?In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Tim Keller, Senior Vice President and Legal Director at Gen Justice, an organization based in Arizona dedicated to fighting for foster care children at the federal and state level. Tim shares Gen Justice’s proposal to establish fostering independence accounts—a state-funded initiative that provides financial support to kids if they are willing to stay in the foster care system and accept guidance on everything from education and job training to housing and financial literacy courses. Finally, Tim also speaks to the importance of prioritizing the needs of the child when thinking about child welfare.Resources: Cash accounts can help youth aging out of foster care succeed | Gen JusticeFoster care agencies take thousands of dollars owed to kids. Most children have no idea | Eli Hager | The Marshall Project and NPRShow Notes: 01:50 | What is the average profile for a kid who ages out of foster care?05:00 | What are fostering independence accounts and how do they work?08:35 | The risks associated with the new California Universal Basic Income law12:00 | Should the focus be on supplying cash assistance or life skills to kids who age out of foster care?18:45 | Thinking about a child-centric view of child welfare

Description: The way we frame conversations about race has significant implications for future education policies. Talking about “achievement gaps” draws attention solely to the differences between white and black students, which can perpetuate racial stereotypes. Maybe framing the issue as an “opportunity gap” instead would encourage us to consider policies that promote equity and excellence for all.In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by David Quinn, Assistant Professor of Education at the Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern California. Professor Quinn discusses the value of focusing on opportunity gaps instead of achievement gaps. He also notes the importance of recognizing historical injustices while at the same time understanding the importance of agency in the advancement of learning.Resources:Experimental effects of “achievement gap” news reporting on viewers’ racial stereotypes, inequality explanations, and inequality prioritization | David Quinn |Journal of Educational and Behavioral StatisticsDistance to 100 for everyone vs. closing racial or achievement gaps | Ian Rowe | EduwonkShow notes:00:45 | Problems with the “achievement gap discourse” 06:00 | Framing the issue as an “opportunity gap”13:20 | Reports on racial test score gaps magnified racial stereotypes 14:50 | Thinking about racial equity in terms of justice28:30 | The importance of agency for the advancement of learning

Description:Families are increasingly finding themselves trapped in a whirlwind of competition for their kids. From rigorous sports clubs to the college admissions process, parents are forced to concentrate more on what everyone else is doing as opposed to what is best for their family. This unhealthy dynamic has led to a decline in civic associations and other institutions that are critical for community and human development. How can parents better adapt to these changing times and attempt to rewrite the social contract?In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Matt Feeney, author of "Little Platoons: A Defense of Family in a Competitive Age." Matt discusses how a harmful culture of competition is causing children to miss out on key developmental milestones and skills needed for a successful life. Matt notes the importance of school counselors and parents working together to combat unhealthy incentives.Resources:Sports Families: The Hungry System of Club Sports | Matt Feeney | Institute for Family StudiesBread and circuses: The replacement of American community life | Lyman Stone | American Enterprise InstituteShow Notes:00:35 | What are “Little Platoons” and how does this concept shape our understanding of the family?06:55 | Why parents are reluctant participants in a hyper-competitive environment09:20 | What is lost in the lives of kids by our cultural obsession over sports and extracurriculars?11:45 | Why the college admissions process is interfering in the moral autonomy of the family15:20 | How can parents push back against these harmful incentives?

Description:The New York legislature has just passed a law that could bring $350 million of tax revenues to the state each year from marijuana sales. While the short-term benefits may be appealing, it Governor Cuomo and his lawmakers have not considered the far-reaching ramifications of such a law. The passage of this and other similar laws across the nation call into question several items: What has happened to bourgeois virtues such as honesty, integrity, temperance, and delayed gratification in our nation? What role does the government have in maintaining those values? If that is not their role, what is?In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Howard Husock, an adjunct fellow alongside them at American Enterprise Institute studying local government, civil society, and urban housing policy. Referencing one of his recent columns, Howard discusses how the passage of laws that enable and even encourage drug use undermines the bourgeois values that contribute to a productive and healthy society. Howard notes that, far too often, government officials are followers of public trends rather than leaders who advocate for proven, constructive values.Resources: Government against bourgeois values | Howard Husock | City JournalAlbany’s shameless weed bribe will hurt the poor | Howard Husock | New York Daily NewsShow notes:01:00 | What are the bourgeois virtues?02:50 | The unintended consequences of collecting revenue from marijuana taxes07:15 | Will marijuana laws create new “dry” and “wet” towns?10:10 | Why do legislators continue to enable drug use?13:20 | Government as peoples’ problem solver17:00 | With the widespread decline of religious institutions, how can seemingly lost virtues be reinforced going forward?

A good education is a ticket to a good life, and high-quality mathematics instruction is growing rapidly in importance. However, an increasingly loud line of rhetoric threatens to weaken our public schools’ standards for high-quality mathematics programs. For example, The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has supported a math curriculum taking the position that white supremacy is furthered by objectivity in mathematics. Will this divisive and demoralizing new approach offer any improvements to children’s learning?In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Ben Chavis, the former principal of the American Indian Public Charter School in Oakland, California. There, he transformed a school on the brink of closure into one of the top schools in the country. Ben credits this incredible turnaround to an undying focus on what really matters: academic rigor. He confronts the ideas and policies that may be detracting from the quality of learning in our nation’s schools and offers an alternate view on how we can revitalize math education in the US. Resources:Math Camp in a Barn: Intensive Instruction, No-Nonsense Discipline | Naomi Schaefer Riley | The Wall Street JournalShow notes:02:28 | How can white supremacy show up in math classes that are focused on objectivity?04:38 | Math as a key for upward mobility for students from disadvantaged backgrounds09:50 | Confronting the idea that objectivity of math is racist, and so are the people teaching it12:25 | Why the importance of math to professional success is ignored16:28 | How to diversify schools without a quota system22:03 | The role that math camps and extracurricular activities play in students’ success25:47 | How to improve math programs in the public school system

The podcast discusses the harmful effects of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) on children. It explores the origins and impact of ICWA, the support and misconceptions surrounding the act, challenges in placing Indian children, and the chilling effect of ICWA on prospective foster and adoptive families.

Description: Conversations about polyamory, same-sex parenting, and other alternative family arrangements have received increased national attention in recent years. But so often, these discussions focus primarily on the interests and desires of adults and pay very little attention to the wellbeing of children. What factors should serve as the impetus for change in policy and culture around child welfare? How should we balance the desires of adults with the needs of children when making decisions about the type of family a child will be raised in?In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Katy Faust, author of “Them Before Us: Why We Need a Global Children’s Rights Movement,” and founder of an advocacy organization with the same title. Katy discusses why her organization is advancing a child-centered approach to parenting, adoption, and child welfare. She outlines her conclusions from quantitative research and the stories of children and adults looking back on their childhood about the type of family arrangement that is best suited to help kids flourish, and the implications that has for public policy. Show notes:01:15 | The child-centered approach to child welfare and adoption Katy Faust is advocating05:50 | What does it mean for children to have natural rights, independent of the desires and interests of adults?10:20 | Why, in the world of children’s rights, adults must do hard things12:40 | The importance of storytelling in the fight for children’s rights14:05 | The data show that any family structure other than a child living with their two biological parents leads to worse outcomes for children21:50 | Why “Them Before Us” seeks to change both hearts and laws