The Disagreement

What you’re about to hear is a powerful and sustained disagreement with the current discourse on youth gender medicine and the more extreme voices who tend to dominate the public conversation. Gender-affirming care, as defined by the World Health Organization, includes social, psychological, behavioral, and medical interventions “designed to support and affirm an individual’s gender identity” when it conflicts with their gender assigned at birth.How long should physicians and clinicians observe a child before they decide to treat them for gender dysphoria?When (if ever) should a child socially transition, begin hormones, and/or undergo surgery for their gender?Dr. Erica Anderson is an internationally recognized clinical psychologist and academic, specializing in Gender, Sexuality, and Identity. She served on the medical staff of the Youth Gender Clinic at the UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospital and on the board of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH).Dr. Jack Drescher is a Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at Columbia University and a Distinguished Life Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association (APA). In 2022, Dr. Drescher was a member of the APA’s DSM-5 Workgroup on Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders – responsible for revising the definition of what is now referred to as “gender dysphoria.” An openly gay psychiatrist, Dr. Drescher has also served on the World Health Organization’s workgroup revising sexual and gender diagnoses. Show NotesDefining gender [04:16]Shift in patients at pediatric gender clinics [11:20]The Canadian approach [16:33]Treatment options [20:11]Determining if a child will benefit from transition [27:04]Increase in cases [29:19]Risks and benefits of treatment [35:01]Level of caution for when to use medicines [42:46]Canadian vs Dutch approach [46:58]Question of rapid medicalization [49:14]Difficulty of the conversation [54:44]Comparison with gay marriage [57:24] Do you have questions or comments about this episode? Email us at podcast@thedisagreement.com or find us on X and Instagram @thedisagreementhq. Questions or comments about this episode? Email us at podcast@thedisagreement.com or find us on X and Instagram @thedisagreementhq. Subscribe to our newsletter: https://thedisagreement.substack.com/

Today's disagreement is about the "math wars."The "math wars” is a debate happening in K-12 education about the best way to teach math. Broadly speaking, there are two camps that have conflicting pedagogical approaches:Explicit instruction focuses on procedural fluency, guided practice, and repetition.Inquiry-based instruction focuses on conceptual understanding, open-ended problems, and productive struggle.This is an incredibly high-stakes debate — especially if you have children or loved ones that are currently receiving K-12 math instruction. To explore its contours, we’ve brought on two math education expertsThe GuestsKevin Dykema is President of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM), an international organization with more than 30,000 members. Kevin has been a passionate advocate for inquiry-based instruction and NCTM is one of the method’s leading proponents. Kevin is also a teacher — currently in southwest Michigan — and he has taught 8th grade mathematics for over 25 years.Holly Korbey is an independent education journalist, whose work has appeared in The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Atlantic, and many more. Holly also writes and produces The Bell Ringer, a Substack newsletter about the science of learning.Today we ask a wide range of important questions about the Math Wars:How do children actually learn math, and what’s the best way to teach them?Which approach has a more compelling body of evidence on its side?What is the best way to teach students from low-income and marginalized communities? Show NotesWhy the math wars are consequential [03:20]Inquiry-based instruction overview [05:19]Cognitive science [06:52]Relationship between conceptual understanding and fluency [11:26]Productive struggle [13:15]Research overview [20:05]What does explicit instruction look like? [23:50]Income and race [25:13]Arithmetic automaticity [29:19]What would change your mind? [32:01]Steelmanning [34:24] This is a special episode of The Disagreement. What you’re about to hear is a live recording from the New Schools Summit, one of the most important education events of the year. This our first ever live taping and we had a blast. Huge shout out to the NewSchools team for making it happen.And we should add that we’re taking our podcast on the road! Would you like The Disagreement to come to your conference, event, off-site, college, synagogue, or mosque? We want to hear from you. Email podcast@thedisagreement.com. Questions or comments about this episode? Email us at podcast@thedisagreement.com or find us on X and Instagram @thedisagreementhq. Subscribe to our newsletter: https://thedisagreement.substack.com/

Should the United States ban or force the sale of TikTok? What are the implications for free speech? In mid-April 2024, the United States Congress passed legislation that gave ByteDance, the parent company of TikTok, 270 days to sell TikTok or it would be banned in the United States. In response, TikTok filed a lawsuit declaring the legislation unconstitutional on a number of free speech grounds. And it’s currently making its way through the courts.What are the compelling arguments for and against a potential ban or forced sale? Is it constitutional?The GuestsEvan Greer is a Director at Fight For the Future, an advocacy organization focused on technology and free expression. She writes for major publications including The Guardian, Time, and Newsweek. And…we should add that Evan is also a musician who has performed with artists such as Pete Seeger, Talib Kweli, and Dispatch.Sam Lessin is a partner at Slow Ventures, a venture capital firm based in the Bay Area. He is also the co-host of More or Less, a podcast that analyzes the tech industry. Previously, Sam founded a number of tech companies and was the VP of Product at Facebook.Show NotesEvaluating the legislation [2:47]The 1st Amendment [05:36]How independent is ByteDance? [11:17]Data collection [16:37]Is there a slippery slope? [17:28]Privacy protection [24:12]What will happen to TikTok after the legislation? [36:09]China’s interests [40:25]Young people and TikTok [46:50]Political factors [47:27]Steelmanning [50:04] Questions or comments about this episode? Email us at podcast@thedisagreement.com or find us on X and Instagram @thedisagreementhq. Subscribe to our newsletter: https://thedisagreement.substack.com/

Today’s disagreement is on medical aid in dying. In the United States, this term refers to the right for a terminally ill, adult patient to end their own life by taking a medication prescribed by a doctor. Medical aid in dying is currently legal in ten states and Washington, D.C.We’ve brought together an activist and a doctor to dive into the topic:Dr. Ira Byock is a physician, author, and advocate for palliative care — the medical practice of treating people with serious, complex, and terminal illnesses. Ira is the founder of the Providence St. Joseph Health Institute for Human Caring and is an emeritus professor of medicine and professor of community health and family medicine at the Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth College.Kim Callinan is an end-of-life leader and advocate in the field of medical aid in dying. She is President and Chief Executive Officer of Compassion & Choices, an organization that aims to “improve care, expand options and empower everyone to chart their end-of-life journey.”Today we ask a wide range of important questions on medical aid in dying.How broken is end-of-life care in America? And how should we fix it?What are the potential risks and benefits of implementing medical aid in dying?How should we be thinking about death, dying, and the end-of-life for our loved ones?And one more very exciting note: today's disagreement is facilitated by Catherine Cushenberry, one of our producers and someone who has been helping to bring the idea for this podcast to life from the very beginning. Catherine is also a healthcare industry veteran and the perfect facilitator for this topic.And as you'll hear, she's awesome at it.Show NotesCurrent state of end-of-life care [03:25]Palliative care [07:45]Question of unintended consequences [12:56]Defining medical aid in dying [16:47]Effect of medical aid in dying on end-of-life care [22:36]Medical aid in dying outside the U.S. [28:02]Process of medical aid in dying [33:56]Is there a slippery slope? [37:30]Reasons why people choose medical aid in dying [43:21]Financial incentives [47:08]Steelmanning [51:05] Questions or comments about this episode? Email us at podcast@thedisagreement.com or find us on X and Instagram @thedisagreementhq. Subscribe to our newsletter: https://thedisagreement.substack.com/

This is a special bonus episode of The Disagreement. In our most recent episode, nurse Megan Tucker and parent coach Sarah Moore talked about sleep training: specifically, the “cry-it-out” method (also known as the extinction method). It’s a controversial parenting technique — one which Megan often advises, but Sarah Moore does not.We wanted to get into the alternatives, but didn’t have enough time in the main disagreement. Sarah agreed to come back and talk about the other options available to parents — what she calls the more ‘gentle techniques.’ Sarah Moore is a conscious parenting trainer and founder of Dandelion Seeds Positive Parenting. Sarah is Board Chair for the American Society for the Positive Care of Children, and the author of Peaceful Discipline: Story Teaching, Brain Science & Better Behavior.If you haven’t listened to the original disagreement between Megan and Sarah yet, head over to our feed and take a listen. Or start right here and then circle back for the more comprehensive dive into the topic.  Questions or comments about this episode? Email us at podcast@thedisagreement.com or find us on X and Instagram @thedisagreementhq. Subscribe to our newsletter: https://thedisagreement.substack.com/

The “Cry-It-Out” method is also known as the extinction method. Here’s what it looks like: at bedtime, parents put the baby in the crib drowsy, but still awake. Then they leave the room and get the baby at a set time the next morning. They don’t respond to crying or protest unless there’s a concern for health or safety. Is this the best way to help a new baby sleep through the night? Or are there better alternatives? The GuestsSarah Moore is a conscious parenting trainer and founder of Dandelion Seeds Positive Parenting. Sarah is Board Chair for the American Society for the Positive Care of Children, and the author of Peaceful Discipline: Story Teaching, Brain Science & Better Behavior. Megan Tucker is a registered nurse, certified lactation consultant and certified childbirth instructor. Megan is the founder of Baby Basics Atlanta, where she works with families of newborn children. Today we ask a wide range of important questions about sleep training:What is the best way to help parents get their newborns to sleep through the night?What are the ethics of the “cry-it-out” method?How should the parents balance the needs of their children with their own needs? Show NotesDefining the cry-it-out method [04:31]Longterm effects of parental responsiveness [08:43]Challenges in sleep research [11:54]What is the average duration of crying in the cry-it-out method? [14:50]Co-sleeping [17:23]Sleep training trade-offs [28:31]Critiques of sleep training [32:28]Impact of less sleep on parents [39:55]Reasons why newborns cry [46:19]Needs of the baby vs. needs of the family unit [48:23] Questions or comments about this episode? Email us at podcast@thedisagreement.com or find us on X and Instagram @thedisagreementhq. Subscribe to our newsletter: https://thedisagreement.substack.com/

In this episode, The Disagreement asks a wide range of important questions about marijuana legalization.Is marijuana harmful? And if so, what is the nature of the harm?Has the increasing regulation of marijuana over the past few years been positive or negative for public health, criminal justice, and the US economy?What are the most compelling arguments for and against regulation? GuestsPaul Armentano is the Political Director for the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) and a leading national advocate for legalizing marijuana. He has written many books and policy papers, including: Marijuana is Safer: So Why Are We Driving People to Drink? and Emerging Clinical Applications for Cannabis and Cannabinoids.Dr. Stuart Gitlow is a psychiatrist and internationally recognized addiction expert. He previously served as President of the American Society of Addiction Medicine. In 2016, he testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee opposing the legalization of marijuana. He is the author of Substance Use Disorders: A Practical Guide. Show NotesComparison with seatbelt laws [05:12]Effects on criminal justice [07:15]Economic impacts [11:29]Impact on productivity [12:52]Public health implications [14:36]Comparison with alcohol [17:27]Substance dependence [19:39]Basis of addictive disease [23:03]Profit motive [26:50]Issue of psychosis [31:46]Impact of THC on psychosis [34:14]Steelmanning [37:26] ResourcesLink to the Lancet study referenced in the podcast on cannabis use and psychosisLink to a Journal of the American Medical Association study that shows the disproportionate impact of anti-marijuana laws on African-Americans Questions or comments about this episode? Email us at podcast@thedisagreement.com or find us on X and Instagram @thedisagreementhq. Subscribe to our newsletter: https://thedisagreement.substack.com/

What role should the United States be playing on the global stage?Shadi Hamid is an American author and political scientist, who is currently a columnist and member of the Editorial Board at The Washington Post. He is also a host on the Wisdom of Crowds podcast.Daniel Bessner is the Annett H. and Kenneth B. Pyle Associate Professor in American Foreign Policy at the University of Washington. He also co-hosts the American Prestige podcast. Today we ask a wide range important questions about American power:To what extent should the U.S. be involved in Ukraine, Taiwan, and the Middle East?Are we the good guys?What are the alternatives to American hegemony?This conversation is a sequel to an extended disagreement between Shadi and Danny on The Wisdom of Crowds podcast two years ago. It’s definitely worth a listen. Show NotesU.S. role in promoting democracy abroad [04:12]The historical record of U.S. interventions [09:39]How many democracies are there in the world? [12:20]What metrics measure democracy? [13:24]U.S. policy toward Ukraine [15:28]Possible motivations for Russia’s invasion [17:41]Is perception of American strength a deterrent? [20:25]Comparing Russia, China and the U.S. [24:50]China-U.S. conflict [39:44]Israel and Gaza [41:36]Steelmanning [51:24] Questions or comments about this episode? Email us at podcast@thedisagreement.com or find us on X and Instagram @thedisagreementhq. Subscribe to our newsletter: https://thedisagreement.substack.com/

Today we have a sharp disagreement about circumcision with  two cutting-edge experts in the field.Professor Brian Morris is professor emeritus of molecular medical sciences at the University of Sydney in Australia. Over the last few decades, he has become perhaps the most prolific researcher in the world when it comes to the medical benefits of circumcision.  Dr. Ted Handler is a pediatrician at East Bay Pediatrics in northern California and the founding pediatrician for Oath Care, a venture-backed healthcare startup. In 2023, he wrote a viral article called “A Jewish pediatrician’s surprising take on circumcision." Today we ask a wide range of questions:How common is circumcision in the United States and across the globe?How do you weigh the risks and benefits?What are the implications for sexual health and pleasure? Show NotesDiffering UTI rates [07:45]Hygienic argument for circumcision [14:07]Sexual experience sensitivity [16:34]Does removing the foreskin remove sensation receptors? [18:35]Evolutionary purpose of foreskin [25:20]Risk of injury from circumcision [26:28]Trauma for the parents [30:21]The Plastibell technique [34:38]Perspectives of sexual partners [39:24]Social/cultural reasons [41:15]Changing rates of circumcision [42:36]Steelmanning [43:59] If you know of anyone who would be a good guest on the following episodes, please reach out to Greg Woodward at greg@thedisagreement.com:An expert who is opposed to banning TikTok in the U.S.An expert who supports the use of consequences/punishments in day-to-day parenting Questions or comments about this episode? Email us at podcast@thedisagreement.com or find us on X and Instagram @thedisagreementhq. Subscribe to our newsletter: https://thedisagreement.substack.com/

Today's disagreement is about the relationship between Israel and American Jews. To have this conversation, we’ve brought together two prominent American Rabbis with two very different perspectives on the current conflict. The GuestsRabbi Stuart Weinblatt founded Congregation B’Nai Tzedek in Potomac, Maryland in 1988 and is the Senior Rabbi there. He is the Chair of the Zionist Rabbinic Coalition and has previously served as the President of the Rabbinic Cabinet of the Jewish Federations of North America, and the Director of Israel Policy and Advocacy at the Rabbinical Assembly. Rabbi Matthew Soffer is the Senior Rabbi at Judea Reform Congregation in Durham, North Carolina. Previously, Rabbi Soffer served at Temple Israel in Boston, where he led the nationally influential Riverway Project and Ohel Tzedek, the synagogue’s social justice wing. Today we ask a wide range of questions relating to the war in Gaza and Zionism more broadly: Is the war in Gaza a just war? How does one balance the particularism of Jewish peoplehood with the universalism of Jewish teaching?How should advocates of Israel be publicly speaking about Palestinian suffering? Can Israel defeat Hamas? If so, at what cost?Two quick notes:This is the first of what will hopefully be many conversations on Israel/Palestine and the broader conflict. Our goal is to give voice to a wide variety of stakeholders and perspectives.Disagreements are live and feral and unpredictable. In my conversation with the Rabbis, there are times where I cross over into being more of a participant than a host. This happened organically. It’s not our core model. But it’s honest and real. And it’s representative of many of the conversations that are taking place right now. Show NotesGeneral atmosphere in Israel [05:09]Feelings of moral confusion vs moral clarity [06:44]What is the cost of defeating Hamas? [08:35]Jewish ultra-nationalists in Israeli government [15:41]Acknowledging the suffering of Palestinians [21:54]What does “defeating Hamas” mean? [28:42]Ratio of civilian to combatant deaths [30:42]Jewish concept of tikkun olam [32:43]Do American Jews need Israel? [40:32]Netanyahu’s impact on Jewish peoplehood [42:46]Does Israel fill a spiritual vacuum for American Jews [46:16]Anti-Zionist Jews [51:44]Steelmanning [53:20] If you have any recommendations for other guests on the topic of Israel/Palestine/Gaza (or any recommendations for any other topics/guests) please reach out to producer Greg Woodward at greg@thedisagreement.com. Questions or comments about this episode? Email us at podcast@thedisagreement.com or find us on X and Instagram @thedisagreementhq. Subscribe to our newsletter: https://thedisagreement.substack.com/