A Minor Revolution: How Prioritizing Kids Benefits Us All

Transcript

• 00:00Good afternoon,
• 00:01everyone and welcome to Grand Rounds.
• 00:03Just a quick reminder about next
• 00:05week we will have our second in our
• 00:08trainee series of posted grand Rounds
• 00:10with our psychology Fellows and welcoming Dr.
• 00:13Thema Bryant virtually to the
• 00:14Child Study Center.
• 00:15Now it will be a fully virtual event,
• 00:17but anyone that wishes to come to
• 00:19the Cohen to be in community here
• 00:21listening to Doctor Bryant and welcome
• 00:22you to join us here in the Cohen or
• 00:24you can join us remotely via Zoom.
• 00:28And now with no further ado,
• 00:29I'd like.
• 00:30So welcome,
• 00:30Doctor Jim Lichtman to welcome and
• 00:32introduce our speaker for today.
• 00:38Well, I'll be fairly brief and
• 00:40thank you for the opportunity to
• 00:42make an introduction. My goodness,
• 00:44I can tell all sorts of stories,
• 00:46but I'm going to wait until the end of
• 00:48my introduction before I actually do.
• 00:50But he's going to be teaching us about
• 00:53the book that he recently has authored.
• 00:55And we need to learn more from him
• 00:57in terms of how best to interact
• 00:59with policymakers and politicians to
• 01:00really make a difference in this world
• 01:02with regard to the needs of children,
• 01:05which are immense and it's only
• 01:08sadly getting worse.
• 01:10But I'm really looking forward to your
• 01:14presentation and what more can I say
• 01:16except that this is a a good book to
• 01:18read and he there's another one that
• 01:20he published a couple of years ago.
• 01:22That I would also say I just ordered
• 01:24it from Amazon and hopefully it'll
• 01:26be arriving before too long.
• 01:28But let's see if we can try and
• 01:31make a child first mindset.
• 01:34And I think it looks like a number
• 01:36of people are joining us and
• 01:40it's wonderful that you're here,
• 01:41but we need to find out how best to
• 01:44interconnect with government officials
• 01:46and policymakers and to try and make
• 01:49a real difference with regard to.
• 01:50A sad reality for so many children
• 01:52that are faced in this world with
• 01:54the trauma and the rest of it.
• 01:56And with that, what I'm going to do is
• 01:59just say a few things that were passed
• 02:02on to me by my daughterinlaw and my son.
• 02:05And it turns out that Adam is a graduate
• 02:08of Yale College and he went to Davenport.
• 02:12And actually one of the individuals
• 02:13that was in his class was Catherine.
• 02:17And she is my dear, dear, dear.
• 02:19Daughterinlaw. And here are some fun facts.
• 02:25He's a talented musician.
• 02:27He sings and he plays guitar on the piano.
• 02:29So we're going to be looking forward
• 02:31to that later this afternoon.
• 02:33And he has two wonderful children
• 02:35and he actually is apparently
• 02:36the coach for the basketball
• 02:38team that your daughter is on.
• 02:40So that's pretty amazing.
• 02:43But I guess I'm really grateful
• 02:45that he's such good friends and.
• 02:47Makes me think of my journeys down to Philly,
• 02:49and I always have a great time down there,
• 02:52so the floor is yours,
• 02:55but the book is out there.
• 03:08So thank you all. Thank you to everyone
• 03:12at the Yale Child Study Center for
• 03:14inviting me here today. Thank you,
• 03:17Jim, for the wonderful introduction
• 03:19and for all of you who are attending.
• 03:23It feels, as Jim suggests,
• 03:26particularly appropriate to be coming back to
• 03:29Yale to talk about my work on youth rights,
• 03:33because after all, this was one
• 03:36of the spots where I was a youth.
• 03:39And I have the embarrassing
• 03:41photo evidence to prove it.
• 03:44So here is a picture of me in
• 03:48the Davenport Courtyard in 1998.
• 03:53And in truth,
• 03:54every photograph of me from this
• 03:57period is cringeworthy in its own way.
• 04:01But I selected this one because
• 04:03it's so perfectly captures that
• 04:06late 1990s fashion zeitgeist.
• 04:08And here's The funny thing,
• 04:12when I was 18 and 19 years old,
• 04:15when I wasn't busy making bold.
• 04:18Sartorial choices.
• 04:19I was actually thinking a
• 04:22lot about children's rights.
• 04:26Indeed,
• 04:27I'd always been thinking
• 04:29about injustice toward kids,
• 04:32So I thought it was wrong.
• 04:34When I found out that my best
• 04:36friend's dad spanked him,
• 04:38I didn't understand why I wasn't allowed
• 04:41to vote when I was 12 years old.
• 04:44I was outraged at the indifference.
• 04:47Of school administrators at my
• 04:49junior high school to bullying,
• 04:52and I bristled at being censored as
• 04:55a high schooler when I got to Yale.
• 04:59I was awestruck by the impact
• 05:01of wealth on our socalled
• 05:03educational meritocracy meeting.
• 05:06People who were 4th generation Yaley's
• 05:10people's people whose father had donated
• 05:13$1,000,000 before they transferred in.
• 05:16People who are not only
• 05:19going to graduate debt free,
• 05:21but who really had no pressure to
• 05:23get a job after finishing undergrad.
• 05:25And I think it was this concern with
• 05:29unfairness that really propelled me
• 05:31to law school and shape the questions
• 05:34that I was drawn to as a law professor.
• 05:37And certainly that has,
• 05:39I think,
• 05:40culminated in this new book project,
• 05:43A Minor Revolution.
• 05:44That's the focus of my talk today.
• 05:47So what is our plan for this early afternoon?
• 05:52What's kind of our road map?
• 05:56Not advancing.
• 05:59So first,
• 06:00we're going to look at how children are
• 06:03doing in contemporary America with the
• 06:05aid of a little historical comparison.
• 06:08A spoiler they're not doing great.
• 06:12Second,
• 06:12we're going to turn to how our
• 06:16failure to attend to children's
• 06:18interest throughout their development.
• 06:20Leads to harm and how Ensuring a core
• 06:24set of rights could greatly improve
• 06:26their lives to the benefit of all of us.
• 06:30Third, we're going to consider the ultimate
• 06:33source of our failure to protect, invest in,
• 06:36and empower young people before finally,
• 06:39I'm going to offer a bit of my grand,
• 06:42some might say radical,
• 06:44but I don't actually think it's.
• 06:46Radical.
• 06:46I think it's grand vision of
• 06:49how we can write this ship.
• 06:52So to start,
• 06:53I want to take us back to this
• 06:56really remarkable moment at
• 06:58the turn of the 20th century.
• 07:01And I want to begin with a story,
• 07:03a direct account of Judge Ben Lindsay,
• 07:05who in 1904 had just been appointed to the
• 07:11newly created juvenile court in Denver.
• 07:13And so this is Judge Lindsay writing
• 07:18directly in the first person one day
• 07:21in a busy civil session of the court
• 07:24trying a will case involving $2,000,000
• 07:27very large amount of the time.
• 07:30The courtroom door opened,
• 07:31and a boy poked in his tussled
• 07:34head and freckled face.
• 07:35The bailiff shoot him out.
• 07:38But he returned,
• 07:39not with any thought of disobedience,
• 07:42but because he had learned
• 07:43that he had rights there.
• 07:45I ordered a recess of three minutes,
• 07:47to the disgust I fear of one or
• 07:49two of the distinguished council,
• 07:52and the boy came to the bench,
• 07:54unafraid and smiling now.
• 07:55Where he was crying with fear The
• 07:57first time he was brought there,
• 07:59three months before,
• 08:01he was what is commonly called
• 08:04a street boy or newsboy.
• 08:06He said that he was having trouble,
• 08:10that for years a policeman on a beat had
• 08:12let him sell papers on a certain corner,
• 08:14and now,
• 08:15as he expressed it,
• 08:16a fly guy had taken his place
• 08:19and cuz he was a new cop,
• 08:20he thought he owned the town
• 08:22and it therefore ordered him
• 08:24off the favorite corner.
• 08:25And he was losing $0.50 a day.
• 08:28So what did Judge Lindsay do?
• 08:32He wrote the boy an injunction
• 08:34to deliver to the officer.
• 08:36As Lindsay described,
• 08:37the boy had a case to me as
• 08:41important as the one before the bar,
• 08:44involving the millions that a dead
• 08:46man had left behind for surviving
• 08:48selfishness and cunning craft
• 08:50to battle for in the courts.
• 08:52I do not apologize,
• 08:54but I rejoice that I thought the
• 08:57boy and his little case the most
• 09:00important thing before the court.
• 09:03It was a stunning interaction
• 09:05as the newspaper.
• 09:07This particular newspaper editorial
• 09:09proclaimed a glimpse of our
• 09:12brighter future in which quote a
• 09:14boy of the streets in his rags
• 09:16has as good footing as the cause
• 09:19of men clothes in broad cloth.
• 09:23But this wasn't a singular,
• 09:25aberrant interaction.
• 09:26At the dawn of the 20th century,
• 09:29there was a stirring of children's
• 09:32rights activism all across the country
• 09:34to address the plight of factory kids,
• 09:37starved and battered waves,
• 09:39poisoned infants,
• 09:40illiterate girls and doomed boys
• 09:43destined for arrest and prosecution.
• 09:46The child savers,
• 09:47as these reformers were sometimes known,
• 09:50gave us child labor, labor laws,
• 09:53and playgrounds.
• 09:54They helped Marshall resources
• 09:56to protect children from abuse
• 09:59and neglect by their parents,
• 10:01bolstered public education,
• 10:02and pushed for basic health measures.
• 10:05Grasping that kids were less culpable
• 10:08and more amenable to change than adults,
• 10:11they advocated for the creation of
• 10:13a separate juvenile justice system.
• 10:15Based on rehabilitation, not punishment.
• 10:18And they pushed for regulations to
• 10:20prevent companies from marketing
• 10:22products that imperil children's lives.
• 10:25Across fields, they offered a new vision.
• 10:29Many societal problems originated
• 10:31in the poor treatment of children.
• 10:34But with proper interventions,
• 10:36young people once destined for lives
• 10:40of desperation could be steered to success.
• 10:43So I actually opened the book,
• 10:46looking at a single newspaper from a
• 10:50single day in 1906 and marveling at all
• 10:54of the stories about children's rights
• 10:56and making the world better for children.
• 10:58Contained in these four very brief pages,
• 11:03these progressives were advancing an
• 11:05argument that the project of raising the next
• 11:08generation of Americans was a collective 1.
• 11:11Society bore the ultimate cost
• 11:13of childhood poverty, abuse,
• 11:16illiteracy and poor health,
• 11:18and society therefore had a right
• 11:21and responsibility to intervene
• 11:23to better the lives of youth.
• 11:25And these progressives made
• 11:27remarkable headway.
• 11:28By 1912, President William Taft have had
• 11:34been convinced to create a federal agency.
• 11:37The Children's Bureau,
• 11:38the first of its kind in the world,
• 11:40focused solely on improving the
• 11:43welfare of all young Americans.
• 11:45As the Bureau's first director explained,
• 11:47the core mission was, quote,
• 11:49to serve all children,
• 11:51to try to work out standards
• 11:53of care and protection,
• 11:55which I'll give to every child.
• 11:57Fair chance in this world.
• 12:00At this moment, this remarkable moment,
• 12:03true advancement seemed possible.
• 12:06Inevitable, even.
• 12:09But over the course of the century,
• 12:12the momentum was lost.
• 12:14What the these child savers had
• 12:17provided to us was a promising start,
• 12:20but it was a flawed one.
• 12:22Responding to the horrors of
• 12:24the Industrial Revolution,
• 12:26the institutions they created,
• 12:29we're focused on protecting kids from harm,
• 12:32not with respecting their
• 12:34autonomy and empowering them.
• 12:36And that drove reformers in the
• 12:381960s and 1970s to decide that the
• 12:41forebears work needed to be raised,
• 12:44not redeemed.
• 12:45And over time,
• 12:47Americans became increasingly convinced
• 12:49that the project of raising children,
• 12:52of supporting their proper development,
• 12:55was the sole responsibility of
• 12:58parents and not government.
• 13:02This was a broad cultural shift.
• 13:04But one that got critical support from
• 13:07elite institutions like the Supreme Court,
• 13:09which produced a series of opinions
• 13:12during this period articulating
• 13:14parents fundamental rights to control
• 13:17the upbringing of their children,
• 13:19to direct their destinies in
• 13:22matters of education, medical care,
• 13:25family relationships and everything else.
• 13:27So in 1924, we have, for example,
• 13:31Columbia University's president.
• 13:33Railing against newly introduced child
• 13:36labor legislation that he warned,
• 13:38quote,
• 13:38would empower Congress to invade
• 13:41the rights of parents and to
• 13:44shape family life to its liking.
• 13:46In 1925, in Pierce versus Society of Sisters,
• 13:50we have the Supreme Court striking
• 13:53down a mandatory public education
• 13:55law on the grounds that it quote.
• 13:57Unreasonably interferes with the
• 14:00liberty of parents and guardians to
• 14:03direct the upbringing and education
• 14:07of children under their control.
• 14:10It was this vision that won the day,
• 14:13and it helps, I think,
• 14:14explain how the United States is the
• 14:17only UN member state in the world
• 14:19not to ratify the UN Convention
• 14:22on the Rights of the Child,
• 14:24a truly groundbreaking treaty.
• 14:27Introduced in 1989,
• 14:28a lot of the resistance for the
• 14:31last 30 years in this country is
• 14:33because of fears of how protecting,
• 14:36investing in and empowering kids will
• 14:39somehow infringe on parents autonomy.
• 14:42That's front and center in
• 14:45the Texas GOP platform from
• 14:482016, which states quote.
• 14:50Local, state or federal laws,
• 14:53regulations or policies that limit parental
• 14:55rights in the rearing of both biological
• 14:58and adopted children shall not be enacted.
• 15:01Parents have the God-given right and
• 15:04responsibility to direct and guide
• 15:07their children's moral education.
• 15:09Now, some of you may recognize that
• 15:13photograph in the upper right hand corner.
• 15:14That's just from a couple months ago,
• 15:19March 24th.
• 15:20When the US House of Representatives
• 15:22passed the Parents Bill of Rights Act,
• 15:25designed to enhance the ability of parents
• 15:29to monitor what happens in schools.
• 15:32So what is all this mean for kids?
• 15:36Well, despite the miraculous strides
• 15:39we've made on so many fronts,
• 15:43mastering flight, creating computers,
• 15:46mapping the human genome.
• 15:48Harnessing nuclear power.
• 15:50Over the last 100 years,
• 15:52our efforts to improve the lives of
• 15:55children have slowed to a trudge.
• 15:58To be sure,
• 15:59today far fewer American kids die
• 16:02of malnutrition or lose fingers in
• 16:05factory accidents than in 1900.
• 16:08But on nearly every axis of child wellbeing,
• 16:12we have simply not made the
• 16:15expected progress.
• 16:16Our capacity to better kids lives
• 16:20would amaze the child savers,
• 16:22but we have failed to leverage
• 16:24this incredible wealth,
• 16:26knowledge and technology.
• 16:28In a country whose Fortune 500
• 16:32corporations generated $16.1
• 16:34trillion in revenue last year,
• 16:38one in six kids today grows up in poverty.
• 16:42In our largest cities,
• 16:44one in seven has experienced
• 16:47eviction by the age of 15,
• 16:49and on any given night,
• 16:50one in five people experiencing
• 16:52homelessness is a child in the
• 16:55country with the most billionaires,
• 16:58724.
• 16:58One in eight households experiences
• 17:01food insecurity each year,
• 17:04a number that skyrocketed to 1:00
• 17:06and 3:00 during the COVID pandemic
• 17:10100 years on. We have turned
• 17:13our back on Judge Lindsay,
• 17:15reverting to a justice system that
• 17:17regularly treats kids as adults when
• 17:20it comes to policing and punishment,
• 17:22but not when it comes to basic rights.
• 17:26It is 2023, and poor boys on city
• 17:30street corners are still being
• 17:32harassed by police officers since 2002.
• 17:35One in five pedestrians stopped by New
• 17:38York City police for 18 or younger.
• 17:50American children may no longer
• 17:53be rolling cigarettes in dimly
• 17:55lit New York City factories,
• 17:58but many still labor under appalling
• 18:02conditions for our convenience.
• 18:04You would think that the hard
• 18:07fought reforms that folks like
• 18:09Jane Addams pushed for 100 years
• 18:12ago we're now set in stone.
• 18:14But it is not so.
• 18:16Look at these headlines related to
• 18:18child labor labor in the United
• 18:20States from just this month.
• 18:22I didn't have to go back for there
• 18:24were there were dozens of them.
• 18:26Once in the vanguard,
• 18:27we have fallen behind other
• 18:29advanced nations on investing
• 18:31in and safeguarding children.
• 18:34At every stage of development.
• 18:36Children in the US are now more likely
• 18:38to drop out of high school than
• 18:41kids in other advanced democracies.
• 18:42An American kid today is 70.
• 18:46Percent more likely to die before
• 18:48adulthood than a child living
• 18:50in one of our peer nations.
• 18:52That wasn't true 50 years ago.
• 18:55In the 1960s,
• 18:56American children were safer
• 18:58than kids in other wealthy,
• 19:00developed countries.
• 19:01But while our peers worked hard
• 19:04to provide health insurance to
• 19:06all pregnant mothers and kids,
• 19:08our policies leave millions
• 19:10without coverage even today.
• 19:13More than 10% of children in Texas
• 19:15do not have health insurance.
• 19:17Car crashes and firearm injuries
• 19:20persist as the leading causes
• 19:22of child fatalities because we
• 19:25vigorously blocked gun and vehicle
• 19:28safety laws that are peers past
• 19:32years ago without controversy,
• 19:34Now in a minor revolution,
• 19:37I argue that this inattention and in action.
• 19:41Is not simply a moral problem.
• 19:44It's also an economic and social one.
• 19:47The root cause of nearly every
• 19:49major challenge we face,
• 19:51from crime to poor health to poverty,
• 19:54can be found in our mistreatment of children.
• 19:58And the positive implication of that
• 20:00is that the best way to create the
• 20:03society we all want to live in is to
• 20:07prioritize children's interests as a society.
• 20:11It's not a 0 sum game.
• 20:15As a society,
• 20:16you always bear the cost of
• 20:18addressing social problems,
• 20:20and the choice is simply whether
• 20:22to pay pennies on prevention and
• 20:25early intervention in childhood,
• 20:27or dollars on trying to address ills that
• 20:31have metastasized and hardened over decades.
• 20:34Childhood is the window of opportunity,
• 20:38as I write in the book.
• 20:40When we invest in the welfare of children,
• 20:43protecting them from harm,
• 20:45ensuring their needs,
• 20:46granting them standing and voice,
• 20:49the profits compound over their entire lives.
• 20:53They accrue to their kids,
• 20:55to strangers,
• 20:57to generations to come.
• 20:59Judge Lindsay was right.
• 21:02The most important thing
• 21:04is the child before us.
• 21:07And what he is owed is not the barest
• 21:10of essentials enough to survive,
• 21:12but what he needs to thrive.
• 21:17So in the book I identify 6 core
• 21:20children's rights tied to particular
• 21:22stages of development that they argue
• 21:25we must pursue for the benefit of
• 21:27both children and broader society.
• 21:29And I focus on rights because I think
• 21:33rights carry a particular weight
• 21:35in the United States of America.
• 21:38And I emphasize these six because I
• 21:41think they're particularly important,
• 21:43fully acknowledging that there are others
• 21:45that ought to be advanced as well.
• 21:48Now I'm happy to get into more detail
• 21:51about these six in the Q&A or informally
• 21:54this afternoon following my talk,
• 21:57but I'm just going to highlight one of
• 21:59them right now, the right to be heard.
• 22:02So why this one?
• 22:06Well, because in some ways I
• 22:09think empowering young people,
• 22:11giving them the right to vote,
• 22:12serve on juries, run for office,
• 22:14exercise real power at school and in
• 22:18our important social institutions
• 22:20may be the most important right
• 22:23in securing the other five.
• 22:26I believe a big part of why we
• 22:29have not made more progress on
• 22:31addressing climate change.
• 22:33Gun violence, crumbling schools,
• 22:36and childhood poverty is that
• 22:38kids themselves have no power.
• 22:41As Susan B Anthony explained, quote,
• 22:44the moment you deprive a person of his
• 22:46right to a voice in the government,
• 22:49you degrade him from the status of a
• 22:52citizen of the Republic to that of a subject.
• 22:55A person helpless,
• 22:57powerless,
• 22:58bound to obey laws made by superiors.
• 23:03There was a brutal honesty to
• 23:06octogenarian Senator Dianne
• 23:07Feinstein's explanation of why she
• 23:10wouldn't be listening to the young
• 23:12teen climate activists who'd come
• 23:14to meet with her in 2019.
• 23:17Well,
• 23:18you didn't vote for me.
• 23:22Now, when I talk to folks about extending
• 23:25the franchise to those under 18,
• 23:27the first response I usually get is that
• 23:31kids don't have the necessary capacity.
• 23:34But I think that is belied by the evidence
• 23:37we have from psychology and neuroscience,
• 23:39which suggests that when it comes to voting,
• 23:42relevant cognition,
• 23:43that sort of cold rational cognition,
• 23:46there doesn't appear to be a significant
• 23:49difference between the average 16
• 23:51year old and the average adult.
• 23:53And of course, and this is a big of course.
• 23:56We allow millions of adults who
• 23:59are well below average indeed,
• 24:01who are suffering from very severe
• 24:03deficits to vote, no questions asked.
• 24:07The fall back defense that I get is that
• 24:11even if it is true that kids shouldn't
• 24:14be disqualified based on incapacity,
• 24:16it is a fact that those under 18 don't
• 24:20have sufficient life experience.
• 24:23But that's not true either.
• 24:25Indeed,
• 24:25many young people have significant
• 24:28lived experience relevant to the
• 24:31most pressing issues of the day.
• 24:33They know what a lockdown drill feels like,
• 24:37they've experienced racism and sexism,
• 24:41they know how TikTok works,
• 24:45and they have skin in the game.
• 24:48A 15 year old is going to live with
• 24:50the consequences of the next election.
• 24:53On her reproductive choices,
• 24:54on her job prospects,
• 24:56on the habitability of the world
• 25:00in a way that her 89 year old
• 25:03great grandfather simply will not.
• 25:06So what is the major impediment we face
• 25:09in changing course on building on the
• 25:12legacy of the child savers and really
• 25:16pushing forward on children's rights?
• 25:19I'm convinced that it is not
• 25:21animosity to children some desire.
• 25:24Although we harm children in countless ways,
• 25:27it is not out of a desire to
• 25:29harm children that that happens.
• 25:32It happens, I think,
• 25:34because of a heedlessness,
• 25:39and I want to spend a bit of time
• 25:41considering how this indifference
• 25:43has manifested in the legal system,
• 25:45in particular the criminal justice system.
• 25:48And once again, let's start with a story.
• 25:54So when I talked to Adam and Ariel
• 25:57about the early years of their lives,
• 26:00Adam used the words Fondest memories.
• 26:03Twice there were horses and haylofts.
• 26:07There was a pond and an easy bake oven.
• 26:11They love their parents.
• 26:13But at six and three, Adam and Ariel.
• 26:17And their younger sister were uprooted,
• 26:19pulled up from that North Carolina
• 26:22family farm and tossed into an orphanage.
• 26:25Within Adam's words,
• 26:26a lot of really angry children cast
• 26:30offs shuffled from room to room.
• 26:34Their parents had been arrested
• 26:36for taking part in a conspiracy to
• 26:38distribute cocaine and marijuana.
• 26:41The prosecutor secured 4 life
• 26:44sentences for their father.
• 26:46And then?
• 26:47Appealed the 6 1/2 years he'd
• 26:49gotten for their mother,
• 26:51arguing that the trial judge had
• 26:53erred by taking into consideration
• 26:55that she had young children.
• 26:59According to him,
• 27:01she should have gotten 15 to 20 years.
• 27:043 judges on the 4th Circuit agreed.
• 27:07Adam and Ariel were relevant
• 27:11as the judges wrote quote.
• 27:13Because there is nothing extraordinary
• 27:14about the fact that the defendant
• 27:16had three minor children.
• 27:18A departure on that basis was improper.
• 27:23If that strikes you as monstrous, it is.
• 27:29But this blindness to children
• 27:31is the norm in criminal law.
• 27:33It's usual cruelty.
• 27:37We built our system of mass
• 27:39incarceration without much of A thought
• 27:41for how it might impact children,
• 27:43and today we operate a correctional system
• 27:46that excludes and erases them at every turn.
• 27:50Some 5,000,000 American kids have
• 27:52or have had a parent locked up.
• 27:56Sentencing guidelines may now be
• 27:58advisory rather than required,
• 28:01but judges continue to toe the line.
• 28:03With a downward departure on account
• 28:06of family ties granted in just 9% of
• 28:09federal cases, as we have set about
• 28:13assigning prisoners to prisons,
• 28:15making visitation rules,
• 28:16and entering phone and mail contracts,
• 28:20kids have not been at the negotiating
• 28:23table or even in the room. Sorry.
• 28:26Your mom is now housed in a
• 28:29facility hundreds of miles away.
• 28:31Sorry.
• 28:32We don't allow sitting on laps during visits.
• 28:36Sorry.
• 28:37Calls to your dad cost a dollar a minute,
• 28:41as Ariel explains.
• 28:43My mom was in Lexington, KY,
• 28:45and my dad was in Atlanta,
• 28:48and we saw them about once a year.
• 28:51She remembers when she turned 8
• 28:53and prison officials told her
• 28:55that she could now no longer
• 28:57hold her dad during the visit.
• 29:00Sorry.
• 29:03Our policing practices reflect this
• 29:06same heedlessness to children's
• 29:08welfare in America today.
• 29:10Police officers kicked down doors in
• 29:13the dead of night with guns drawn to
• 29:15drag away fathers as they're terrified.
• 29:18Children watch.
• 29:19They execute pit maneuvers,
• 29:22flipping minivans,
• 29:23carrying children when mom doesn't pull
• 29:26over quickly enough on the highway.
• 29:28They use the same restraint techniques
• 29:31on 100 pound autistic 14 year old who
• 29:35gets upset playing laser tag as they
• 29:37do on a 200 pound man with a knife.
• 29:40The invisibility of children across
• 29:43our legal system is a product of both
• 29:47careless apathy and indifference by design.
• 29:51Indeed, the general assumption
• 29:54is that to ensure accuracy.
• 29:57Fairness and objectivity.
• 29:58We should remove kids from the equation.
• 30:02The plea to think of the children
• 30:06is dismissed as a logical fallacy,
• 30:10a detour into sentiment tower.
• 30:15Don't get distracted by the dead
• 30:176 year old child and applying
• 30:19that second degree murder statue
• 30:21to the facts of the case.
• 30:23Ignore the pictures of those
• 30:25crying kids at the border.
• 30:27When setting immigration policy,
• 30:30postpone the debate over that gun
• 30:33control bill until memories of the
• 30:37latest school shooting have dimmed.
• 30:40Good law is made in the absence of children,
• 30:43we are told.
• 30:45I'm convinced that is wrong,
• 30:48and it's not only devastating to kids but
• 30:52also deeply destructive to our country.
• 30:55Children need to be prioritized when lawyers,
• 30:58judges,
• 30:58police officers and others
• 31:00approach their work.
• 31:05Now, given the overwhelming evidence on
• 31:08the importance of attachment between
• 31:10primary caregivers and young children,
• 31:13and the crushing lifelong toll
• 31:16of parental incarceration,
• 31:17the default should never be
• 31:19to lock up a fit guardian.
• 31:22We should look to other correctional tools,
• 31:24like monitoring,
• 31:25that do not take kids away from
• 31:28their parents and draw confidence
• 31:30in the data that shows that strong
• 31:34family connections reduce recidivism.
• 31:36As we work toward that ambitious goal,
• 31:40we can move more quickly on bail
• 31:42reform to keep most parents at
• 31:44home with their kids pretrial,
• 31:46and on making all phone calls between
• 31:49children and incarcerated parents.
• 31:51Free.
• 31:53The same mindset would lead us to
• 31:55eliminate common law enforcement methods,
• 31:58including high pressure interrogation
• 32:00procedures known to elicit false
• 32:02confessions from juveniles,
• 32:04no knock warrants that put children at
• 32:07unnecessary risk in their own homes,
• 32:09and tear gassing migrants and protesters,
• 32:12which can be particularly harmful to kids.
• 32:15In cases involving child victims,
• 32:18we would draw our focus toward them.
• 32:21Not away from them.
• 32:23And over time we would shift the
• 32:26emphasis of our justice system
• 32:28from responding to crime after
• 32:30the fact with police officers,
• 32:33prosecutors, investigators, trials,
• 32:35prisons, parole officers,
• 32:38to prevention keeping our community safe
• 32:41by bolstering investment in preschools,
• 32:44top quality healthcare,
• 32:46excellent public housing,
• 32:47mentoring and other social
• 32:49services for young people.
• 32:51But putting children first in
• 32:54legal decision making also
• 32:56entails A broader set of reforms.
• 33:01Imagine for a moment that the
• 33:05dominant approach to interpreting the
• 33:07Constitution was not originalism,
• 33:09asking what reasonable people
• 33:11living in the 18th century would
• 33:14have thought the text meant,
• 33:17but asking what the words ought to me.
• 33:20In light of the best interests of children,
• 33:24why is originalism any more
• 33:27legitimate than a child?
• 33:29First perspective when, say,
• 33:31deciding whether prohibiting gun
• 33:33ownership by someone subject to a
• 33:36domestic violence restraining order
• 33:38violates the Second Amendment,
• 33:45Mr. Rahimi was subject to such an order.
• 33:48Following an alleged assault,
• 33:50a court in Texas barred him from harassing,
• 33:53stalking or threatening his
• 33:56exgirlfriend and her child.
• 33:59Rahimi knew he was not allowed to
• 34:02possess firearms, but he had them anyway,
• 34:04and he used them five separate times
• 34:07between December 2020 and January 2021,
• 34:12as the United States Court of Appeals
• 34:14for the 5th Circuit recounted.
• 34:16On December 1,
• 34:17after selling narcotics to an individual,
• 34:20Rahimi fired multiple shots into
• 34:22that individual's residence.
• 34:24The following day,
• 34:25Rahimi was involved in a car accident.
• 34:27He exited his vehicle,
• 34:28shot at the other driver and fled the scene.
• 34:31He returned to the scene in a different
• 34:33vehicle and shot at the other driver's car.
• 34:36On December 22nd,
• 34:37Rahimi shot at a constables vehicle.
• 34:40On January 7th,
• 34:41Rahimi fired multiple shots in the
• 34:43air after his friend's credit card was
• 34:46declined at a Whataburger restaurant.
• 34:51Subsequently,
• 34:51police officers searched his home,
• 34:54found guns and charged him with illegal
• 34:57possession under this federal law.
• 35:00An open and shut case,
• 35:02I would tell my criminal law students.
• 35:05But in February 2023,
• 35:08the 5th Circuit decided that
• 35:11the law was unconstitutional.
• 35:16The three judge panel acknowledged that
• 35:19the firearm ban for people determined
• 35:23again after notice and hearing.
• 35:26To be a quote credible threat to
• 35:28the physical safety of an intimate
• 35:30partner or child reflected quote
• 35:33salutary policy goals meant to protect
• 35:37vulnerable people in our society.
• 35:40But the merits of the law, said the court,
• 35:44were completely irrelevant.
• 35:45What mattered,
• 35:46and all that mattered was that it was
• 35:50not a restriction quote our ancestors
• 35:52would have accepted the government.
• 35:54Had not been able to point to a quote
• 35:58relevantly similar historical regulation.
• 36:01In other words, kids whose abusive
• 36:04fathers are currently under court order.
• 36:07Your dad gets to keep his guns
• 36:10because back in the 18th century,
• 36:12men who threatened and abused
• 36:15their kids got to keep theirs.
• 36:18The response from my progressive
• 36:20pals in legal academia has
• 36:23largely been to dig deeper.
• 36:25Into the dusty tomes,
• 36:27let's out history of Let's find
• 36:31those hidden historical analogs.
• 36:34And the market for gun historians is booming,
• 36:38with lawyers needing experts to help
• 36:41them travel back to the earliest days
• 36:44of the Republic anytime a modern
• 36:46firearm restriction is challenged.
• 36:49But what's the point of trying to
• 36:51win a game with rules that are set?
• 36:55Up for children to lose.
• 36:58The rules of interpretation are the problem,
• 37:02and the rules can be changed.
• 37:05Does it really make more sense to
• 37:09construe the right of the people
• 37:11to keep and bear arms based on the
• 37:14understanding of folks who lived
• 37:16in a time of muskets and cartouche
• 37:18boxes than to read it in light?
• 37:21Of the experiences of children
• 37:23exposed to the threat of gun violence
• 37:25today and in the years to come,
• 37:29firearms are the number one cause of
• 37:32death of children in the United States,
• 37:35and the risk of fatality increases
• 37:38by 500% when a gun is present.
• 37:41In a domestic violence context,
• 37:44the notion of replacing originalism
• 37:47might have seemed laughable.
• 37:50Just a few years ago,
• 37:52for conservative judges it had become gospel,
• 37:56and even liberal stalwarts like
• 37:58Elena Kagan Benthan knee at her
• 38:012010 confirmation hearings,
• 38:03conceding quote We are all originalists now.
• 38:08But it was always a fraud,
• 38:10in the words of Harvard Law
• 38:12professor Adrian Vermeil,
• 38:14a quote useful rhetorical
• 38:17and political expedient.
• 38:19Invented in the 1970s and 80s to allow
• 38:22legal conservatives to make headway
• 38:25against a progressive legal culture,
• 38:27what has been charring for many
• 38:30lefty academics has been the speed
• 38:32at which those on the right,
• 38:34including Vermeal,
• 38:35have been willing to toss it
• 38:37out the window with the war for
• 38:40the Supreme Court seemingly won.
• 38:42As Ramil explained in a recent
• 38:44Atlantic article,
• 38:45quote,
• 38:45originalism has now outlived its
• 38:48utility and has become an obstacle
• 38:50to the development of a robust,
• 38:53substantively conservative approach to
• 38:55constitutional law and interpretation.
• 38:58That is enraged and, I would say,
• 39:01frightened many liberals.
• 39:04But this is actually a moment of
• 39:07great possibility and opportunity.
• 39:09In this disorienting shakeup,
• 39:11there is a genuine chance to chart
• 39:15a new course.
• 39:16So why prioritize children
• 39:18in construing our statutes,
• 39:21including the Constitution?
• 39:23Part of the answer is that the judicial
• 39:26branch was designed to protect those
• 39:29in the minority against the majority,
• 39:31with judges appointed to life
• 39:34terms keeping the popularly elected
• 39:37branches of government in check.
• 39:39And since children currently
• 39:41cannot vote nor hold office,
• 39:43the Court ought to have a special
• 39:46responsibility to act as their voice,
• 39:49to be a counterweight against
• 39:51oppression by those over 18 who
• 39:54enjoy complete dominion over the
• 39:57executive and legislative branches.
• 39:59But that's not what has happened.
• 40:02In recent decades,
• 40:03the Supreme Court has acted to
• 40:06restrict the rights of children.
• 40:08To privacy, free speech,
• 40:10racial equality,
• 40:12and bodily integrity,
• 40:13It is imperiled the ability of
• 40:16kids to be matched with loving
• 40:19L GB TQIA plus foster parents,
• 40:21and blocked environmental laws designed
• 40:24to protect their lives and futures.
• 40:27If you want to predict a pending
• 40:30Supreme Court decision today,
• 40:32a good rule of thumb is to step.
• 40:35Into the shoes of any children
• 40:37implicated in the case,
• 40:39consider what they'd want,
• 40:40and then go with the opposite outcome.
• 40:44Yet the most compelling reason to interpret
• 40:47the law, to privilege children's interest,
• 40:50is not simply to benefit kids, but again,
• 40:54because it is the best way to achieve
• 40:57the society we all want to live in.
• 41:00Prioritizing children's welfare is the least
• 41:04costly and most effective way to address the
• 41:08major social problems we face as a country.
• 41:11Focusing on children's welfare also helps
• 41:14to get judges and lawyers thinking about
• 41:17the longterm health of our country,
• 41:20a cataract in the eye of originalism which
• 41:24never cared a job about America's future.
• 41:27When you're focused on youth rights,
• 41:29it becomes essential to think
• 41:32about the decades ahead,
• 41:33to preserve resources,
• 41:36to see connections between generations.
• 41:39Finally, it's worth noting the kids
• 41:42are Canaries in our coal mines.
• 41:45The things that harm kids also
• 41:48tend to harm adults,
• 41:49but kids are more sensitive
• 41:51to the bad effects,
• 41:52so when we make them our primary focus.
• 41:55We intervene earlier and more completely
• 41:58with major health benefits for everyone.
• 42:02Now, if adopting a child First approach
• 42:04makes sense to apply on the back
• 42:06end to figure out what a law means,
• 42:09it makes even more sense to apply
• 42:12on the front end as we create
• 42:15statutes and regulations.
• 42:19What if before,
• 42:21federal agencies pursued new policies?
• 42:23They first had to consider
• 42:26the impact on children.
• 42:28That's already being done in
• 42:30countries like New Zealand, Austria,
• 42:32Belgium, Finland and Sweden.
• 42:34And one of the great benefits of these
• 42:38assessments is that they can allow,
• 42:40excuse me, lawmakers and regulators,
• 42:44to notice and prioritize children's
• 42:46interests in areas where the effect
• 42:50on children is large but hidden.
• 42:52Sometimes the driest,
• 42:54most adult sounding things preemption rules,
• 42:59zoning provisions,
• 43:00intellectual property guidelines
• 43:02can have visceral implications
• 43:05on our youngest citizens.
• 43:08In making this a reality,
• 43:10I believe we should strongly consider
• 43:12creating a new independent federal
• 43:15agency focused on the whole child.
• 43:18To stand alongside the Department
• 43:20of Transportation and Homeland
• 43:22Security and the Consumer
• 43:24Financial Protection Bureau,
• 43:25we need a single entity promoting
• 43:28children's interests and
• 43:30consolidating efforts currently
• 43:31spread thinly across the government.
• 43:34Now one possibility is to recast and
• 43:37vastly expand the Children's Bureau,
• 43:39that first federal agency focused on kids.
• 43:43It still exists.
• 43:44But it's now housed within Health
• 43:47and Human Services and constrained
• 43:49by a much narrower focus.
• 43:51Whatever the path to creation,
• 43:53I think such an agency could help with
• 43:56what might be the biggest idea here,
• 44:02redefining the guiding principle of law,
• 44:06the answer to what it is for as acting in
• 44:12the best interests of children that has.
• 44:15Profound implications for all of
• 44:18our structures of government.
• 44:21With such a mindset, federal and state
• 44:24budgets necessarily shift spending
• 44:26from the end of life to the beginning.
• 44:31With such a mindset,
• 44:33the tax code no longer defers to a
• 44:37conception of inheritance focused
• 44:40on preserving dynastic wealth.
• 44:43Instead, it advances A notion of
• 44:46inheritance focused on collective
• 44:48investment in all children.
• 44:50With such a mindset,
• 44:52the norms and rules of corporate law,
• 44:55what we tell officers and directors
• 44:59to maximize fundamentally changes.
• 45:01Shareholder primacy gives way
• 45:05to child primacy.
• 45:07In the end,
• 45:09this might all feel radical
• 45:11and perhaps even dangerous.
• 45:15But it is the status quo which
• 45:18merits our suspicion and fear.
• 45:21How can America be the only United
• 45:24Nations member state not to ratify the
• 45:27Convention on the Rights of the Child?
• 45:31How safe and prosperous a future
• 45:33are we making for ourselves when
• 45:36we tell children they have no
• 45:38standing to sue the government for
• 45:40its inaction on climate change?
• 45:42When we say there's nothing wrong with
• 45:44their public school principal hitting
• 45:46them with a paddle as discipline,
• 45:49when we ensure that half of US kids
• 45:52have a parent with a criminal record,
• 45:55are we the good people that we think we are?
• 46:01Ariel told me her saddest moment as a kid.
• 46:06It was quote when my mom
• 46:08recorded reading a story to us.
• 46:10Green Eggs and ham.
• 46:11And they mailed a video to us of
• 46:13her reading it in prison clothes,
• 46:15and we watched it over and over
• 46:17to hear her voice.
• 46:19At that time,
• 46:20I was so broken and felt so
• 46:22alone and just wanted my mom.
• 46:26We did that too, Ariel.
• 46:29Her mother broke the law, yes,
• 46:31but it was us who decided that
• 46:35the result should be the torture.
• 46:37Ariel to take her away from her mom.
• 46:40To lock her in an orphanage.
• 46:43It is us who are failing to
• 46:46live up to our core principles.
• 46:50In 1765, William Blackstone declared
• 46:54that it is better that 10 guilty persons
• 46:58escape than that one innocent suffer.
• 47:01The words appear in chapter one of
• 47:04the criminal law case book I use.
• 47:07They are bedrock.
• 47:08Upon which all the doctrine to come rests.
• 47:12Focus on the rights of the innocent.
• 47:15Build your system upon that.
• 47:19How is it that we do not see the
• 47:23innocent children suffering right
• 47:25in front of us because of us?
• 47:30Look back at Ariel's family. 2.
• 47:34Guilty people were punished and three.
• 47:39Innocent children suffered as a result.
• 47:43That is the math of dystopia.
• 47:47But it is not our destiny.
• 47:49We can remake our legal world to put
• 47:53children first for them and for us.
• 47:57And I want to leave you with a challenge.
• 48:01In this short talk,
• 48:02I focused on a few arenas where
• 48:04we might prioritize children,
• 48:06but there are many people in
• 48:07this audience who work in.
• 48:08Other fields who are
• 48:10focused on other concerns,
• 48:12who are grappling with other
• 48:15issues and your homework is to
• 48:18think about what you know best.
• 48:21What would your field or concern
• 48:23look like if it were rebuilt or
• 48:26reformulated to truly put children first?
• 48:29What does child prioritization
• 48:32mean for emergency medicine?
• 48:35What is a child first environmental movement?
• 48:38Look like,
• 48:40What would immigration policy entail if
• 48:44it privileged the rights of children?
• 48:47What is youth centered,
• 48:50feminism or racial justice?
• 48:53What does child primacy mean for art,
• 48:56curation, or architecture?
• 49:01I look forward to reading your essays,
• 49:04but for now.
• 49:06I'd love to answer any questions you have.
• 49:09Thank you so much for having me here today.
• 49:23Questions in the Cohen or online
• 49:31Susie.
• 49:37Thanks so much Adam for
• 49:38this amazing presentation.
• 49:39I love your, your title of being
• 49:41a crusading lawyer and I think
• 49:43that's the epitome of a compliment.
• 49:44So thank you so much for all of this.
• 49:47The additional story that I'd like you
• 49:49to tell you mentioned as we were walking
• 49:51in about the environmental story and
• 49:53the environmental burden as an insult
• 49:54and and that an asset to children.
• 49:58Yeah. So you know what's interesting?
• 49:59I focused on sort of telling the
• 50:03criminal justice story about our apathy,
• 50:06our indifference, our heedlessness.
• 50:08But I could tell a story about almost
• 50:11any area, and I'll tell you a very quick
• 50:13story because we didn't get to it before.
• 50:15So I live in downtown Philadelphia and.
• 50:18We bought an old house house built in 1860,
• 50:22and when we got the report, they said, oh,
• 50:24there's a lead service line in the basement.
• 50:26And being someone who knows and cares
• 50:29about these things, what did I do?
• 50:30Well, I called up the water
• 50:33department to have it tested.
• 50:34I talked to the man who came.
• 50:36We went down in the basement.
• 50:37He said good news,
• 50:39we treat our water so it's it's
• 50:41not like Flint, MI,
• 50:42it's all going to be good.
• 50:45And sure enough.
• 50:46A couple weeks later I received a letter.
• 50:49It said everything's fine,
• 50:51no detectable lead at all.
• 50:53And so my wife and I and our two year old
• 50:57daughter moved into the house and started
• 51:00using the water as we normally would be.
• 51:03Now my dad, couple weeks later
• 51:06sends me a message and says, hey,
• 51:08there's this nonprofit startup
• 51:09that's collection data and you know,
• 51:11you might want to help them out.
• 51:12It's a nice thing.
• 51:14And I said, OK,
• 51:15no sure they can come over and test it.
• 51:19Went off on vacation,
• 51:21got back the letter from doctor
• 51:24Mark Edwards down at Virginia Tech,
• 51:26who actually was one of the people
• 51:29involved in exposing some of some
• 51:31of the lead scandals recently.
• 51:34And the letter said,
• 51:37you have high lead levels in your water.
• 51:43I my first reaction literally was
• 51:44this was sent to the wrong address.
• 51:46They must,
• 51:47they must have put the wrong
• 51:49letter in the envelope.
• 51:51And then I started to actually compare
• 51:54things and being the person that I am
• 51:57both lawyer and a science oriented person,
• 51:59I said I would like to learn
• 52:01more about these techniques of
• 52:03testing water and how this works.
• 52:06And what I discovered was they'd use
• 52:09very different testing procedures.
• 52:12The people from Philadelphia Water,
• 52:13what they had done was to collect
• 52:17the water directly out of the brand
• 52:20new non lead tap for sample then
• 52:24turn on the tap for 10 minutes.
• 52:28Now they had asked me let the water
• 52:31be stagnant in the pipes but they
• 52:33didn't test any of the water actually
• 52:36sitting in the pipes in my house.
• 52:37They tested the water that was
• 52:40in the non lead.
• 52:41Main out on the street,
• 52:43that's what happens if you
• 52:44let it flush for 10 minutes.
• 52:46No surprise what head doctor Edward sample
• 52:48it tested the water that was actually
• 52:51in the lead service line and in those
• 52:54copper pipes with the lead solder joints.
• 52:56And what's fascinating is I didn't
• 52:58called off Philadelphia water and I
• 53:00said what happened here And they said,
• 53:01oh let's come back,
• 53:02we'll do a profile sample.
• 53:04And I said I don't know what that is
• 53:06but you clearly do what they did.
• 53:07They came back measured the pipes.
• 53:10And then they tested it at set
• 53:11intervals and what they found was,
• 53:13huh, look at that.
• 53:16If you test at actually I'll
• 53:18do it this way so you can see a
• 53:20little bit better if you test at
• 53:22moment zero non lead water pipe,
• 53:24no lead if you let it go for 10 minutes.
• 53:28But if you test it where the water
• 53:30actually is. And I thought why?
• 53:33Why?
• 53:34Why would you possibly test in
• 53:36this way Philadelphia water?
• 53:40You don't write test if your child has
• 53:44a fever by putting him in an ice bath
• 53:46and then having them drink right and
• 53:48eat a popsicle and then put in the the,
• 53:51the the thermometer.
• 53:52Why would they do it?
• 53:54Well because if a certain number of
• 53:58samples that they test comes back
• 54:02above a certain level their subject.
• 54:04To have to pay for remediation,
• 54:06to actually have to fix.
• 54:07So they don't want to know
• 54:09that there's a problem.
• 54:10And when I did a little bit more
• 54:12poking around, I said, well,
• 54:14I'm so interested because all of
• 54:15the stuff that they have sent
• 54:16me is all about how, you know,
• 54:17as long as we can get your
• 54:19lead level at under, you know,
• 54:21it's like 15 parts per billion,
• 54:2310 parts parts per billion.
• 54:24I guess that's the safe level of lead.
• 54:26What was fascinating is why is it set there?
• 54:29It's not set there because 10 parts.
• 54:32Per million is the safe level of lead.
• 54:34What's the safe level of lead?
• 54:36Zero. No lead is safe.
• 54:39Why is it set that high?
• 54:41Because lead exposure is so pervasive.
• 54:45If we set it,
• 54:46we're actually should be all these
• 54:49old cities like Philadelphia.
• 54:50We'd have to fix everything.
• 54:53And here's the amazing thing.
• 54:54Philadelphia is a progressive city.
• 54:57The people that I know from the
• 54:59water department are people.
• 55:01Who are nice people who you would say
• 55:03that person cares about children.
• 55:06It's not that they are setting
• 55:08out to harm children,
• 55:09it's that they are going through the motions.
• 55:13They are assuming while everything
• 55:15works just fine and I think in
• 55:18every industry we kind of do that.
• 55:20So in immigration contacts, right,
• 55:22we kind of assume, well okay,
• 55:24we'll just here's a little kid
• 55:25and then we'll ask them questions.
• 55:28It's like you're asking questions
• 55:29about what do you face.
• 55:30You know,
• 55:31a persecution your country and
• 55:32you're 2 years old.
• 55:33You're asking a 2 year old this question.
• 55:36But everything you know the
• 55:37we're following the protocol.
• 55:38We're just going through the motion.
• 55:40That's what I think we have to change.
• 55:41We have to.
• 55:42If you work for the water department,
• 55:43your goal should be to deliver safe water.
• 55:46You want to know how what is in
• 55:50people's water exactly as they use
• 55:51it when a little kid goes to the sink
• 55:54in the middle of the night and turns it on.
• 55:56That's the sample that you want to take,
• 56:00Jim.
• 56:06You so much, Adam. We're very grateful
• 56:08for your thought and your energy.
• 56:11Teach us what's happening
• 56:13in Pennsylvania and then Philadelphia
• 56:14with regard to some of the things
• 56:17that you've really focused on here in
• 56:19terms of how we can make a really big
• 56:21difference with regard to society,
• 56:23to the laws, to everything that
• 56:25we think is important in terms of
• 56:28moving forward with our society.
• 56:29And then of course,
• 56:31I'd be interested in hearing from
• 56:33our colleagues here in Connecticut.
• 56:35How things are moving forward as well,
• 56:37Yeah. So I think there are things that
• 56:41Philadelphia and Pennsylvania are doing well
• 56:44and lots of things we could be doing better.
• 56:46So one of the things about Philadelphia with
• 56:49respect to let is we actually are better
• 56:53than the number of other urban environments.
• 56:56One things that Philadelphia actually
• 56:58was kind of a leader on was,
• 57:00you know, lead paint.
• 57:02Related remediation, their rules about
• 57:04actually testing and disclosures,
• 57:07I think we need to do way more,
• 57:10but at least I think Philadelphia
• 57:12on that exposure has done more.
• 57:16I think 1 area they need to do in
• 57:18addition to water that they need to
• 57:20do more on is actually construction.
• 57:23There are a lot of you know.
• 57:25Gentrification is booming.
• 57:27A lot of areas,
• 57:29particularly in the Northeast were
• 57:31had a lot of injured industry for
• 57:34decades and decades lead smelting,
• 57:36things like that.
• 57:37When buildings are knocked down,
• 57:39a lot of that air,
• 57:40air it actually gets into the air and
• 57:43I think that's a real danger where we
• 57:45need to do more now in criminal justice.
• 57:47You know we have a progressive prosecutor
• 57:51in Philadelphia and I think one of the
• 57:53things that he has really emphasized.
• 57:54Is trying to avoid getting kids into
• 57:59the socalled school to prison pipeline
• 58:03and I think those efforts to avoid which
• 58:07which particularly impact children of.
• 58:10Color.
• 58:10There's a lot of data on how the same
• 58:13acting out behavior that, you know,
• 58:15tweens and early teens engage in.
• 58:18If you're a white little boy,
• 58:20it's, you know, messing around,
• 58:21your parents get called.
• 58:22If you're a black child,
• 58:24the police are called and that
• 58:26initial interaction can just
• 58:28set you completely off course.
• 58:30I think certainly the DA.
• 58:35Understands that and has been
• 58:39trying to launch programs to
• 58:41avoid sweeping young people up.
• 58:44An area of failure though
• 58:45is gun violence right.
• 58:47So we have not been able to
• 58:49solve that and I we just had a
• 58:54mayor primary for the
• 58:58Democratic candidate and.
• 59:00I hope that the candidate who
• 59:02won will go beyond kind of the
• 59:05rhetoric from the campaign.
• 59:06She was very focused on just
• 59:08hiring more police officers.
• 59:10I personally don't think that's going to.
• 59:13Do the take the steps necessary to protect
• 59:19young people from gun violence in the city.
• 59:22But I think the area where
• 59:24I actually am am excited.
• 59:25I just talked to a journalist in
• 59:28Philadelphia about a lot of efforts
• 59:30to actually make the physical space.
• 59:33Of the city more conducive to children.
• 59:36And that means more green space
• 59:39that has effects in countless ways,
• 59:42including simply, you know,
• 59:44just lowering the temperature of
• 59:47certain neighborhoods that are leafier.
• 59:49But I think it also comes to
• 59:52putting in more public parks,
• 59:54better bike lanes.
• 59:55All of those things can make a difference.