Faculty Bibliography

This article describes the rapidly growing homeschooling phenomenon, and the threat it poses to children and society. Homeschooling activists have in recent decades largely succeeded in their deregulation campaign, overwhelming legislators with aggressive advocacy. As a result, parents can now keep their children at home in the name of homeschooling free from any real scrutiny as to whether or how they are educating their children. Many homeschool precisely because they want to isolate their children from ideas and values central to our democracy. Many promote racial segregation and female subservience. Many question science. Many are determined to keep their children from exposure to views that might enable autonomous choice about their future lives. Abusive parents can keep their children at home free from the risk that teachers will see the signs of abuse and report them to child protection services. Some homeschool precisely for this reason. This article calls for a radical transformation in the homeschooling regime, and a related rethinking of child rights and reframing of constitutional doctrine. It recommends a presumptive ban on homeschooling, with the burden on parents to demonstrate justification for permission to homeschool.

Differential Response represents the most important child welfare initiative of the day, with Differential Response programs rapidly expanding throughout the country. It is designed to radically change our child welfare system, diverting the great majority of Child Protective Services cases to an entirely voluntary system. This Article describes the serious risks Differential Response poses for children and the flawed research being used to promote it as “evidence based.” It puts the Differential Response movement in historical context as one of a series of extreme family preservation movements supported by a corrupt merger of advocacy with research. It argues for reform that would honor children’s rights, confront the problems of poverty underlying child maltreatment in a serious way, and expand rather than reduce the capacity of Child Protective Services to address child maltreatment. It calls for a change in the dynamics of child welfare research and policy so that we can avoid endlessly repeating history in ways harmful to child interests.

This article discusses the human rights debate at the core of current controversy over international adoption. Many powerful children's human rights organizations, including UNICEF, take the position that such adoption should be restricted if not eliminated, based on ideas about heritage rights and the related significance of keeping children within their country of origin. They have had a major impact on policy in recent years, resulting in the closing down of international adoption from many countries. This article takes the position that children's most important human rights include the right to grow up in a nurturing family, and that international adoption is able to offer significant numbers of children the permanent homes they need and will not find in their countries of origin. It discusses the history and current trends in such adoption, recent legal developments, the politics and policy pros and cons, and reform directions for the future.