In Wisconsin, family separations disproportionately impact Children of Color. In 2020, Children of Color made up about 31% of Wisconsin’s child population, but 56% of the foster care population in out-of-home care. Nationally, 53% of Black children will experience a Child Protective Services’ investigation before their 18th birthday. In this episode, we explore these disparities and impacts of systemic oppression on children and families, and how these experiences intersect with trauma.
Today’s episode included the following speakers (in the order they appear):
Opening quote: Tim Grove – Senior Consultant – Wellpoint Care Network
Host: Luke Waldo
0:04 – Tim Grove – Opening Quote on Trauma and Equity
:52 – Luke Waldo – Introduction to root causes of neglect – trauma and systemic oppression.
3:23 – Luke Waldo and Jennifer Jones – Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) and Adverse Community Environments.
5:41 - Bregetta Wilson – Dorothy Roberts’ Torn Apart reading and the structures of bias built into child welfare systems.
8:25 – Luke Waldo – Importance of facing the realities of inequities and generational trauma in our society.
9:05 - Tim Grove – Impacts of ACEs, trauma, and equity.
13:01 – Bregetta Wilson – How are we educating the system actors like mandated reporters? Generational trauma from generational child welfare involvement. Bias.
15:46 – Luke Waldo – Prevalence of ACEs. ICFW ACEs studies. Disproportionality statistics.
17:48 – Luke Waldo and Jennifer Jones – Systemic oppression and disparities.
21:39 – Bryan Samuels – Child welfare disparities. Hispanic and African-American families in child welfare system.
24:39 – Gabe McGaughey – How might data better inform us?
25:29 – Bryan Samuels – How data might more effectively inform the child welfare and child maltreatment prevention systems.
27:56 – Luke Waldo – What would families change about the child welfare system?
28:24 – Bregetta Wilson – Let families lead.
29:19 – Luke Waldo – Closing introduction to speakers.
29:45 – Jennifer Jones - The legacy of systemic racial trauma. Positive Childhood Experiences.
34:44 – Bryan Samuels – The real challenges of the child welfare system.
39:36 – Luke Waldo – 3 Key Takeaways
41:58 – Closing Credits and Gratitude
Join the conversation and connect with us!
Tim Grove 00:04
You can't talk about trauma without talking about intergenerational and historical trauma. You can't heal trauma, or it gets remarkably difficult without being fully invested in acting towards equity.
Luke Waldo 00:28
Welcome to Overloaded: Understanding Neglect, where we explore the complexity of child neglect, its root causes and challenges that families experience that overload them with stress, and the opportunities that we have to improve our communities, organizations and systems that build strong families and thriving children.
Luke Waldo 00:52
Hey, everyone, this is Luke Waldo, your host for this podcast and the Director of Program Design and Community Engagement for the Institute for Child and Family Wellbeing, our partnership between Children's Wisconsin and the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee's Helen Bader School of Social Welfare.
As you just heard from Tim Grove in our introduction, today, we will be exploring trauma and systemic oppression in the forms of racial and class disparities, and how they impact overloaded families. In our first episode, we aspired to set the foundation as to how we define neglect, and what it looks like in the eyes of the child welfare system. Again, according to Wisconsin's definition, neglect means failure, refusal or inability on the part of a caregiver for reasons other than poverty, to provide necessary care, food, clothing, medical or dental care or shelter, so as to seriously endanger the physical health of the child.
As Bryan Samuels pointed out in last week's episode, neglect is often easier to see and therefore document compared to abuse. A teacher may notice that a child has been wearing the same clothes for many days in a row; a health professional may see that a child hasn't gained weight over the past few visits, or that the medication that was prescribed hasn't been filled at the pharmacy; a caseworker may find a family's home with an empty pantry, no beds or two other families living with them. What they often don't see is what is underlying those visible conditions, the root causes of neglect.
Over the next two episodes, we will be exploring those root causes with our policy and research, and direct practice and lived experience experts. We begin today by exploring trauma, how it occurs both at an individual and family level, as well as at the community and systems level. We opened today's conversation with Jennifer Jones from Prevent Child Abuse America, as she helps us better understand the layers of adversity that overloaded families experience. She is followed by Bregetta Wilson from Wisconsin's Department of Children and Families, who reads a powerful excerpt from Dorothy Roberts book Torn Apart. If you have questions or feedback, please share them with us in the comments and rating section. And while you're there, please leave us a rating as well. Now, on to the episode.
Luke Waldo 03:23
So I want to revisit, Jennifer, what you were referring to when you talked about how Black children in particular are often those that are being reported most commonly for neglect, or disproportionately, not necessarily most commonly, but disproportionately for neglect. And at the same time, were living in communities that were under-resourced, right. So when we talk about child abuse and neglect, of course, in our field most people are now familiar with with ACEs, otherwise known as Adverse Childhood Experiences. But there is another ACEs that I think is really important to talk about, and that is Adverse Community Environments. And I'm hoping you can talk a little bit more about how Adverse Community Environments may impact overloaded families and lead to the potential of neglect referrals or investigations.
Jennifer Jones 04:12
I just want to call out Dr. Wendy Ellis and her colleagues. She's the researcher that produced this concept or idea of, of a Pair of ACEs. And so we are all familiar with, or most of us are familiar with the idea of Adverse Childhood Experiences, which are very individual, right. It's around child abuse, neglect, substance use, and you know, all of those things that you experienced as an individual under the age of 18. What Wendy and her colleagues have have raised and brought to the forefront is this idea that there are also these Adverse Community Environments that we need to, we need to take into consideration as well. So things like systemic racism, a lack of safe and affordable housing, poverty, lack of social and economic mobility, these all compound one another, and actually make it more challenging for people and individuals that have experienced ACEs to survive and to thrive. So if we're actually going to address ACEs, adversity, the individual ACEs and adversity that people experience, then we have to think about the system issues that are also contributing to people's challenges and to people's physical health, mental health, negative physical and mental health outcomes.
Bregetta Wilson 05:41
So I've been reading this book by Dorothy Roberts called Torn Apart: How the child welfare system destroys Black families, and how abolition can build a safer world. Termination of parental rights as this permanent resolution is called as a parent's physical custody, as well as the right to ever communicate with or regain custody of the child. It is the death penalty of the family policing system, the ultimate punishment the family court can impose. The United States extinguishes the legal rights of more parents than any other nation on Earth. As with every aspect of the child welfare system, Black and Native children suffer the most, they are more than twice as likely as White children to experience the termination of both parents' rights. In some states, the legal demolition of family ties has risen dramatically in the last two decades, spurred by federal laws, a celebration of termination proceedings. Terminations in Minnesota, which removes Black and Native children at exceptionally high rates increased by 80% from 2010 to 2019. Child Welfare authorities will these powers to supervise, reassemble and destroy families with stunningly little judical constraint or public scrutiny.
Such extreme state intrusion in homes violates well-established principles of U.S. constitutional law that protects us from tyrannical government rule. Such dramatic assaults on people's most cherished relationships targeted against vulnerable populations constitutes torture under international declarations. Such a powerful mechanism for reinforcing racial capitalism, the US system of wealth accumulation grounded in racist hierarchy and ideology parallels the function of police and prisons. Recent foster care rates for U.S. children at 576 per 100,000 are about the same as incarceration rates for U.S. adults at 582 per 100,000. The child welfare system has unparalleled powers to terrorize entire communities, shape national policies, and reinforce our unequal social order.
Luke Waldo 08:09
While Bregetta's reading of Dorothy Roberts' Torn Apart may have been hard to listen to, I believe it's critical that we hear it and face its reality, put ourselves in the place of families experiencing those tragic realities and reflect on the change that is possible in our systems, programs, and mindsets, so that families and communities no longer have to experience such tragic outcomes. In the coming segment, Tim grove of WellPoint Care Network formerly St. A, and Brigida Wilson, again, we'll share the impacts of generational trauma and chronic adversity on children and families.
Tim Grove 09:05
One of the seminal studies around adversity and trauma is the Adverse Childhood Experiences or ACEs study. I won't go into a ton of detail on that here. I'm hoping we can post a resource that if people who haven't been exposed to that they can pursue and study it that way. One of the outcomes the ACE study talks about is when there are high loads of adversity in large groups of people, so not at the individual level, but in large groups of people, the percentage of problematic outcomes connected to that adversity are staggering. So let me give you a few numbers. 78% of IV drug use, 78% is directly attributable to overwhelming adversity. 67% of suicide is directly attributable to overwhelming adversity. 55% of anxiety, directly attributable to overwhelming adversity. 40% of depression, the list goes on and on and on.
So that is sort of dot number one, dot number two is what are the conditions that kind of promote adversity to occur. And what we look for, and Wendy Ellis has done some great work on this with her team out in Baltimore, is when you have a sort of lack of stable and affordable housing, when you have employment barriers, when you have discrimination or histories of oppression, those conditions are kind of the soil under the ground that sort of create this tree of adversity and the outcomes I just described.
So if we do one more connection of dots, and we start to think about oppression, and discrimination, and folks who have been disenfranchised, we can look to the Joy DeGruys of the world, the Maria Yellow Horse Bravehearts of the world, the Sam Simmons of the world, the Fran Kaplan, Reggie Jacksons of the world, who will teach us all about history that is full of many things struggle, persistence, resilience, but also chock full of varying forms of oppression. And so when we trauma geeks think about that, from a generational trauma point of view, from historical trauma point of view, the three dots connect quite unfortunately nicely. And that when you've got, for example, Black, African American perspective, a 420 year history of varying forms of resilience, persistence, opression contributing with these conditions that sort of Dr. Ellis would describe under the ground, it's really the only accurate way to think about the individual person you're working with in front of you. So we say stuff at Wellpoint like "you can't talk about trauma without talking about intergenerational and historical trauma. And we also say stuff like you can't heal trauma, or it gets remarkably difficult without being fully invested in acting towards equity.
Bregetta Wilson 13:01
You know, when I read that, I found it to be very alarming. So when you talk about generational trauma, and some of the things that our families face, this is one issue that is a constant when you think about terminating parental rights. But when you think about, well, what are the causes, you know, our families, families nationwide, in Wisconsin, everywhere, really face a lot of social issues that feed into fueling child welfare, so to speak, you know, when you think about housing, or the language around how do we define neglect? And how are we educating certain aspects of systems when you think about the mandated reporting structure? And what we do when a call comes in on a child who may have, you know, been a little smelly at school for the last couple of days, and that gets called into CPS? Is that a real reason?
You know, to really call and engage child welfare, I think that it's important to be mindful of how a lot of the social issues contribute to the generational trauma of families that are consistently, either their family was in child welfare, and there's a history and that history moves along the child welfare system, so to speak, for generations to come, 10 years later, you know, last names follow you, so to speak. And so when you think about the causes, it really boils down to the social aspects of of our society that have to do with housing. It goes to the language once again, how we define neglect. And it also, you know, goes to how do we report neglect? How do we report child abuse? What does that really look like? And so it varies because of people's biases. You know, everyone's bias is different, you know, you and I have different ways of viewing the same situation. And it's not necessarily wrong. But is it equitable? Is it just? Is it, what are the morals in that?
Luke Waldo 15:46
Through Jennifer, Bregetta and Tim, I hope you have developed a strong understanding of the many forms that adversity and trauma present themselves, whether through generations of oppression or traumatic experiences, or the home or social environments that can cause chronic stress or adversity. Whatever form it may be, it is hard to understate the profound impacts they can have on overloading individuals and families and ultimately impairing their ability to cope with and manage the next challenge.
Much like you heard from Tim earlier, our UWM colleagues at the Institute conducted a study that showed that families involved with the child welfare system in Milwaukee, and families participating in home visiting programs in Milwaukee and Racine, were more than two times as likely as the general population in Wisconsin, to have experienced most of the adverse childhood experiences that Jennifer Jones shared earlier. In some cases, such as having an incarcerated parent, they were up to six times more likely, and where the ACEs study shows the most adverse long term impacts on overall health outcomes, having four or more ACEs, they were nearly three times more likely.
In the coming segment, Jennifer, Bryan and Bregetta will talk about systemic racism, disproportionality and racial trauma, as we face the disturbing reality and history in the US, where 53% of Black children will be subjected to Child Protective Services investigation prior to their 18th birthday. Here in Wisconsin, family separations disproportionately impact children of color. In 2020, children of color made up about 31% of Wisconsin child's population, but 56% of the foster care population in out-of-home care. As we will hear from Bryan Samuels of Chapin Hall, there is a growing and disproportionate number of Hispanic children now being separated from their families and entering the child welfare system in different areas of the country.
Luke Waldo 17:47
So in the article that you co-wrote with, with your colleagues at Prevent Child Abuse America, there's a quote that I found particularly compelling that leads nicely I think, into this next question and kind of builds off of what you just shared. So I want to read it for quickly. Individualizing problems turns policymakers away from considering their structural causes. Policies which treat medical deviance, no doubt help thousands of people, but they do so at the cost of expanding state intervention without increasing the state's ability to redress the fundamental inequities which underlie abuse and neglect. So my question for you, Jennifer, is what are those fundamental inequities that underlie neglect, especially here in Wisconsin?
Jennifer Jones 18:31
So I would say, Luke, that you know, and we, you know, we have, we have raised some of this, we have talked about some of this, you know, the idea of, you know, the inequities of obviously race, right, we have issues of systemic racism, we have people of color living in under-resourced communities; we have people that can't access, safe and affordable housing; we have people that can't access nutritional food or medical care. Or, and so all of these system issues, again, contribute to and compound the individual adversities that folks are having. So we tend to focus our attention and strategies on various individual traumas and adversities, and I think that quote was a beautiful quote that you picked out.
So the things that we know are described in the ACEs study, but what we tend to ignore or overlook, or these system issues and the inequities that are inherent in people's lives, but we all know are just as impactful. You both are systems people. We did a lot of systems change work in the context of our Change in Mind work together. You can create all the programs and services, but at the end of the day, you aren't going to move the needle on the systemic issues, the issues that are inherent in people's lives, and as a result, and I think this is also It just emphasizes the point that you stated that, you know, for decades, our interventions and policy responses have been directed towards this idea of addressing individual behaviors. Same with resilience, right?
We all believe that resilience is internal, and that we have to make people more resilient. But we're not actually addressing the systemic issues that are contributing to generations of trauma. And so again, I think it's absolutely essential and imperative that if we're going to move, or make any movement, to change these cycles of intergenerational trauma, to impact these inequities that exist, not just in Wisconsin, but we know exist all over the country, that we have to not only address the individual ACEs and adversity, but the conditions and systems in which people live. And that's why we love Dr. Wendy Ellis' work around the Pair of ACEs because it really brings that to the forefront. It not only shows and represents what we all experience, a majority of us have experienced Adverse Childhood Experiences, have ACEs, have an ACE score, and it really brings to light the inequities that actually make it even harder for people to to be well and to be healthy, and to not participate in risky behaviors.
Bryan Samuels 21:39
As the demographics change in child welfare, one of the group of families that don't get the attention that's necessary, and that's the Hispanic population. In many states, in the state of Illinois, the Hispanic population is 20-25% of the state population. Increasingly, those numbers of Hispanic or Latinx families in the child welfare system, those numbers are going up, they're not going down. So we tend to think urban, we tend to think families of color equates to African American families. But increasingly, Hispanic families are coming into the system. And I think more attention needs to be paid to what's going on in those families that are increasing their visibility in child welfare.
I looked at some recent federal data, the data that's most readily available to the public, to look at the demographic changes in the child welfare population. And what you see across the last 10 years, is a slow decline in the number of African American families in the system, and a slow increase in the number of Hispanic or Latinx families in the system. And in 2020, for the first time, I think in the history of the country, more Hispanic children entered the foster care system than did African American children. The other interesting thing is when you look at disproportionality, right, which is the percentage of the state general population, and the percentage of the Child Welfare population, the demographic makeups there, what you see, at least back in 2019 and 2020, is many of the states that were disproportionately African American are not the states with the highest disproportionality for Hispanic families. And so it's not this kind of, oh, they're just replacing families, African American families with Hispanic families, it appears to be a separate and unrelated phenomenon, that somebody ought to spend more time poking around to get a better understanding of what's happening at the community level that are driving those changes.
Gabe McGaughey 24:39
Well, I think that brings up a good question, you know, in child welfare we've gotten more used to, I don't think we're routinely used to looking at our outcomes by race. I think we've improved, but I don't think we're where we want to get in terms of helping that inform our policy and adjust our policy and practice. Where do you see the opportunities and looking at using looking at outcomes by race or race data that's available that highlights potential differences by race and ethnicity in the prevention space, like how do we make that have that as we talk more about prevention? How do we make sure that's baked into the new wellbeing system that puts more emphasis on prevention rather than separation?
Bryan Samuels 25:29
So again, I think what's important in looking at the data is, is not to continue to make the mistake of separating out those things that appear to be economically related, versus those things that tend to be human services or social services related, right. And so as you try to build up prevention systems, you really want to be looking at the larger set of social determinants of health. Because those are kind of the best kind of warning signs around vulnerabilities within communities.
So I think we got to be looking at the data, but if child welfare is just looking at the families that are being reported for abuse and neglect, and not looking at where AFDC or TANF is going up in the state, we're looking at job losses are the greatest, you're going to miss the opportunity to really create a coherent system. So it's about looking at some of those economic, right, underlying data, and understanding how that's driving family vulnerabilities. Because as best we can tell, the economic and concrete services that are associated with healthy and successful families happen in the prevention space, right? If we try to get to the economic and concrete supports, after that family is already involved in the foster care system is going to take more time and more resources to be successful. So being smart about using data, looking forward, but not just using the Child Welfare related data to build a prevention strategy. But looking at a larger data set. And looking at it from a geographic standpoint, I think is really critical.
Luke Waldo 27:41
If you are asking families, particularly those that are experiencing generational poverty or generational involvement with the child welfare system and adjacent systems, what would they change about our systems and more specifically, the systems that are impacting them very directly, like the child welfare system, and others, again, adjacent system?
Bregetta Wilson 28:24
Beginning with the family, if we really let the family lead, what would that look like? Keeping families together, you know, when you think not just about if a family is struggling, but placing that child with someone who's in kinship care, or, you know, has someone who they're close to that they can stay with. I think that we're shifting to do that more often. Yet, I also believe that, you know, is something that we have to be mindful of how that also impacts families and how that impacts sometimes creating a wedge between families that may have their children placed with another family member? How do we also be mindful of those things?
Luke Waldo 29:19
In our final segment of this episode, Jennifer and Bryan talk about the failures of our systems and the potential of systems change that may better serve, support and empower children and families.
Jennifer Jones 29:46
When a child has traumatic experiences like neglect or abuse, they can actually alter the brain's architecture and function. And this all shows up later in adulthood and negative physical and mental health issues, in participation in high risky behaviors, and in early death. We also know that Adverse Childhood Experiences, or ACEs, they're prevalent, so all of us have them. And they are more common among people of color. And in fact, women, LGBTQ individuals, most racial and ethnic groups are at a at a much higher risk of experiencing four or more ACEs. And we know the research in terms of what happens to people who experience four or more ACEs. And they're the higher percentages of them experiencing negative and physical health outcomes. These adverse and traumatic experiences can be passed along for generations, we know that the history and the research around epigenetics in particular, so there's the individual ACEs that we know contribute to these generational challenges that families experience.
I also want to add here, just because I think it's relevant and important, is that there's this recent body of research that I've been involved in, called Positive Childhood Experiences. And I actually had the pleasure of working with Dr. Christina Bethell and her team at Johns Hopkins and Dr. Bob Sege and Dr. Jeff Linkenbach and others, to create this idea of a Positive Childhood Experiences score. And so as you both remember, because I think we were working together back then as well, we added, we had the opportunity when I was at the Wisconsin Children's Trust Fund of adding questions to the Wisconsin Behavioral Risk Factor survey. We did that back in 2015, I believe. So these these things like, did your family stand by you during difficult times? Did you feel a sense of belonging in high school? Did you have two non- parent adults that took a genuine interest in you? What we discovered in the analysis of that data is that nearly 60% of individuals with four or more ACEs, and only zero to two Positive Childhood Experiences reported depression or poor mental health in in adulthood, in comparison to only 20% with four or more ACEs and six to seven positive childhood experiences scores.
So this idea that the more Positive Childhood Experiences you have, even despite high ACE scores, even if you have four or more ACEs, the less likely you are to in adulthood to experience depression, or poor mental health. So we know based on this research, and there's more obviously to come, right. But we know that Positive Childhood Experiences are just as impactful on adult outcomes. And we need to spend more time and resources promoting Positive Childhood Experiences, and safe, stable, nurturing relationships and environments. Now, I also want to say here, because I recognize that these are also sort of individual right, it's like, did my family stand by me? Did I feel a sense of belonging? And so there's some work that folks are doing to also look at these Positive Community Environments. So that it's not just about the individual experiences, but it's also about the context and the conditions that will promote positive experiences.
So I think this idea of that we have to address obviously, right, we have to address adversity, we have to address trauma. And we have to address the systemic issues that are keeping people challenged. And those again, we don't actually spend any time looking at okay, well, what are the systematic issues that people are also experiencing, both historical and have historically experienced and are experiencing at this point in their lives? I'll say them again, systemic racism, lack of social and economic mobility, lack of safe and affordable housing, poverty, community violence, all of these systematic issues that we have tended to largely ignore in our responses and in our interventions.
So we tend, it's much easier to sort of create a program or an intervention that deals with somebody's parenting issues or some somebody's substance use issues or somebody's mental health issues. It's a lot harder, and you guys witnessed this and continue to witness it, to address the systemic issues that are actually contributing to generations of trauma.
Bryan Samuels 34:43
You really have had this changing demographics in the child welfare system across the country. It's not necessarily moving at a fast pace, but you have an increasingly smaller number of children coming from urban areas that are disproportionately people of color, and a larger percentage of families coming into the system in more rural areas that tend to be more white than folks of color. And so you have a little bit of shifting going on in the system that's really powerful.
One of the things that is important, it will be important in Wisconsin in the same way it's important in the state of Illinois, is to look at as the population shifts geographically, whether the services need to be reallocated geographically. So it's often the case that those more rural areas have fewer service providers, right. So they tend to have to wait longer to get serviced, which tends to exacerbate any social problem that they're experiencing at the time that they have child welfare involvement.
So making sure that there's a better match between where services are available and where families are coming into the system is critical. I often say that child welfare is not an evidence- based intervention. And as a result of that, sometimes we come into contact with families more than once, before we actually get it right. The tools we're using to investigate aren't so accurate, that on a first engagement, you can get it right all of the time. And so you often see, child welfare systems struggle with families being reported three, four or five times before they finally make a decision to remove the child or they make a decision that that child really doesn't need to be removed, but there are a critical set of services. And so there is a lot of ambiguity in those tools and how decisions get made. And so it's not perfect science around making decisions around removals.
And the thing that makes it the most complicated is when people are experiencing economic hardship, where you can you can see poverty, it's not nearly as obvious what abuse looks like. And so I'm making this point, you can't get it right every time. And so making sure that when you when you do get called up, you make the best decision possible. But it's. thissounds crazy for a former child welfare director, as well as somebody that was responsible for the child welfare system in the entire country to say, but it is true, child welfare, particularly investigations are not an evidence-based intervention. Child Welfare doesn't get it right every time. And there are real consequences when Child Welfare gets it wrong.
Having said all of that, we know what it looks like when child welfare plays it safe, and simply takes any child that gets reported. That's what happened in the '90s when the child welfare system doubled in size. By child welfare, every time it was getting called out, we'd go into families and if there was any ambiguity whatsoever, about abuse and neglect, they took the kid into the system. We don't want to go back there. So we want to get better at figuring out what families need to be successful. That ought to be the focus of child welfare. Because just going into families and taking kids because it's easy, it's just a bad policy direction to go in. The country's learned a ton from that. Don't nobody want to go back there.
Luke Waldo 39:23
I hope that today's episode and insights from our experts have you thinking more about how generational trauma, chronic adversity and systemic oppression are too often what is underlying neglect. How might we change our systems so that families no longer experience the tragedy that Bregetta read to us? How might we aspire to the vision with which Tim opened our episode? hope you'll come back for future episodes as we explore those questions more deeply.
But before we go, today, I wanted to highlight three key takeaways to reflect on as we move into our next episodes. First, generational trauma, and chronic adversity are prevalent. Too many individuals, families and communities are overloaded with the stress, pain and often unhealthy coping that comes from that.
Second, we need to see these individuals, families and communities as the survivors that they are, and begin asking ourselves how we can do and be better, so that survival is no longer a daily condition of life in our communities.
And third, we, as part of a system, have a responsibility to challenge our mindsets and biases that too often lead to the disproportionate targeting of people of color. When we ask the questions that Bregetta asked in this episode, "Is it equitable? Is it just? Is it moral?", we may discover that we behave differently.
Thank you for joining us for this second episode. We hope that you will come back and listen to our third episode next week as we go deeper into even more core underlying root causes of neglect. If you enjoyed today's episode, please share it with friends, family, and colleagues. Also, if you rate us on whatever podcast platform you listen to us on, it makes it easier for others to find us. Finally, to learn more about the experts that you heard today, visit the show notes, which is where you will also find links to sources or information that were mentioned in today's episode. Thank you again for joining us. See you next week.
Luke Waldo 41:59
This podcast would not have been possible without the support and talents of Carrie Wade, who is responsible for our technical production and original music composition. I can't express my gratitude enough to Carrie for all she gave to this project. I'm also grateful to Gabe McGaughey, our Co-Director here at the Institute for Child and Family Well- Being who contributed to the ideas behind this podcast and interviewed some of our experts. Finally, I would like to thank all of our speakers that you have heard today and throughout the podcast for their partnership, their willingness to share their stories and expertise with me and all of you and their commitment to improving the lives of children and families. I'm Luke Waldo, your Host and Executive Editor. Thanks again for listening and see you next time.