Point of View September 9, 2026 – Hour 2 : Subsidizing Stay at Home Parents

[00:00:05] Across America, live, this is Point of View. And now, Kerby Anderson.

[00:00:20] Welcome to the second hour of Point of View today. It's been a great show so far and I know that we are going to continue to talk about some really important topics and I am very excited to welcome Joe Waters to Point of View for a conversation about something that was reported over the weekend. Should the federal government subsidize in the form of giving federal money to stay at home parents?

[00:00:44] We're going to talk about this proposed policy, what it actually means and get into some of the details with Joe Waters. Again, he is the co-founder and CEO of Capita, an independent think tank that focuses on family and community flourishing. So Joe, thanks so much for taking time to be with us on Point of View today. Of course, Kerby. Thanks for having me.

[00:01:04] So I'm really interested in this one because I am all for anything that we can do that is pro family and as Point of View has talked about for years and we talk about quite often, we're seeing declines in fertility rates. We are seeing the breakdown of the nuclear family. We know that families are essential for a flourishing society. And so I was really interested to see this proposal and interested to see that at least among conservatives,

[00:01:32] and I think a lot of our listeners will identify with that label, there are some strong divergent opinions. But before we kind of get into some of the different arguments, just a little bit of an overview. The New York Times reported over the weekend a scoop that the Trump administration is planning to use an existing federal program for a child care and development fund to subsidize stay at home parents and make them eligible for those same benefits.

[00:02:00] So as far as we know, this isn't some new set of funding. This isn't some new program, but it's expanding eligibility for an existing program. So tell me if I've got that right and maybe give us a little background on the existing program and then how that might apply now to married couples with a stay at home parent. Sure. As you said, this is reporting by the New York Times over the weekend. And as of now, I have not heard confirmation one way or another from the administration that they do intend to do this.

[00:02:31] But the New York Times reported that the administration, as you laid out, would like to amend the eligibility rules for CCDF, the Child Care and Development Fund, to support married stay at home parents. Our view is that it would be great to find ways to support stay at home parents. Stay at home parents, especially those in low income families, deserve and need our help.

[00:03:00] They make an essential contribution to the common good by raising their children and building up their families, which as you pointed out is the fundamental and natural group unit of society in the words of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. And so on the face of it, this looks like a pretty good and interesting proposal in terms of the ends that are desired,

[00:03:25] which is to support stay at home parents with child care funds to recognize the contribution that they made to the common good and to support the child care that they're already providing. The challenge, though, is that there is not a proposal from the reporting of the New York Times to increase the pot of money available for the Child Care and Development Fund.

[00:03:47] So what you would be doing is essentially making everyone's slice of the pie much smaller. And already only one in seven eligible families, without this proposal included, only one in seven eligible families are actually able to take advantage of these child care subsidies. So we would be making that pie even smaller.

[00:04:13] And so, you know, the really the proposal is, I think, good in terms of the end that is desired of supporting stay at home parents. But we need to work out the means and work out the means in a way that does not make everyone's slice of the pie, which is already quite small, even smaller. Sure. And that is one of the concerns that I have heard raised from people who I will say theoretically oppose it, because, as you noted, we don't actually have an official proposal yet.

[00:04:38] We know that, you know, Vice President Vance in particular has really talked a lot about pro family policies and different ideas and things. So maybe just kind of help us understand the the CCDF as it exists, the Child Care and Development Fund for the families who are currently taking advantage of that are eligible for that. You know, what does that family look like? Who is this currently applying to? Well, they have to be low income.

[00:05:07] As I understand it, you know, the eligibility can vary by state, but they have to be working. And the child care that is provided has to be child care outside of the home in licensed child care programs. So they're low income families. They're they're working or seeking work and they are taking advantage of a program that is outside of the home. So that's that's it basically right in these.

[00:05:34] This is a program that is federal grant administered by the states. And I can think, you know, just in my own experience of, you know, people I know from growing up are currently, you know, in my town, single moms who are trying to work to support their kids. And oftentimes the biggest barrier to them being able to provide or find work is child care, because child care costs alone would eat up their paycheck or exceed what they might even be able to earn at a certain stage in life.

[00:06:04] So that that is a concern, you know, for those single moms. But we're going to go to a break in a couple of minutes. Then we'll come back. But just real quickly, I think that there is an important misconception here that maybe families where one parent stays home are already doing really well. So they don't even need the support. What would you say to that? That's right. That is certainly the misconception, and it is absolutely not the case.

[00:06:28] We know this because we have done extensive polling and interviews with stay at home parents across the country, and they struggle to pay rent and other basic costs. We're not only talking about Ballerina Farm, right, and TradWive Instagram influencers. We're talking about often very low-income families, and in fact, families who may be working but identify as a stay at home parent.

[00:06:51] I remember a conversation that I had in a focus group we did in Wilkes County, North Carolina, in northwestern North Carolina, with a parent who identifies as a stay at home parent, then drives 30, 45 minutes to the next county to work in a poultry processing plant, third shift. So this is a stay at home parent who's working a relatively low-wage, low-income job, doing their best to stay afloat to take care of their kids.

[00:07:20] They want to be a stay at home parent. They want to be the primary caregiver for their child, but they also need to make ends meet. So certainly, when you look at the polling data, when you look at the interviews with stay at home parents, and in fact, one in five stay at home parents across the country is a dad. Many of them, about half of them in our surveys, could not afford an unexpected $400 expense.

[00:07:42] So we're not looking, we're not talking primarily about the higher income stay at home mom or dad who basically has chosen to do this and has the financial flexibility to do it. And it's also worth saying that a lot of these families, stay at home parents, are doing it because their child needs them in some unique way, some particular way, such as they have a medically or behaviorally complex child,

[00:08:08] and they need to be at home and take care of their child. So it's a far more complicated picture than I think what the social media influencers would suggest. That's for sure. Yeah, helpful perspective there. We're talking with Joe Waters. He's the co-founder and CEO of Capita. And we're talking about a reported proposal from the Trump administration to actually expand the child care and development fund to be able to benefit married parents where one is staying home.

[00:08:38] And we're looking at kind of the pros and cons of that proposal as it stands now. We'll be right back to talk with Joe a little bit more after this break. This is Viewpoints with Kirby Anderson. Did we need a study on this topic?

[00:09:08] Apparently, we did because it was attacked as soon as it was published. Researchers found a strong correlation between proponents of transgender ideology and left-wing violence. On the one side, columnist Matt Vesta wondered if we really need to spend money on a study like this. On the other side, LGBTQ advocates responded that the study merely showed correlation and no proof of causation. The report has a lengthy title about left-wing authoritarian violence. Respondents were quizzed about six potential targets of violence for the study.

[00:09:38] Killing Charlie Kirk. Killing Donald Trump. Killing Brian Thompson. Arson of ICE buildings. Damaging wealthy people's property. And violence against police. The study concluded that gender ideology is associated with left-wing authoritarianism and willingness to justify political violence. The researchers added that experimental research would be needed to determine causality.

[00:10:01] Now, when we discussed this study on my radio program, one of my guests reminded us of the very low percentage of transgender people who are in this country compared to the number of violent acts by transgender-identifying individuals. This would include school shootings in Tennessee and Minnesota. This would include the individual who attempted to assassinate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. And in a recent trial, we learned that Charlie Kirk's assassin lived with his transgender partner.

[00:10:30] This study confirms what many Americans have believed based upon many incidents reported in the news. There does appear to be a link between gender ideology and violence. I'm Kirby Anderson. And that's my point of view. Go deeper on topics like you just heard by visiting pointofview.net. That's pointofview.net.

[00:11:00] You're listening to Point of View, your listener-supported source for truth. We're continuing our conversation with Joe Waters, co-founder and CEO of Capita, talking about a reported proposal for expanding the Child Care and Development Fund, or CCDF, to actually be eligible or available for married parents where one parent, mom or dad, is staying home. And so we're talking about this.

[00:11:29] I did want to mention real quick, along with all of our topics at pointofview.net, there is an article that kind of goes through several of the talking points that we're mentioning here by your colleague, Joe Ivana Greco. And one of the things that she mentioned in there was an American Compass poll from just a couple of years ago, I believe, where, again, this is maybe busting some myths that people have.

[00:11:51] Among lower and middle-class Americans, there is actually a much stronger preference for the ability to stay home, have one parent stay home as the primary caregiver of children, even more so than, like, upper-class families. But those are often the families that aren't really able to have one or both parents stay home or make ends meet if they do.

[00:12:16] That's absolutely right, and I think that American Compass poll is a great resource here that lower- and middle-income Americans, what they want is flexibility. And I think, frankly, all Americans want as much flexibility as we can give them. And the support that we have largely offered for child care in this country has been a little bit one-size-fits-all for too long.

[00:12:43] And I think even if you look over on the Democratic side, we're seeing some shifts happening. So, for example, Project 2029, which is a Democratic response to Project 2025, recently released their child care proposal, which would actually include more support for stay-at-home parents than what the New York Times reported the Trump administration is supporting. That's a shift.

[00:13:08] I think it's a positive one because I think we all realize across the political spectrum that parents need more support and parents need more flexibility to make the choices that are best for their children and for their family. So that American Compass poll, I think, is absolutely right and certainly backed up by what we're hearing anecdotally from parents all across this country. So I want to also talk about maybe some of the concerns and just get your response to those,

[00:13:37] because a lot of people, I think, understandably have concerns about, you know, whenever the government subsidizes something, they're getting involved in it. And so, you know, as tough as it is, you know, economically for a lot of working class families right now, is it the best solution for government to get involved and particularly by reclassifying parents as child care providers? Like, is that going to cause some sort of, you know, problem down the line? Yeah.

[00:14:06] Because historically, according to my understanding, parents who are watching their own children aren't classified legally as child care providers. They're just parents. So what are there any concerning implications of that change to you or how would you respond to those concerns? Yeah, I mean, I think there's, as my colleague Elliot Haspel pointed out on Fox the other night, there's some real sort of legal questions that remain.

[00:14:32] Again, we haven't seen an actual proposal, so we don't know what's actually being proposed. But the reclassification of parents as child care providers, which shifts in eligibility away from child care outside of the home, you know, that might run afoul of the statute. And I'm establishing CCDF. I'm not a lawyer. But, you know, I think there's a lot of people have raised those questions. I would say from my point of view, parents are parents, and they need to be supported as parents.

[00:15:02] We don't need to reclassify them to support them. Parents are essential, right? Parents are contributing to the common good by raising their children. And given the importance of the family in our society, in any society, families need our support. Parents need our support to make the choices that they feel are best for their families.

[00:15:27] So, frankly, I would prefer we not have to do any sort of rigmarole to reclassify parents, that we just support parents as parents better and more generously than we have and not get into this reclassification. I've also seen arguments saying that, you know, we should support parents more.

[00:15:49] But, and again, it gets into kind of this pragmatism debate of like, okay, well, what would we like to have and what is being kind of put on the table for us to take advantage of right now? And so I understand that, too. But is it like if you had a perfect world of something that would support families, support parents as parents, maybe incentivize people to have more kids? What would that look like? You know, people throw around child tax credits and different things like that.

[00:16:18] Is there something that you would like to see going forward in our government that would support families more? Yeah, expanded child tax credit would certainly be at the top of my list. Also at the top of my list would be paid leave, paid leave plan, national paid leave plan to support families, particularly in the first six months of life. And I think there's, it's pretty shocking when you think about it.

[00:16:45] I think that basically a quarter of moms have to go back to work within two weeks of giving birth. That is barbaric in my mind. And we need to be doing much, much better for moms. And, you know, Social Security caregiver credits is another thing that we have put forward. It's actually been put forward for decades and has never passed Congress.

[00:17:11] But basically for those parents who stay at home to take care of their kids, to give them some credit towards Social Security such that they have a more secure retirement. Those are three things of varying difficulty to get done. Expanded child credit, paid leave, expanded Social Security caregiver credit or a Social Security caregiver credit. Excuse me.

[00:17:36] I would add to that that, you know, what if we just created a big pot of money in addition to the CCDF that specifically goes to support stay-at-home care? That is also something that we could do. Again, I'm not saying it's politically very feasible, but you asked for my perfect world proposal. And those four things would certainly be in it. Yeah, no, that's helpful.

[00:18:01] And I think that it's, you know, helpful to think what we would like to have because I think on the other hand, you have people who would say, well, they'd like to have, you know, an economy that is a lot, you know, less encumbered, that is more free, where, you know, wages are keeping up with rates of inflation and it's not as hard to buy a home. And it's easier for one parent to be able to stay at home and not have to rely on any government. And then on the other hand, you know, you kind of have people arguing, well, it is what it is right now.

[00:18:29] Why should the government pay someone to send their kid to child care but not get extra help if they want to actually stay home with them themselves? And so we're kind of in this spot where we have to look at the situation as it is and where we would like to go as a nation and see if there's some way we can meet in the middle. But, Joe, thanks so much for sharing your perspective. In a couple of minutes before we wrap up this segment, any last thoughts or information about where people can follow more of your work and research at CAPITA?

[00:18:58] Well, all of the research which has been done by my colleagues, Ivana Greco, Elliot Haspel, and Elise Anderson, including our surveys of stay-at-home parents, summaries of focus groups, and two reports on who stay-at-home parents are and what they need from government and society, it's all available at CAPITA, C-A-P-I-T-A dot org. And let me just say, end with this, Liberty, that I think it is critically important. We have the Project 2029 proposal.

[00:19:26] We have this Trump-Vance proposal. We have a proposal, for example, from Representative Ro Khanna, Democrat of California, suggesting that we need more support for stay-at-home parents. So I'm very concerned that we try as best as we can to not make this a culture war wedge issue, and let's come together across political divides as Americans to support all families, whether they choose external child care or to have a parent stay home,

[00:19:54] because the family, as I said at the top, in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, is the fundamental natural group unit of society, and it needs the support of all of us to remain strong. It's the basis of a free society, and it is the basis of a more prosperous and flourishing future for us all. Well, Joe Waters, thank you so much for joining us on Point of View today and sharing your perspective. Delighted to be with you. Thank you so much for the invitation.

[00:20:21] So if you want to read more about all the things we were talking about, again, you can find those links at pointofview.net. You can find the link to the article that we referenced by Ivana Greco, who I've interviewed on the Know Why podcast before, to see, okay, what is this proposal? What is the argument for? If this is indeed a proposal that the Trump administration is going to be putting forth officially, and we'll get maybe more than just the scoop about actually the proposal itself,

[00:20:47] we'll continue to discuss that on Point of View, because it definitely will impact families. And I'm sure we'll look at all the different angles, the pros and the cons, the conservative arguments for and against. But we do know that, as Joe said, supporting flourishing families is very important, and we need to be able to have open discussions about how to do that the best. So, again, check out those links at pointofview.net. Educate yourself on the proposal and what we're talking about, what the conversation is right now.

[00:21:14] When we come back from the break, let's talk about another thing impacting families. Draconian laws that make criminals out of moms for letting their kids go on a walk outside. Yes, this has happened. We're going to go back to the state of Virginia when we get back after this short break. Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.

[00:21:39] Those are the words of President Ronald Reagan, a staunch defender against socialism. Sadly, too many Americans have failed to educate this generation about the dangers and failures of socialism. Surveys show that a majority of young Americans hold favorable views of socialism. And here's what's really surprising. More than a third of churchgoers prefer socialism to capitalism.

[00:22:07] How can we prevent freedom's extinction? It's up to patriotic Americans like you, those who believe in the existence of truth, to band together and defend freedom's legacy. Thankfully, there is a team dedicated to doing just that, the truth team. And we have a spot for you. Join us in defending freedom's legacy.

[00:22:31] Learn more by visiting pointofview.net or call 1-800-347-5151. That's pointofview.net and 800-347-5151. Point of View will continue after this.

[00:23:00] You are listening to Point of View. The opinions expressed on Point of View do not necessarily reflect the views of the management or staff of this station. And now, here again, is Liberty McCarter. All right. You need to go to pointofview.net and check out the articles that we are talking about today. Here's one from the Free Press. She let her son go for a walk. Now she's a convicted criminal.

[00:23:28] This is a story I'm going to go through the details with you. You may have seen it online if you've been keeping up with the news because it has gone rather viral. It happened in Virginia. And it's not the only case like this, which is the problem. And when we are talking about the state of families today, when we're talking about the state of kids and the next generation, and whether or not they're developing well, and we're talking about technology use,

[00:23:55] all of these things intermingle into cases like this. And so what happened is Carrie Ann Parkinson is a mom of five, I believe, in Virginia. So this happened earlier this year in June. As the article opens up, she made a fateful choice that could affect her life for years to come. She let her five-year-old son, Sam, walk alone to a neighborhood pond to collect goose feathers.

[00:24:22] Now keep in mind, as we go through this story, you don't necessarily have to agree with this mom's decision or the activity that she allowed her son to partake in to be concerned about the legal implications here. So Carrie Ann Parkinson, by the way, she is a certified family life educator. Previously, she worked as a behavioral specialist with at-risk youth. Then she went to law school.

[00:24:52] According to the author of this column that I'm referencing, who is somebody who actually previously taught the mother and knows her personally, the mom, Parkinson, has embraced a deliberate parenting philosophy of encouraging independent activities when a child shows that he or she is ready. Statistically, this is backed up as being good for the child's overall well-being and mental health. And we'll get into some of those statistics and that information in a minute.

[00:25:22] So that's a little bit of background on the mom, Carrie Ann Parkinson. So in June, she was eight months pregnant with her fifth child, I believe. And she had been out walking with her son, Sam, in a neighborhood called Ford's Colony. And it is a gated community in Virginia. It's a nice suburban neighborhood. They were walking trails as they frequently do.

[00:25:49] The walking trail is set apart from very speed-controlled roads. There are occasional crosswalks. And as she was walking, she observed her son, as she had multiple times before, observing the road, checking before he crossed the street, doing all the rules that she had taught him to do. And if you are a parent of little kids or have ever had little kids, then you know you do the same thing. Like when you're going out walking, you know, maybe they're learning how to ride their bike or you're taking them for a walk.

[00:26:18] You teach them. Say, okay, you've got to check the street. I know I do this with my kids. And I watch them. And I'm still there with them. But I'm watching them to see, are they being safe? Are they actually checking before they cross the street or cross the crosswalk? Do they know how to get home? You've got to train your kid. You've got to practice with them. And that's what she was doing. So when they got home, he asked if he could return to a pond they had just been at. It's about half a mile away from their home. And he wanted to collect some goose feathers.

[00:26:47] And seeing that she had been on the trail with her five-year-old son multiple times, that he had followed all the rules, that she believed he was mature and confident enough to be able to find his way there, get the goose feathers and come back, she said yes. Well, somebody happened to observe that little Sam was alone by the pond. They didn't go and check on him themselves. They called the security guard for the neighborhood. So the security guard actually escorted Sam back to the residence.

[00:27:16] And the child, little Sam, five-year-old Sam, led the way because the guard asked Sam to get into his vehicle, reportedly, but the kid refused, which good on the kid. He walked to the pond, but he did not get in a stranger's vehicle. Because how is he supposed to know? A guy comes up and says, I'm a security guard and you're in danger. You need to get in my car. The kid says no. The kid walks home. Security guard follows him. And here's where things go sideways. Mom's not happy.

[00:27:44] Carrie Ann Parkinson, this says, responded testily. And then the police were called. And so she refused to answer the responding officers' questions. So then CPS was called. It resulted in three police cars, the CPS workers being there, the security car being there. And this, according to the article, because Parkinson stood on her rights. Two weeks later, they all leave. The police officers, CPS investigators, they all leave.

[00:28:13] Two weeks later, charges were filed and a warrant was served for her arrest. She actually was prosecuted. Prosecuted. And she was convicted by a judge and sentenced to six months in jail. Now, the sentence was waived since she's a mom. But she was convicted of that six-month sentence. Additionally, and then the charge specifically that she was convicted of is first-degree misdemeanor of contributing to the delinquency of a minor.

[00:28:44] She also will be placed on Virginia's child abuse and neglect registry for seven years. So for the next seven years, she is going to be listed in the state of Virginia as somebody who's committed child abuse and or neglect. And as this article notes, it goes through several other details here.

[00:29:06] If the authorities actually thought that her children were in imminent danger, then they would not have waited two weeks to serve the warrant. This seems more about the way that she responded to the security guard and the officers and CPS investigators who came to her home, which honestly, I'm not advocating. I don't know exactly what she did or what she said. If she was not cooperative, probably wouldn't recommend that just for your own safety.

[00:29:32] But I would be upset, too, as a mom, if I had allowed my child to walk in the neighborhood and then all of a sudden there is CPS investigators at my door. And here's the thing. In the state of Virginia, in 2023, the state legislature unanimously enacted a provision specifically to provide that a child would not be considered abused or neglected solely on the basis that a parent allowed them to engage in independent activities,

[00:30:00] including traveling to or from school or nearby locations on bicycle or foot, because this has become an issue. This is not the first time that parents have been arrested because neighbors see kid walking or riding bike in the neighborhood by themselves and then they call the police and then parents are neglected and charged with abuse or neglect. This is not the first time that that has happened.

[00:30:25] And so some states have actually taken that into consideration and passed laws to protect parents in those cases, because I'm sure many people listening can think about a time when they were maybe five or in first grade and they walked to school if it was not that far away or they went out and they played in the neighborhood with their friends after school. Come home when the porch lights on. I mean, I remember that as a kid going out and playing on my street or the next street.

[00:30:53] I had, you know, a radius of where I was allowed to go and knock on doors to see who could come out to play. And that was a very common thing. And so now, though, there are parents that are actually getting arrested for that. So that's concerning because you're concerned about parental rights. You're concerned about, you know, again, maybe you wouldn't have said, yes, I'm going to let my five-year-old walk in the neighborhood half a mile down the sidewalk. Maybe you would.

[00:31:17] But should a parent be arrested and then put on a child abuse and neglect registry for doing so? So if anything, if it had at all to do with some, you know, sort of attitude that was given rather than actual neglect or abuse concerns, if that had any factor in her conviction, that's also concerning as well as an abuse of power.

[00:31:42] So, again, if they had really been concerned about the child's well-being, then they probably wouldn't have waited two weeks to come back. So here's the thing, and this is where the article ends. Again, this is from the Free Press. You can read it at pointofview.net. Parents are really in between a rock and a hard place because we see the fallout of not giving kids enough freedom and independence.

[00:32:05] Something that I'll talk about in a few minutes is how kids have really had no protection online in the last few decades, in the last generation. And so they have been given these devices where they appear to be safe because they're at home sitting on their couch or in their bedroom. Parents can see them, but they're exposed to all kinds of horrible things online, content-wise, in the way that social media apps and technologies are designed to be addictive. And we have talked about those harms, and now there is so much research backing that up.

[00:32:34] And so parents are wanting to respond to that, to say, I want to raise kids to be independent. I want them to have skills. Play is so important for kids. I want them to be able to go outside and in age-appropriate levels be able to gain some independence and resilience where they're experiencing life outside in the real world, not just inside looking at a screen all the time.

[00:32:58] But if you go too far, according to what your neighbors think or the local police department thinks or a local judge thinks, then you can be put on an abuse and neglect registry for seven years as a mom of five kids. Or if you don't go far enough, then you're going to raise a child that doesn't have resilience and doesn't have independence because they've never been able to leave the house. And that's kind of the situation that we're in right now. So Parkinson, the mom, Carrie Ann Parkinson, has appealed.

[00:33:26] And under Virginia law, she is entitled to a jury. So one judge thought that she was guilty of abuse and neglect for letting her five-year-old walk in the neighborhood. We'll see if a jury of her peers thinks the same. When we come back, let's talk about a little bit more of the research behind why independent play is so important for kids. We'll be right back.

[00:33:46] You're listening to Point of View, your listener-supported source for truth. Okay, I want to talk about this childhood independence thing for a few more minutes because if we are talking about limiting screen time,

[00:34:10] if we are assessing the situation and saying, all right, it seems as if maybe a lot of young adults today aren't really functioning that well in society, meaning aren't able to have the independence needed to be able to launch and fly from the nest, so to speak, or you're seeing more and more mental problems among Gen Z and young adults, then maybe we need to look at what we've been doing and correct our course a little bit.

[00:34:38] Maybe having screens in school all day and hours and hours of screen time at home isn't that great. Maybe blowing up dopamine receptors in young developing minds with social media apps and bright, colorful screens that are designed to be addictive isn't a great idea. Maybe keeping kids inside looks like we're protecting them, but we're not actually building them to be resilient. This is a lot of the argument that Jonathan Haidt makes in his book, The Anxious Generation.

[00:35:08] So if we want to be able to do that, we have to be able to course correct. So if parents try to course correct and then they get arrested for doing so, then we're kind of stuck. So this is an article published a few months ago in the Institute for Family Studies by Ivana Greco, who we actually just talked about. She is one of the researchers and writers at Capita, and we just talked with Joe Waters. So she has researched this as well since she focuses a lot on different angles and aspects of family flourishing.

[00:35:35] And so she knows a lot of research highlighting that play is very, very important for children's well-being. In fact, the lack of play and independent play among American children has declined dramatically in recent decades is a factor in rates of mental health disorders among children today. When you kind of look at the research here.

[00:35:58] So again, over the past 75 years, children have become more and more restricted in their ability to play independently, unsupervised by adults pursuing self-directed activities. This is important for their mental development, for resilience, for even socialization, knowing how to get along with others. I mean, that's so common sense, right? But oftentimes we need studies and research to back up what we already know intuitively. But school days are longer than they used to be.

[00:36:26] You have so many organized sports that have taken over just pickup games and independent play. And then again, the lack of parents being able to let their kids roam, so to speak. So this is from another study the Institute for Family Studies did on resilient children. You can look up Institute for Family Studies and resilient children and just Google that and you'll find this. But it's not until age eight or nine that the average American family allows a child to go more than 100 yards from his or her house.

[00:36:55] Okay, until age eight or nine. We're talking about 100 yards from their house. And by age 17, which in many states is legally an adult, large shares of parents still place limits on how far from the house their kid can walk or ride a bike. And as, again, we've noted, including by this most recent case out of Virginia, many states have – and Virginia passed a law to protect independent play.

[00:37:24] And they still arrested a mom and convicted her and sentenced her to a waived six-month jail sentence and put her on an abuse registry because she let her child walk half a mile from home. But there are other states where that's – it actually is in the law to restrict parents' ability to make those decisions for their kids. In Connecticut, for instance, you're discouraged from even leaving a child at home alone until they are 11 or 12. And, again, just that – so much of that is subjective based on the family.

[00:37:54] Multiple parents have been arrested for letting their kid play at a neighborhood park. Maybe that's just right around the corner from their home. And so, so much of this is subjective because, you know, it changes depending on your child, their maturity level, the kind of neighborhood you live in, whether or not you know your neighbors. Like, there are so many factors, even from child to child within the same family, that might impact a parent's decision to say, yes, you can play outside.

[00:38:19] I know in my own neighborhood, which is a great neighborhood, there have been Christian families that we know with teenage kids who are, like, walking in the local park and have the police called on them. And they're not – they're just being outside. They're homeschooled. So they do their work. Then they go outside at the local park and play as teenagers. Okay? Seems like, what, good old-fashioned fun? No, we're going to call the police.

[00:38:45] So there is actually a bill that has been proposed at the federal level by Representative Blake Moore out of Utah to actually protect child independence. It's called the Promoting Childhood Independence and Resilience Act to actually protect parents from exactly this kind of thing.

[00:39:03] Because people are recognizing, like, if we acknowledge the problems that are resulting from the lack of play, we need to be able to protect, within reason, parents' ability to make their own decisions about whether or not their kids are allowed to play outside independently, whether or not they're allowed to walk to school, whether or not they're allowed to go play at a park in a neighborhood, and just not arrest them every single time. A lot of this, I think, is also personal.

[00:39:29] You know, I know that if my kids were running down the street and asked me how I know, there would be neighbors who would check on them because they know our family and they know our kids because we talk to neighbors. And they would say, you know, hey, buddy, are you okay? You know, is mom here? Does she know you're outside? If they were concerned, they would come to my door and they would check on us. And so I think there's also a problem that we kind of live in this culture where nobody wants to talk to each other. You just see a kid playing outside and your first response is to call the police.

[00:39:59] Maybe we need to get to know our neighbors a little bit better. But anyway, I did want to also highlight something that I've talked about on the Know Why podcast. There has been more debates in Texas about this new curriculum standards that were passed. I talked about this a few weeks ago on the Know Why podcast. You can look it up specifically because people were accusing Texas of forcing kids to read the Bible.

[00:40:23] And as we have discussed, really, that is within the context of literature class and including the Bible parts of the Bible as literature that is worthy of study. And yes, it is. Well, apparently there has been a push to take out a part of new curriculum standards in Texas that said that the 9-11 attacks were motivated by radical Islam.

[00:40:46] And there was a big push by activists to take that out as not being historically accurate, as being a grave mistake. Also, using the word brutal and describing military campaigns against Jewish and Christian tribes.

[00:41:06] So this effort failed, thankfully, because, again, based on everything that I've read and I've actually gone to the approved standards from the Texas State Board of Education. You can find them online if you're concerned about the Bible reading, if you're concerned about what they're teaching, you can go and look it up. They're teaching that America was founded on Christian principles. And that's just a fact.

[00:41:29] They are including the Bible in literature study, which has been affirmed as being constitutional by the Supreme Court over and over again. And historically, students have studied the Bible and you can have a society that acknowledges its moral, its religious, its philosophical roots and still also has religious freedom.

[00:41:51] In fact, having a society that is founded on Christian principles is the best way to have religious freedom for all. So, no, I don't think that Texas or anybody for that matter should go back and rewrite history to somehow downplay the role of radical Islam in the September 11th attacks. And, yes, that was what they were trying to do. So you can read more about that.

[00:42:15] We've got an article from Houston Public Media at pointofview.net if you want to read a little bit more about that. But go to Know Why podcast. And, again, this new Texas curriculum requirements keep popping up in the news for one reason or another. And I kind of did a deep dive on it on the Know Why podcast a few weeks ago, which you can find if you go to knowipodcast.com. We're already out of time for today. But, again, I will be back with you tomorrow. And I'm looking forward to it. It's going to be a special episode. It's going to be our Next Generation Roundtable.

[00:42:45] And I'll be joined by Josh Barnes, Richard Lim, and Alyssa Sonnenberg. And exactly a year ago, we were all on the Roundtable together processing the shock of Charlie Kirk's assassination. So we have a special opportunity to reconvene one year later and talk about where we are as a nation, where we've come since that tragic day, and maybe where we're headed as well. So I hope you'll tune in tomorrow and join us for the Roundtable right here on Point of View.

[00:43:13] The Bible tells us not to worry. And yet there is a lot of worrying stuff in our world today. Thankfully, the Bible doesn't stop at telling us not to worry. God gives us a next step. He says we need to pray. But sometimes even knowing what to pray can be difficult. And that is why Point of View has relaunched our Pray for America movement,

[00:43:40] a series of weekly emails to guide you in prayer for our nation. Each week you'll receive a brief update about a current issue affecting Americans, along with a written prayer that you can easily share with others. We'll also include a short free resource for you in each email so you can learn more about the issue at hand. Will you commit to pray for America?

[00:44:07] Go to pointofview.net. Click on the Pray for America banner at the top of the page to subscribe. Again, that's pointofview.net. Click on the Pray for America banner. Let's pray together for God to make a difference in America. Point of View is produced by Point of View Ministries.