Decades of research in developmental psychology and neuroscience reveal that early stress, particularly in the first few years of life, can influence brain development, behavior and well-being. 

Megan Gunnar has dedicated her career to understanding the relationship between stress biology and neurobehavioral development in children. As a professor at the University of Minnesota鈥檚 and director of the 鈥� which studies how children and adolescents regulate stress and emotions 鈥� she has influenced and mentored generations of researchers. 

After earning her doctorate in developmental psychology from Stanford University in 1978, Gunnar completed postdoctoral training in psychoneuroendocrinology at Stanford Medical School before joining the faculty at the University of Minnesota in 1979. Over the years, she鈥檚 authored studies, including research on the intersection of , and has been a leader in for parents and caregivers. 

鈥淢egan Gunnar is a force of nature,鈥� says Ellen Galinsky, president and co-founder of Families and Work Institute and author of The Breakthrough Years and Mind in the Making. 鈥淲ith a rare background in psychology and developmental psychoneuroendocrinology, she has broken new ground in research on the effects of stress on infants, children and adolescents. She is a gifted communicator, known for phrases that make her findings unforgettable, and a true field-builder.鈥�

As Gunnar prepares to retire at the end of this academic year, she reflects on what decades of research suggest about how early stress shapes the developing brain. In the conversation below, she discusses how her field has advanced, the challenges of modern stressors on children and families, and what parents and caregivers can draw from her field to support infants and young children today. 

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Why are the earlier years so important for brain development? 

The brain is in the process of getting itself organized during those years. When you add to the development of the brain, it’s on top of the brain that’s already been developed. There are such things as sensitive periods when things get established and then get solidified. 鈥� Nature decided to have these sensitive periods.

What can change during these periods?

Things like executive functions, being able to learn to have inhibitory control. These begin to be established early, but we can work on them. You can work on self-regulation throughout your life. It’s harder later than it is earlier, but it never completely closes off. 

How can adults recognize stress in children?

Parents are not going to run around taking measures of cortisol. Signs that a child needs help are often that they start misbehaving. The canary in the coal mine is misbehavior.

Any parent knows this. A kid is going along fine. They start acting [out] all of a sudden. What’s going on? Bad kids? No, they鈥檙e probably hungry. Or maybe something else is going on that鈥檚 troubling them, especially if it lasts longer. It might be that they’ve had problems with friends at school. They might be worried about something. When they get more clingy or more crabby than usual, that’s a sort of sign that they’re a little stressed and they need some support of some kind.

What鈥檚 the best way to respond?

One of the things that we do so frequently with kids is say, “Don’t do this,” but then we don’t tell them what we want them to do. Any good preschool teacher will tell them what they’re supposed to do. They don’t say, “Stop making loud noise.” They say, “Use your indoor voice.” One of the misconceptions that we have is that kids know how they’re supposed to behave. And if we want to change the behavior, it鈥檚 often easier and better to tell them how we want them to behave.

When a child is feeling stressed and upset, asking what’s wrong can be sort of tough because sometimes they don’t really know what’s wrong. But [saying] 鈥淐ome, let’s sit together and let’s breathe together,鈥� and modeling the behavior of calming down and getting them calmer before you try to probe to figure out what’s going on is a wise thing.

There’s a lot of parenting advice on the internet, especially on Instagram. Where can parents and educators of young children turn for quality information?

Zero to Three鈥檚 is wonderful. If you’re an educator or a parent who likes to read complicated things, then the puts out working papers that go in more depth. [Gunnar is a founding member.] 

I wouldn’t look at any influencer. I just would go to Zero to Three or the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development if it’s more of a health question, and the if it’s more of a mental health question, absolutely not to the influencers. They’re just there to catch your attention.

You were a pioneer in treating child psychology as a science related to other sciences. Can you unpack the term 鈥渂iobehavioral鈥�? Do you think of it as an approach or as a field of study?

Psychology used to be about behavior and how we think 鈥� how we conceptualize and talk about thinking, right? But not about the body that all that was happening in. We’re not a disembodied brain. That’s been the biggest change since I got in the field 50 years ago. 

Now you hear the term 鈥減sychological science,鈥� and that is the shift 鈥� to move from just looking at behavior to looking at the processes and the mechanisms underlying behavior, including how the brain acts and so on. It’s also other endocrine systems, immune functioning, how all of that plays together to influence the way people behave.

So it’s everywhere. And you either talk about it as 鈥減sychobiology鈥� or 鈥渂iobehavioral,鈥� putting words together, but it’s a whole system.

Given your work as an educator, professor and mentor, are there promising avenues or researchers on the horizon?

I think many of us feel now that we鈥檝e filled in enough of the pieces of the mechanisms for how things happen, not that we see the association, but we understand the mechanisms 鈥� and we can continue to do that, but it’s really time to stop admiring the problem and to move upstream and try to change the conditions that are leading to the problem. 鈥� I think around the globe, that is the movement 鈥� to understand how to link the work we do to the policy, and show that certain policies are providing for better health outcomes through mechanisms that we now understand. 

I think there are some really amazing people out there that are doing some really phenomenal work. Many of them are actually my former students, but there are others as well. 鈥� The work is getting more interdisciplinary. The lines between disciplines are just fading, which is really lovely. And I tell students: You don’t want to be a dilettante. You don’t want to know a little bit about a lot of things and not much about anything. You need to be somebody who is an expert in X so that you can be at the table, but you really do need to broaden your scope and be able to work with people from different disciplines. 

If what we’re going to do is not only understand what the problem is, but what are the mechanisms for it, and how do we link that to policy, you’re going to need to be able to talk to economists who want to know the return on investment.

Can you say more about the consequences of not investing enough in early education and early educators? 

I really feel for those educators. They’re not paid enough. And we expect so much of them. And the ones who are laying down the fundamentals are paid the least, and they are often the least trained and the least supported. We just have to get to the point where we recognize that the best investment 鈥� as we’ve been saying for years, as the economists have helped us say 鈥� is in high-quality education available to all children from birth.

How has the science in your field advanced? 

The science has advanced in that we understand more and more about what’s happening inside a kid, biologically and in the brain. But the basic understanding of what children need in order to feel safe and secure, we’ve known for a long time. Now we understand a lot more about the how and the why of it.

The capacity to look at the physiology and how the brain responds has been just unbelievably exciting and illuminating. It has certainly helped us understand the importance of the earliest years in terms of the programming of the biology of stress.

What do you recommend for parents in this moment? 

Are we talking about normal life stress, or are we talking about buffering the children who are living in the areas where ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) is swarming and whistles are blowing and people are being dragged from their cars? Those are two related but somewhat distinct issues. 

Given that you鈥檙e living and working in Minnesota, I鈥檓 curious what your thoughts are on the latter.

I am envisioning what it would be like for a child 10 and under, or maybe 7 and under, living in those houses in the Longfellow neighborhood, where periodically, there are . There are men terrifyingly dressed, marching with guns in your street. 

I think the best thing [a parent can] do right now is to spend their evening watching old [episodes of] Mister Rogers鈥� Neighborhood because he was amazing at listening to children talk about their fears without adding to them. If you remember, one of the things he said, about when terrible things happen, is to look for the helpers. If I were a parent with a small child living in those neighborhoods, I would help my child reframe the whistleblowers as helpers coming, rather than emphasizing the scary guys. 

The other thing that I think is really important for parents to remember is that when a child asks a question, and we hear that question with our adult mind, like, “What are those bad people doing?” 鈥� the next step always with a young child is, “Well, what are you thinking might be happening?” So that you come in with your answer where they’re at, rather than this big thing that may be way beyond what they were thinking. 

Disclosure: Ellen Galinsky was Chief Science Officer of the Bezos Family Foundation from 2016-2022. The Bezos Family Foundation provided financial support to Early Learning Nation.

鈥淲e know what the causes were,鈥� said Leslie Boissiere, vice president of external affairs with the Casey Foundation, known for its , which evaluates child well-being and other measures in each state. 鈥淭here were significant pandemic-era policies in place, notably, the Child Tax Credit, which was allowed to lapse. Rising costs have also had a significant impact,鈥� she said. are also a factor. Families with workers in low-paying jobs are particularly vulnerable in the current economic conditions.

To make matters worse, cuts to Medicaid, the and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) , said Bruce Lesley, president of First Focus Children.

鈥淐hildren 0 to 3 years old,鈥� Lesley added, 鈥渉ave the highest poverty rate of any age group.鈥�

Measuring child poverty doesn鈥檛 involve checking children鈥檚 tax returns or bank accounts. Little kids don鈥檛 have those. It depends entirely on the financial circumstances of their household, and often their parents. The Casey Foundation, and most other institutions tracking child poverty use the , which counts government benefits to gain a broader view of well-being, rather than the , which relies principally on wages. 

Poverty has serious consequences for learning. 鈥淚n this period when a young child’s brain is in a rapid period of development, poverty is an impediment to that development,鈥� Boissiere explained. 鈥淚t increases the risk of behavioral and emotional challenges both at home and in school. And it creates a long-term barrier to a child’s ability to reach their full potential.鈥� 

She elaborated: 鈥淚f you think of what poverty means for a child, it means I’m constantly worried that I’m going to have enough food to eat. I’m not sure where my next meal is coming from. I may not live in healthy housing conditions. And it’s difficult for a child to focus when those things are on their minds.鈥�

Over the long term, she noted, 鈥淭here’s a direct impact on the children, but there’s also a direct impact on communities, and ultimately there’s a direct impact on the long-term health of our economy, because children today are the workforce tomorrow.鈥�

Against this troubling backdrop, three pathways have emerged in the fight against child poverty 鈥� though none alone can fill the gap left by federal cuts.

States Taking Action

鈥淭he federal government sets the policies,鈥� explained Boissiere. 鈥淎nd states implement those policies. And so the implementation can have a direct effect on how kids and families are impacted.鈥� She noted that states can also pass their own child tax credits and earned income tax credits. In New Mexico, for example, anti-poverty programs and policies like reduced child poverty by 19 percentage points between 2022 and 2024, according to the Casey Foundation.

Maryland is pioneering another way that states can help their youngest residents thrive with its . The program provides grants to community partners in regions throughout the state where child poverty rates are especially high. 

The initiative has $19 million in grant funding to 28 high-poverty communities in 12 counties. Two strategies make ENOUGH unique: intentionally listening to community organizations and allowing them to 鈥渜uarterback鈥� the efforts; and harnessing philanthropic capital through the which is boosting the public funds, with $100 million committed for the next six years.

The investments include high-quality child care and education programs in South End, a community in , and , a cross-sector partnership in south Baltimore aimed to bolster education, community wellness, housing and economic health. as 鈥渁 promising example for how other states can work across silos, enact evidence-based policies, and partner with local communities to reduce child poverty.

Gov. Wes Moore acknowledged the policy headwinds at a recent event kicking off ENOUGH鈥檚 second year, in which residents, officials and nonprofit leaders gathered in Baltimore鈥檚 Waverly neighborhood to hear about the initiative鈥檚 progress. Moore condemned recent federal budget cuts as 鈥渢he single largest rollback of poverty-fighting programs in modern history.鈥� 

He continued: 鈥淣ow, at a time when the federal government is effectively telling communities of color and children living in poverty, 鈥榊ou鈥檙e on your own,鈥� Maryland is stepping up and doubling down. ENOUGH is about making government work better for the people it serves and ensuring that Maryland鈥檚 decade is written by our communities, not simply for them.鈥�

Addressing a group of reporters after his remarks at the event, Moore recalled his service as CEO of New York鈥檚 Robin Hood Foundation. 鈥淚 ran one of the largest data-driven poverty-fighting organizations in the country. We led with data, and that’s really the same type of mantra that we have here.鈥� 

Philanthropy Filling Gaps

Like state and city governments, foundations and philanthropists can play a role in reducing the harm caused by cuts to programs that support working families, but cannot make up for the gaps in federal funding. There are a number of prominent grantmakers focused on child poverty, including the William T. Grant Foundation, the Ballmer Group, W.K. Kellogg Foundation 鈥� and their efforts to address a range of issues including early education, child welfare, racial equity, housing and family economic security make a difference. Giving USA, which tracks charitable giving, that nearly $180 billion of the $592.5 billion donated in 2024 went to human services and education. Much of that went to organizations helping children in the United States, though the categories extend beyond this population.

Reflecting on the present moment, Boissiere described the Casey Foundation鈥檚 approach: 鈥淲e do our part to support the ecosystem, both in terms of supporting local organizations, but also making sure that public resources are available and that decision makers have access to data to try to help inform smart choices on behalf of kids.鈥� 

Even if donors step up their giving significantly, nobody expects the generosity to come close to making up for 鈥� not even the recently announced from the Michael & Susan Dell Foundation. The gift is designed to put $250 into the so-called Trump accounts of 25 million children living in ZIP codes where the median family income is below $150,000. Because account holders cannot make withdrawals from the accounts until they are 18, however, the program does not directly influence the child poverty rate today.

Advocates Pushing for Change

The nationwide advocacy community 鈥� which also includes organizations like the , , , , the 鈥� isn鈥檛 giving up on pushing for the federal programs that have been proven to lift families and children out of poverty.

Recommendations from the include rental assistance to reach more people who struggle to afford housing and expanding the Child Tax Credit for the who don鈥檛 get the full credit because their families鈥� incomes are too low.

To this list, Lesley from First Focus adds making SNAP more generous for families with young children, when parents may be earning less because they are . He also said administered by Social Security for children who have experienced the death of a parent should be automatic, rather than requiring an application process.

In a , Lesley argued that advocates should prioritize children over families. The family-first frame, he writes, 鈥渉as ignored the power of empathy and the perceived deservingness of children, muted the moral urgency of our arguments and made children invisible in policy discussions. It arguably has led to fewer resources for children and families alike.鈥� Pointing to a , Lesley underscored that children are a winning issue with voters.

Real changes result from states directing resources toward solutions, foundations increasing their grantmaking, and advocacy organizations analyzing data and taking steps to build awareness or prompt policy change. But that may not be enough to support the sustained structural transformation necessary to conquer child poverty.

The annual , released last month from the , found that while there鈥檚 some bright spots nationally compared to 2019 鈥� including a growing number of children covered by health insurance and a decrease in teen pregnancies 鈥� many states are struggling to take care of children, whether it鈥檚 the number of children living in poverty, a growing number of teen deaths or older students who are not in school or working.

鈥淲hen we look at the overall numbers, we see a somewhat mixed picture,鈥� said Nicholas Munyan-Penney, assistant director of P-12 policy at , a national education policy group and grantee to the Annie E. Casey Foundation. 鈥淏ut, when we actually break it down by demographics, we see that there continues to be very large gaps between racial groups, in particular with Black and Latino students 鈥� [and their] educational outcomes.鈥�

Nationally, there was improvement in seven of 16 indicators, the report found. Of the remaining measures, six worsened since 2019 and three remained the same. In almost all 16 categories, however, American Indian, Alaska Native, Black and Latino children fared worse than the national average. 

The report found education topped the list for the weakest rebound in recent years with continued declines in reading and math proficiency for all demographic groups between 2019 and 2024; and a smaller percentage of children attending preschool across the country. 

Using federal NAEP test data from the National Center for Education Statistics, the report found 70% of American fourth graders in 2024 were not reading on grade level, worsening from 66% in 2019 鈥淸and] essentially undoing a decade of progress.鈥� About 73% of eighth graders are not proficient in math either.

Black, American Indian, Alaska Native and Latino students saw widening gaps compared to the national average and their white and Asian peers. In 2024, for example, about 84% of Black fourth graders and 90% of Black eighth graders were not performing on grade level in reading and math respectively compared to 61% of white fourth graders and 63% of white eighth graders.

Nationally, high school graduation rates have increased by one percentage point to 87% between 2018-19 and 2021-22, but similar to proficiency, most students of color lag behind the national average by between four to 13 percentage points.

鈥淭his really is indicative of the fact that we’ve had generations and generations of disproportionate resources going to students,鈥� Munyan-Penney said. 鈥淲e know that students of color and from low-income backgrounds have continually seen less investment in their schools and communities, and that is really borne out here in the data.鈥�

Children of color disproportionately lived in high-poverty areas in 2019-23, with around 20% of Black and American Indian or Alaska Native, followed by about 11% Latino children, who lived in areas of concentrated poverty compared to 3% for white, Asian and Pacific Islander children. 

Most states fund public schools through local property taxes, so there鈥檚 often a direct correlation between concentrated poverty and struggling student achievement, Munyan-Penney said.

Disparities also extended beyond education 鈥� particularly with the number of child and teen deaths per 100,000. 

From 2019 to 2023, the number of kids and youth who died between the ages of one and 19 per 100,000 children increased from 25 to 29, with cause of death mainly from accidents, homicides and suicides. That figure for Black youth is nearly double the national rate, with a 30% increase between 2019 to 2023, from 41 to 53 deaths per 100,000.

State-by-state child well-being has also been a moving target.

While New Hampshire, Vermont and Massachusetts topped rankings for overall child well-being, Mississippi, Louisiana and New Mexico scored the lowest. The report acknowledged that despite overall rankings, some states 鈥渟how vastly uneven scores across domains,鈥� including Maine, which scored overall at No. 17, but simultaneously ranked No. 41 in education or North Dakota which ranked first in economic well-being, but No. 42 in education. 

鈥淪trong performance at the state … level can mask the reality that millions of individual children are still struggling to access the resources,鈥� the report said.

Federal investments toward healthcare coverage and economic stability during the pandemic were credited in the report as sources of improvement in parental employment and children covered under health insurance. 

About 25% of children had a parent who lacked stable employment between 2019 and 2023, which improved by one percentage point. The report found financial aid, including pandemic relief funds in 2020-21 and an expanded child tax credit, helped “strengthen family financial security.鈥� The report also found an increase of children covered by health insurance from 5% in 2019 to 6% in 2023 was an 鈥渆ncouraging milestone.鈥�

But, these gains may too be in jeopardy in upcoming years as several pandemic-era supports expired and President Donald Trump鈥檚 administration has recently made cuts to SNAP and Medicaid.

鈥淭he pullback in federal investment鈥� is definitely a concern of mine,鈥� Munyan-Penney said. 鈥淚’m not optimistic that these numbers will continue to go up unless we sort of see a change in the way that the federal government is approaching this and or we have very robust state investment.鈥�

The reality of such a high poverty rate among the youngest and most vulnerable Americans is the result of policy choices. Research that it鈥檚 not because the U.S. has higher rates of single parenthood or because low-income Americans don鈥檛 work hard enough for a decent income. Instead, where other countries make robust investments in government programs, particularly those that benefit parents and children, the U.S. . And yet poverty has been found to have on children鈥檚 development and well-being. The stories below expose the result of this disinclination to invest in families with babies and young children 鈥� as well as what happens when efforts to do things differently are abruptly abandoned.

Various data sources all illuminate the same trend: homelessness among children under age 6 has been climbing in recent聽years, driven by a mix of systemic factors, with disturbing consequences for the country鈥檚 children.

During the pandemic, universal, free school meals were a lifesaver for parents like Lynnea Hawkins, who no longer had to pull together complicated paperwork and send it in with her son, making him a target for torment. But then Congress ended the program, forcing parents to once again face shame and stigma to participate 鈥� or forego free meals for their children altogether.聽

Even when Congress passes a new program aimed at helping families afford the basics for their children, it doesn鈥檛 always reach them. Erika Marquez鈥檚 family was eligible for the new Summer EBT benefits rolled out in 2024 to help parents get through the lean summer months, but her husband couldn鈥檛 figure out how to sign up, so they missed out. 鈥淚t鈥檚 just hard when you hear your child say, 鈥楳om, my stomach is rumbling,鈥欌�� she said.

Even long-established programs with solid track records aren鈥檛 always safe. At the end of 2023, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children, known as WIC, needed more money to stay available to all low-income pregnant people and new parents, but Republicans threatened to break a 25-year track record of fully funding it.聽

The often threadbare American safety net leads to some disturbing outcomes, such as the fact that nearly half of our nation鈥檚 families are struggling to afford diapers. Some change their children less often than they should to make the diapers they do have last, while others go without diapers at all.聽

Some states have taken bold steps to do more to address child poverty. In 2021, Connecticut became the first state to create 鈥渂aby bonds,鈥� depositing $3,200 in an account for every baby whose birth is covered by Medicaid so that it can accrue interest and create wealth for them later in life.

• Marshara Fross, Ph.D., perinatal justice scholar and post-doctoral fellow at the University of South Florida鈥檚
• Luis J. Hernandez, founder of
• Jha鈥橬iyah Holland, entrepreneur and community safety advocate at and
• Zonnie Thompson, housing justice project coordinator at
• Rachel Warren, coordinator of the

They spoke about their journeys, their motivations and their strategies, encouraging webinar participants to find a cause and join forces with others in their community. As Warren asserted, 鈥淲e need each other more than we鈥檙e allowed to believe.鈥�

Here are our 5 Top Takeaways

1. Start by centering Black experience. As a researcher trained in , Jha鈥橬iyah Holland prioritizes listening to people and making them feel they鈥檙e being heard. For example, ThreeCubed partnered with the United Way of Greater Knoxville, Tennessee and Tennesseans for Quality Early Education on the , an initiative designed 鈥渢o tap the power of communities across the state to collaboratively design, implement and scale high-quality early care and education systems locally, while informing and advocating supportive state policies.鈥�

In the course of her research, she realized 鈥渢he people doing the work are underfunded and the grant process needs more equity,鈥� and she expressed determination to address these chronic shortcomings. As a survivor of gun violence, Luis J. Hernandez understands that it takes 鈥減eople who are in crisis,鈥� as well as mental health professionals, to develop comprehensive community violence-prevention programs. They are closest to the problem, he said, so they are closest to the solution. Zonnie Thompson described a White House rally in support of a , where people told their own stories of their struggles to obtain and maintain housing.

2. Act on data-driven strategies. The evidence is clear on a uniquely American epidemic: . 鈥淲e need robust data,鈥� said Hernandez, 鈥渢o identify best strategies for interventions,鈥� adding that academic research bolsters activists鈥� credibility.

Thompson said that 鈥渂eing honest about who is unhoused鈥� means counting people who are couch surfing or living in motels, and this more inclusive data broadens the alliance advocating for reforms. Rachel Warren鈥檚 blunt viewpoint on research reflected a preference for action: 鈥淪top asking the same question over and over,鈥� she said. 鈥淭he community has given you the answer. The data is there. Use it.鈥�

3. 鈥淏e impeccable with your word.鈥� This dictum from Don Miguel Ruiz鈥檚 influential book resonated with all of the webinar participants. They spoke about the importance of choosing their words carefully and earning the trust of those affected by the overlapping causes they were fighting for. Warren called this the 鈥渢hrough line between all our work. We do what we say we鈥檙e going to do.鈥�

Dr. Marshara Fross stated, 鈥淲e shoulder not only our own burdens but the burdens of our families and communities,鈥� and Holland added, 鈥淲e need to understand how tied we are to our ancestors.鈥�

4. 鈥淒oing nothing is not an option,鈥� declared moderator Mavis Sanders, senior research scholar of Black Children and Families at Child Trends.聽 Driven by two traumatic birth experiences of her own,聽 Fross helped launch . 鈥淲e had to raise all our own funds,鈥� she recalled. 鈥淚 got an awesome group of people to support me.鈥�

Surrounded by systemic and historical racism, facing odds that seem insurmountable, today鈥檚 advocates have at least two advantages over their predecessors in the Civil Rights movement. First, they have the shoulders of those predecessors to stand upon. Second, they have social media, which connects them to allies down the street and around the world.

Ultimately, today鈥檚 social entrepreneurs take action to fight injustice and to advance well-being in their communities because they don鈥檛 feel they have a choice in the matter. In other words, as Holland urged, 鈥淚f you don鈥檛 do it, nobody else will.鈥�

5. Don鈥檛 underestimate the power of faith. All of the webinar participants cited God as their primary influence. Fross鈥檚 faith enables her to 鈥渟tand steadfast in my purpose: creating a better future for the families of the future.鈥� Hernandez, 23, who has been an anti-violence advocate since he was 14, is also inspired by young New Yorkers 鈥渨ho show up in spite of their pain.鈥�

Thompson, who started a career doing hair and makeup for celebrities before shifting to housing advocacy, spoke of 鈥渓etting God order your steps.鈥� He also cited the influence of his sister, who recently died of cancer. 鈥淚f it weren鈥檛 for wanting to make her proud,鈥� he said, 鈥淚 wouldn鈥檛 be doing this work anymore.鈥�

Warren invoked her faith in the context of a thought-provoking vocabulary word: which she defined as 鈥渢he thing that makes you, you.鈥�

Though previous studies have indicated that exposure to green space is associated with improved mood, reduced risk of mental disorders and a reduction of attention deficit disorders, most research has focused on older children, adolescents and adults. Few studies have considered whether green space is associated with young children鈥檚 mental health outcomes. These recent studies suggest that not only can exposure to green spaces positively affect young children鈥檚 mental health, but that early childhood may be an especially critical time for such exposure.

Dr. Nissa Towe-Goodman was drawn to the research that became the large national study, , published in the April 2024 issue of the journal JAMA Network Open, after reading about the dramatic effect of lifetime exposure to green space on mental health issues. (Longitudinal evidence indicates that adolescents and adults raised in low levels of green space have up to a 55% greater risk for mental disorders than those raised with high levels of green space 鈥� a statistic Towe-Goodman calls 鈥渨hopping.鈥�) At the same time, her daughter was in preschool and Towe-Goodman noticed a dramatic difference in her little girl鈥檚 demeanor on the days they stopped by the park on their way home to play by the river and hike the park鈥檚 pathways.

鈥淭he transition to school is often challenging for kids,鈥� she says, 鈥渁nd I noticed that being outdoors, climbing and playing in nature reliably made such a difference for her. I wanted to take a deeper look at those effects.

鈥淏efore I became interested in green space, I was aware how stress is a major risk for young children鈥檚 mental health. Your stress system and certain behavioral regulatory strategies are developing within that infancy, toddler, preschool period. We think one of the ways green spaces may impact young kids鈥� mental health is through offering stress reduction, a restorative exposure whereby their stress systems can down-regulate.鈥�

High-intensity stress for extended periods can impair cognitive development and development of attention skills, which over time can build up and become mental health problems, Towe-Goodman says.

A research scientist at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Towe-Goodman led a team of researchers who drew their data from the National Institutes of Health鈥檚 Environmental Influences on Child Health Outcomes program (ECHO), a consortium of socioeconomically and geographically diverse cohort sites across the U.S. that studies environmental factors related to child health. The team studied more than 2,000 children born between 2007 and 2013 living in nearly 200 counties across 41 states. It is the first study to examine the association of green space exposure on internalizing and externalizing symptoms in early childhood across the U.S., Towe-Goodman says.

The study used satellite imagery to estimate live vegetation density up to three-quarters of a mile around each child鈥檚 home and, using standard checklists, relied on parents鈥� reporting their children鈥檚 internalizing and externalizing symptoms. The study found that greater exposure to residential green space in the 2- to 5-year-old children was associated with fewer internalizing symptoms such as anxiety, depression, withdrawal and sleep concerns. Although green space was also associated with externalizing symptoms such as aggression and rule-breaking, the link was not significant after accounting for the effects of neighborhood poverty.

鈥淲e know early childhood is really crucial in terms of developmental plasticity,鈥� Towe-Goodman says, 鈥渁nd the child鈥檚 environmental exposures make a big difference early in development. As kids reach school age, they start getting involved in different activities and are exposed to all sorts of different environments. We were looking at the effect of residential green space. So, our study didn鈥檛 show that effect in older children (ages 6 to 11).鈥�

Green Space in Tennessee

A more geographically focused study led by epidemiologist Dr. Marnie Hazlehurst as a postdoctoral scholar at the University of Washington鈥檚 Department of Environmental & Occupational Health Sciences investigated the relationship between residential green space exposures, and child behavioral and mental health, in children aged 4 to 6 in Tennessee. The children were part of the Conditions Affecting Neurocognitive Development and Learning in Early Childhood (CANDLE) cohort within the ECHO consortium, established to investigate determinants of child neurodevelopment. The CANDLE study is a longitudinal pregnancy cohort located in Shelby County, Tennessee, a socioeconomically and racially diverse cohort that included pregnant women enrolled between 2006 and 2011.

The study examined three measures of green space to assess the overall greenness of the area surrounding the child鈥檚 residence, the percentage of land area covered by tree canopy and the distance to the nearest park. Mothers were given a checklist of questions on a wide variety of their 4- to 6-year-old children鈥檚 behaviors. The final analytic sample comprised 943 children.

Again, higher levels of residential surrounding greenness were significantly associated with lower scores on internalizing symptoms, including anxiety, shyness and emotional reactivity. Lower levels of internalizing problems were indeed associated with higher residential greenness, though not necessarily tree cover or park proximity. Hazlehurst says one of her study鈥檚 unique aspects was its study of multiple forms of green space, though some of its findings beg further investigation, such as delving into the potential barriers to accessing the green space afforded by tree cover or parks (such as an unsafe environment), despite their proximity to the family鈥檚 home.

As with Towe-Goodman鈥檚 study, no associations were observed between green space and externalizing outcomes such as aggression, lack of emotional control and rule-breaking.

The study, , was published in the February issue of the journal Environmental Health.

鈥淚 was interested in studying green space as a beneficial environmental factor in children鈥檚 health,鈥� Hazlehurst says. 鈥淭here has been a growing concern that a lack of exposure to nature and kids not spending time outside in natural green spaces is contributing to health problems, including effects on mental health. Most of the prior work had focused on school-aged children, even though we know that early childhood is a sensitive window for the environment to influence kids鈥� brain development.鈥�

Hazlehurst said the underlying mechanisms of green space鈥檚 mental health benefits are not fully understood, but in part it is believed that green spaces encourage children鈥檚 physical activity and free play. Such exposure may offer children opportunities to restore their emotional resources as well 鈥� a sort of 鈥渇orest-bathing鈥� for the pre-K set. Playing outdoors also allows children to build their emotional regulatory capacities through risk-taking, as well as mitigating some environmental stressors such as heat and air pollution.

One of the takeaways from Hazlehurst鈥檚 research is that green space may be particularly important for children and families with access to fewer resources. Populations with lower socioeconomic status are more likely to experience higher levels of adverse stressors and environmental exposures, she says, and may be more reliant on resources within their residential neighborhoods. More green space in these neighborhoods might help mitigate some of these stressors.

Profound and Lasting Effects

Symptoms like depression and anxiety that develop early in life can continue to have profound and prolonged effects on a person鈥檚 functioning throughout their lifetime. The protective role of green space during these early years may have long-lasting implications for children鈥檚 mental health, as both recent studies suggest. The studies add to the body of evidence that preschool children benefit greatly from exposure to nature, from nature-based early learning, outdoor preschools, and programs that intentionally get children out into the green outdoors.

鈥�(Creating more green space) is one of those potentially low-cost benefits not only for young kids, but for the environment and for families,鈥� Towe-Goodman says. 鈥淲e are all increasingly aware of the ways we are intertwined with our environment. If you can help increase exposure to natural spaces, if you can protect those spaces and offer programs to families early on to increase exposure to the natural areas around them, that seems like a solution with great potential.鈥�

Resource

An emergency for America鈥檚 children: In late 2021, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (AACAP) and the Children鈥檚 Hospital Association (CHA) joined together to declare a National State of Emergency in Children鈥檚 Mental Health. The challenges facing children and adolescents are so widespread that these professional organizations called on policymakers at all levels of government and advocates for children and adolescents to join them in the declaration and advocate for a set of proposed actions to address the crisis. The proposed solutions and the declaration can be found on the .

The examines the causes driving the 鈥渁stonishing鈥� rates, resulting in bleak educational outcomes and disproportionately impacting Native, Black and Latino children. 

The national report, which explores social, health and economic factors across while also highlighting programs that work, paints a stark portrait of the state of child well-being. From a decline in the number of 3 and 4 year olds in school to an increase in the rate of child deaths, it warns the United States 鈥渟tands on the precipice of losing our economic standing.鈥� 

Without urgent, targeted investments in family engagement, social emotional health and tutoring, a generation of Black and brown kids may soon be shut out of fast growing, high-paying STEM fields, researchers say.

Today 2 in 5 or 40% of kids have experienced at least one of what experts call 鈥� trauma such as the loss of a parent from incarceration, divorce or death; housing or food insecurity; exposure to violence or substance use; and forms of abuse. In Mississippi and New Mexico, half of children experienced such trauma, according to 2021-22 data. 

鈥淚 think we should all be astonished that kids in this country are experiencing ACEs [trauma] at the rate that they are,鈥� said Leslie Boissiere, vice president of external affairs with the Casey Foundation, which has published data books on the state of childhood and funded related initiatives for more than 30 years. 

鈥淲e also know that post-pandemic, chronic absence is twice the level that it was before 鈥� it’s critically important that we understand what are the factors that are affecting kids as they enter the classroom and what’s preventing them from showing up for school.鈥�

Alaska, Arizona, Washington D.C., and Oregon saw the highest chronic absenteeism rates, between 42 and 46%. Idaho, Louisiana, New Jersey and Washington saw the lowest, with between 4 and 18% of kids chronically absent in the 2021-22 school year, the latest available data.

Several New England states that invest heavily in early childhood education 鈥� New Hampshire, Massachusetts and Vermont 鈥� ranked highest in Kids Count鈥檚 latest annual state by state comparison for overall child well-being. Utah and Minnesota round out the top five, based off of 16 education, health, economic and family indicators. 

Beyond traumatic experiences, the data book points to rising economic or housing instability; limited or costly childcare options, which results in siblings caring for each other or working; and transportation challenges as common factors impeding children from attending school consistently. 

鈥淲hat we’re seeing is many kids don’t have those basics met 鈥� Most of the country now accepts that we’re in a reading and literacy crisis but to break down, what does it actually look like and what does it mean? It is particularly alarming,鈥� Boissiere said. 

While the report unveils some bright spots that will improve childrens鈥� well-being 鈥� an increase of kids who are insured and a decrease in the teen birth rate 鈥� the reality facing educators is that only one in three kids are reading at grade level by 4th grade.

One in four kids are proficient in 8th grade math. Racial breakdowns reveal alarming inequities: only 9% of Black kids, 11% of Native kids, and 14% of Latino kids are proficient.

Additionally, 54% of 3 and 4 year olds, roughly 4.3 million, are not in school, up from pre-2018 numbers, which has alarmed experts who point to the age as critical for mastering basic literacy and numeracy. The share is much higher for young Native and Latino children, 60% and 61% of whom are not in school, respectively. 

鈥淭he demographics of the public school system are only growing more and more diverse, so to ignore these disparities would really disservice most students in public schools,鈥� Boissiere added.

Over $40 billion of federal pandemic relief funds for education remain unspent; states have until September 30 to allocate funds, which could be used through 2026. 

Authors urge every school to track absenteeism and invest in family engagement to better understand the challenges facing families in their particular context. They recommend implementing high dosage tutoring and point to the community school model, which offers wraparound physical and emotional health support alongside academics. 

, for instance, dropped its chronic absenteeism rate from 37 to 18% by investing strategies such as installing washer and dryers on campuses, rolling out a chatbot to address common questions about transportation and other barriers, and altering their automated call system to better track absenteeism and its causes.聽

On one campus, a barber comes monthly to offer free haircuts. They鈥檝e added additional van transportation for the coldest days to serve kids who don鈥檛 have adequate winter clothing, and launched a housing resource center to assist families experiencing homelessness who need support navigating local services.  

鈥淚t is going to take educators, administrators, parents and communities coming together,鈥� Boissiere said, 鈥渢o go back to hopefully better than pre-pandemic levels, make sure that kids are attending school regularly, and that they show up prepared to learn.鈥� 

Still, the child welfare system annually separates over 200,000 children from their families nationwide. Scholar, activist and author Alan J. Dettlaff calls this 鈥渁 disconnect in the public consciousness,鈥� as there is far less outcry about the pattern of state-sponsored separation in the form of removing children from their homes and placing them in foster care.

The history of racism in the United States and its ongoing impacts on children and families experiencing state-sponsored displacement are on full display in this collection edited by Dettlaff. Featuring contributions by Victoria Copeland, Maya Pendleton, Jesse M. Hartley, Reiko Boyd and Kristen Weber, traces family separations in the United States back from the era of slavery and maintains that today鈥檚 child welfare system is the deliberate outcome, primarily to the detriment of Black children and families.

鈥淭he child welfare system is largely a system that responds to families living in poverty,鈥� Dettlaff writes. 鈥淚f the system were intended to assist families living in poverty, it would provide support in the form of direct financial assistance and other material resources to aid families in meeting their children鈥檚 needs.鈥� The impacts of family separations are so untenable that the practice and system that sustains it must be abolished, not reformed.

The contributors cite research showing that forcibly separating children from their parents results in significant and lifelong trauma, regardless of how long the separation lasts and why it occurred. While the body of research specific to the experience of family separation by the child welfare system is small compared to that of parental incarceration and immigration enforcement, these studies consistently document children鈥檚 feelings of loss, fear, anger, helplessness, shock and confusion.

Boyd cites describing the physiological responses of children experiencing separation: 鈥淭heir heart rate goes up. Their body releases a flood of stress hormones such as cortisol and adrenaline. Those stress hormones can start killing off dendrites鈥攖he little branches in brain cells that transmit messages. In time, the stress can start killing off neurons and鈥攅specially in young children鈥� wreaking dramatic and long-term damage, both psychologically and to the physical structure of the brain.鈥�

All children in foster care are at significant risk of adverse outcomes as adults. Former foster youth are consistently more likely to experience unemployment or low earnings, less likely to graduate high school, more likely to rely on income assistance programs, more likely to have significant mental health and substance use disorders, and significantly more likely to be incarcerated. In addition to these setbacks, their physical safety is in jeopardy. Multiple studies across decades have shown that rates of physical and sexual abuse among children in foster care are two to four times greater than those in the general population. Children in foster care are also more than three times as likely to attempt suicide than children not in foster care.

Nearly 70% of children enter foster care due to neglect, broadly defined by states, which usually refers to a failure to provide for basic needs like food, clothing, education and shelter. Less than one-fifth of children taken from their parents have experienced any form of physical or sexual harm. Today, it is estimated that more than half of all Black children in the United States will be the subject of a child welfare investigation by the time they turn 18. Black youth in foster care are significantly more likely to 鈥渃rossover鈥� into the juvenile legal system.

The authors chronicle several policy decisions and examples of racialized laws that influence these patterns. 鈥淭he idea of a white, middle-class parenting standard against which all other families are judged has been embedded in modern child welfare policy since the 1960s,鈥� Dettlaff argues in his introduction. 鈥淒ue to these racist policies and explicit and implicit biases among decision-makers, Black children are significantly more likely to be reported to child protection hotlines than white children and significantly more likely to be the subject of a child welfare investigation than white children.鈥�

Debunking the myth of benevolence that the general public overwhelmingly affords the child welfare system, the book makes a thorough case that it is harmful and provides hope that a better future can and must exist. The abolitionist stance is optimistic by definition. 鈥淎bolitionists seek to create a society where all children and families have everything they need to experience safety in their homes and their communities, free of violence and harm and free of the societal conditions that create violence and harm,鈥� write Weber and Pendleton.

Abolition, this book argues, requires constant critique of all forms of oppression, adapts and changes strategies over time and ultimately builds new and better relationships for one another. While it is about dismantling oppressive systems, it is equally about building new structures that sustain freedom.

Confronting the Racist Legacy of the American Child Welfare System forcefully responds to critiques that abolitionist efforts often come with no detailed plan.聽In addition to direct material support, the contributors envision broader structural changes needed to end poverty and advance the safety and well-being of children, like a housing guarantee, free public transportation and free, accessible and meaningful child care, health care and mental health care.

Perhaps the most thought-provoking of the book鈥檚 tangible suggestions involves redirecting the funds allocated to uphold out-of-home placements to families experiencing poverty instead. In 2018, that sum was $33 billion. According to Weber and Pendleton, 鈥淒ecades of research demonstrate that providing direct material assistance to families significantly reduces both involvement with the family policing system and incidents of child maltreatment.鈥�

The conversation explores taking a loving approach to the work, thinking about intentional equity and community partnerships that are grounded in respect for culture.

Mark Swartz: Early Learning Nation focuses on young children and their parents, educators and advocates. What would you like our readers to know about the Children鈥檚 Bureau?

Aysha E. Schomburg: The Children鈥檚 Bureau has always prioritized our partnership with early childhood education. Young children are at the highest risk of maltreatment. A high-quality early-education program can act as prevention for child abuse and maltreatment.

Swartz: On his first day in office, President Biden released his . How is the Children鈥檚 Bureau making good on this promise?

Schomburg: One of the first things that I did in this role was send a letter out to the jurisdictions of the nation to talk about equity. Foster care, which disproportionately impacts Black and brown children, is family separation, and that should only be a last resort. We鈥檙e really focused on not only prevention, but also on leveraging our tools to help families get what they need and helping states help families get what they need.

At the Children鈥檚 Bureau, we鈥檙e trying to move in a direction so that we have less to do on the intervention piece, because we are doing more on the prevention piece. And we have a long way to go, but we鈥檝e come pretty far. For example, we want jurisdictions to spend more federal dollars on prevention. I鈥檓 happy to say that to date, we have approved 44 prevention plans, which includes 3 tribes, meaning 44 jurisdictions have opted to take advantage of the of 2018.

Swartz: Can you describe your strategy for advancing equity?

Schomburg: One thing is listening to folks with lived experience. I was in a meeting with impacted parents, and a parent said, 鈥淟et us tell you how we would spend the money to answer the problems that we have in our community.鈥� That was well over a year ago, and I knew that when I had the opportunity to use some discretionary funds, I would try to do that. I heard what she had to say, and in response, we issued a . Field initiated, meaning we have asked the community to tell us how they would use the funds to address racial bias in the child welfare system 鈥� as opposed to the federal government prescribing how the funds should be used. This is our first field-initiated grant in at least 20 years, maybe 30.

Another strategy is strong and intentional collaboration with other agencies at the federal government and our sister offices in the Administration for Children & Families. In June we issued a notice of funding opportunity, , to invest $2 million to enhance collaboration at the jurisdictional levels or at the state level between your child welfare division or office and your early childhood education partnerships. We collaborate with Housing and Urban Development, with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and so on.

Swartz: How did the pandemic affect the foster care system?

Schomburg: The pandemic generally exacerbated inequities. Most of us are acutely aware that there are inequities throughout the country in various different ways, particularly when it comes to the haves and have-nots. When the pandemic started, I was working for the New York City Administration for Children鈥檚 Services. Right away, it was like, okay, everything is closed. People were unable to work. So those folks who were, for example, food insecure, now literally had no food. There were lines, several blocks long, of people waiting to get into a food pantry. Not everyone had access to Wi-Fi and the things that they needed to be in communication with each other.

Swartz: How did you get up to speed, going from a city role to a federal role?

Schomburg: One of the great things about this role is that I get to see so many different places, and every time I go somewhere, I have an aha moment. There鈥檚 so much beauty in this country. But then I happen to have this role where I鈥檓 constantly dealing with challenges, trying to prevent child trauma, trying to help families stay together by ensuring they have access to whatever they need. There are 574 federally recognized tribes. There are some issues and challenges that are particularly related to tribes, and in this role, I have had the privilege of learning specifically about challenges experienced by tribes and by folks living in rural areas. Whenever I travel, I make it a priority to speak to community members, impacted families, impacted young adults.

Swartz: What lessons has the Children鈥檚 Bureau drawn from the pandemic?

Schomburg: When I came into this position during the pandemic, we wanted to create more flexibilities with our federal funds, so we could be able to say to the states, for example, 鈥淵ou can use to give cash assistance to young people, to use for whatever needs they may have.鈥� We try to interpret a law to be as flexible as we can.

Swartz: What motivates you to do this work?

Schomburg: The number one reason I do what I do is because I love the children and the families that we serve. I don鈥檛 feel like we talk about love enough. I鈥檓 taking a loving approach to doing this work, to thinking about intentional equity, to thinking about community partnerships that are grounded in respect for culture.

Swartz: How has your own personal story shaped your commitment to children?

Schomburg: I grew up in Brooklyn, and I鈥檓 one of five children. My parents worked. I had a two-parent household, and we were in a beautiful neighborhood, in a beautiful home. I don鈥檛 ever remember being hungry. We went on vacations. This is how I thought families were. We鈥檙e all together, eating at the dinner table every night.

It makes me want that for every family. That鈥檚 my inspiration and motivation. In this country, we have enough resources for every family to have everything that it needs, and in my opinion, we just have to decide that giving families what they need is more important than anything else.

Swartz: Could you tell us about your experience as an ?

Schomburg: When I was invited to participate in Aspen, I had also just been appointed to this role and wasn鈥檛 sure if I had the time for an 18-month fellowship, but I鈥檓 so happy I made the commitment. Not only did I learn so much about what鈥檚 happening nationally, but I also made lifelong connections. It has been one of the best decisions I鈥檝e ever made.

Here are our top 5 takeaways from the presentation:

1. The many gaps are related and rooted in history. The 鈥済ap鈥� usually refers to future academic performance. While education can determine future outcomes, it doesn鈥檛 capture the scope of the potential problems that children and families face.

鈥淥ne of the greatest predictors of a child鈥檚 education outcomes is the education outcome of their mother,鈥� explained Shantel Meek of Arizona State University鈥檚 . 鈥淭hese pieces compound over time and become root causes and beget opportunity gaps in the future.鈥�

鈥淢any gaps in opportunity and outcome share the products of centuries of systemic racism across numerous domains of life, including finances, wealth, health and education,鈥� explained Duke University鈥檚 Kenneth A. Dodge. The research suggests that exclusionary policies and practices, such as residential and school segregation, are some of the structural drivers of these gaps, since they dictate whether and how many resources are distributed to children, based on where they live and go to school. Additionally, macroeconomic and labor market trends affect parental earnings and job quality, influencing stress levels and health, and affecting children’s development.

2. Gaps impact birth and beyond. While most babies in the United States are born healthy, and on track for normal physical and cognitive development, those who are not may need substantial resources and care to survive infancy and meet the challenges beyond. Nearly 15% of women in the U.S. do not receive adequate prenatal care.

鈥淎ccess to quality maternity care is critical to maternal health and positive birth outcomes, especially in light of the high mortality rates and severe maternal morbidity in the United States,鈥� explained New York University鈥檚 LaRue Allen. 鈥淔ailure to provide these opportunities early in life can lead to worse outcomes or exacerbate health issues that cause concern.鈥�

3. Environment and income influence growth factors. Child well-being is affected by environmental factors like harmful pollutants and contaminants in the water and air. The prenatal and early childhood periods represent windows of increased susceptibility. Children of color and those of lower-income households are more likely to experience these opportunity gaps.

鈥淧arents’ jobs shape economic opportunities for children, particularly since wages are such a large source of family income,鈥� explained Pamela K. Joshi of Brandeis University. 鈥淎ccess to paid leave improves parents’ health and young children鈥檚 health in infancy up to and through elementary school.鈥� About a third of working families and most low-income families do not earn enough wages from their full-time employment to always cover necessities to raise children.

4. Access to universal care and culturally inclusive education is essential. Children are born learning, and neuroscience has long demonstrated that the early years are among the most sensitive periods for brain development. Child care and education rarely meet the needs of those most in need, and experiences differ when access is granted 鈥� for instance, dual language learners. 鈥淎 lack of access to bilingual staff and teacher expectations, cultural inclusivity and effective engagement with families who speak a language other than English, all shape children鈥檚 experiences and disproportionately those of immigrant children, Latino and Asian American children,鈥� explained Milagros Nores of Rutgers Univeristy.

5. Mental health must be a focus. The authors found that well-implemented, universal programs such as home visiting and social-emotional learning approaches in child care and preschool settings can improve outcomes. In addition, policies that support their parents’ mental health and well-being can improve outcomes for their children.

鈥淎ccess not only to mental health treatment but also to mental health promotion and prevention services and environments is crucial to parents, caregivers and children, Dodge said,

鈥淗owever, a lack of culturally informed and linguistically matched care can exacerbate inequalities for marginalized groups.鈥� Young children who experience compromised mental health are at increased risk for later challenges in their physical health, social relationships, psychological well-being and financial stability that last across the lifespan.

Early Learning Nation spoke to experts from (KIND) and the (MPI) to learn more about how educators and community partners can welcome and support the youngest new Americans. KIND offers legal support and social services to unaccompanied minors. MPI strives to come up with realistic policy solutions to manage migration, immigration and integration

Here are seven insights for teaching and serving immigrant children.

1.  Immigrants live everywhere. Historically, we think of Texas, California, Florida and New York as immigrant hubs. While these states have the largest shares of immigrants, the picture is far more spread out, says Essey Workie, director of the Human Services Initiative at MPI. 鈥淲e’re seeing more and more immigrants in rural communities,鈥� she notes, 鈥渨hether it’s because of the price of housing or because of agricultural work opportunities.鈥� (.)

2. The journey from Latin America is especially traumatic. Children come to the U.S. from all over the world, often escaping violence and persecution. In the case of new arrivals from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras (which account for most unaccompanied children and families arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border), gangs and the threat of sexual and gender-based violence have forced them to flee for their lives. 鈥淐hildren flee trauma,鈥� says Kena Mena, social services supervisor at KIND. 鈥淭hen they experience trauma again and again on their journey here and throughout their experience.鈥� According Workie, the trauma they experienced may not be fully expressed until children begin to feel safe with a parent or sponsor.

3. 鈥淭rauma doesn鈥檛 define migrant children,鈥� declares Argelia Tlatelpa Perez, senior social services coordinator at KIND. Teaching respect and inclusivity with a culturally responsive lens can help them to cope with trauma and to get ready for school. Perez recommends being especially patient with these children as they acculturate to the U.S. They may not reveal their feelings right away, but careful listening can bring about trusting relationships. Young children are remarkably resilient, says Mena, but only with the help of caring adults.

4. Know who is in your community. As a teacher, you may know the names of the children in your classroom, but do you know where they鈥檙e from? Workie encourages educators to know 鈥渢he languages they speak at home, the cultural practices they have, the faith groups they affiliate with,鈥� adding that while it isn鈥檛 appropriate to ask about religion at the time of enrollment, these discoveries can be made through family engagement. 鈥淭hat鈥檚 a great way to honor the students’ background and heritage,鈥� she says.

5. Get familiar with available resources. As Workie describes it, the fate of children processed by the (ORR) is anything but straightforward: 鈥淲hen a child leaves federal custody and goes to live with a parent or other sponsor in the community, ORR doesn鈥檛 have legal custody anymore. The parent or sponsor is responsible for the child’s well-being, but they are often unauthorized themselves and have limited access to benefits and services. And there often isn鈥檛 intensive case management to help them navigate this very complex maze.鈥� Educators may not have the knowledge to serve as advocates, but helpful resources include:

• The Child Welfare Information Gateway鈥檚 list of
• The Kaiser Family Foundation鈥檚 report

6. Immigration enforcement often exacerbates the stress. Imagine you鈥檙e living in a new country, trying to learn a new language and make new friends, but at the same time, law enforcement officials are targeting your family and people who look like you. According to a , 鈥�Immigration enforcement actions鈥攁nd the ever-present threat of enforcement action鈥攈ave significant physical, emotional, developmental and economic repercussions for millions of children across the country.鈥� have decided not to voluntarily share immigration status and other confidential information about students and their families with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (this agency鈥檚 warrants are not legal but rather administrative).

7. Mental health supports matter for these kids. Immigrant children often feel like they have nowhere to go for emotional relief and no one to talk to. Feelings of loneliness, sadness and worthlessness are common. As Workie explains, one-on-one counseling with a psychologist is rarely an option鈥攅specially when Spanish-speaking therapists are in such short supply. She mentions peer-support groups and sports or arts activities as vital for managing mental health and stress levels. 鈥淧lay matters,鈥� says KIND鈥檚 Mena. Her organization provides puppets, song, sensory toys and stickers for children in shelters run by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Mark Swartz: We鈥檝e been hearing the word trauma a lot lately. Even newborns and infants are experiencing what the world is going through right now, and it’s traumatic for them, too, but at the same time, they have this capacity to rebuild and bounce back. I was wondering what you’ve observed and what your team has observed, or what you anticipate.

Dr. Joshua Sparrow: As we create our responses to the effects of the pandemic on children, families and communities, it will be critical to build on the strengths we鈥檝e always had, and those that we鈥檝e been developing through this experience鈥攚ithout minimizing or denying the hurt and the harm. We can heal if we can find the strong tissue to grow from. Concerns about learning loss are real, but children are always learning wherever they are, under all kinds of circumstances. We can honor their experiences and listen to what they have been learning when their schools have been closed.

If we can face what hurts, what has been harmed, without catastrophizing, and turn to parents鈥� passionate concern for their children鈥檚 well-being, the wisdom of our cultures and the power of children鈥檚 development and community connectedness鈥攙irtual or in person鈥攖hese will help us get through.

Swartz: What kinds of supports will the COVID generation of young children need as they grow up?

Sparrow: I don鈥檛 think it will help to lump children together or label them as the 鈥淐OVID generation.鈥澛� Their fates don鈥檛 have to be sealed by their experiences of the pandemic, and the pandemic need not erase their unique individual differences. In a , we attempted to lay out the range of variables influencing the effects of the pandemic on children.

Children鈥檚 development depends on the larger contexts of family, school, neighborhood, community, the physical environment and a nation鈥檚 values and polices. Scattered, fragmented approaches to healing that address one source of hurt or harm while leaving intact the others are often limited in their effects, and their effects are often short-lived. Children, families and communities that have been harmed in these times in multiple ways鈥攂y separations, losses, isolation, financial hardship, systemic racism, climate change and more鈥攚ill need comprehensive, systematic approaches.

Swartz: The includes more than 60 programs, organizations and systems of care around the world. What are some of the providers in the Touchpoints network seeing?

Sparrow: We鈥檙e still learning about the impact of the pandemic on children, families and providers, and will continue to do so for at least a generation. While some of our assumptions may hold up, we may also find ourselves surprised. Way back, when the pandemic began, many of us were worried about how mask-wearing might interfere with infants and toddlers learning about facial expressions, which are so important and are learned very early on. And it may be even more of a challenge for children who will go on to be diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, but who are already, in the first year of life, struggling to be able to look, observe and take in and make sense of facial expressions.

Yet this recent story from a child care center director may tell us something about how children鈥檚 innate strengths may be protecting their development: In an infant-toddler classroom, when one of the teachers took her mask off, the children all became anxious and agitated. When she put the mask back on, they were relieved and comforted, and settled down right away.

Little did we know that for them, 鈥淭his is what you do to take care of us. This is what makes us safe and secure.鈥�

In other words, babies are smart. Really smart. They鈥檇 also learned to use all of the other nonverbal information from the upper part of the face. 聽They’re looking at the crinkles around the eyes, the wrinkles in the forehead, the angles and postures of our body and the tone of our voice. There is so much information there that they鈥檝e learned to use to fill in the gaps the masks create.

Swartz: Lately, it feels like for every step forward, we鈥檝e had at least one step back.

Sparrow: Child development doesn鈥檛 move in a straight line, either. Before each new developmental accomplishment, there is a temporary loss of functioning in some area that had previously been mastered. Mothers of four and five month old babies, for example, always called up Dr. Brazelton to say, 鈥淔eeding was going so well, but now she just takes one or two sucks, pulls away, looks around the room, and she’s done. Is there something wrong with my baby? With my milk? Or me?鈥�

Brazelton said it is our job to be ready for those two questions: 鈥淗ow is my baby doing?鈥� and 鈥淗ow am I doing as a parent?鈥�

Swartz: What accounts for that phenomenon?

Sparrow: Their ability to focus shifting from about 18 to 20 inches, perfect for looking at your face while feeding, to about six to eight feet, so that they can now see all around the room. This shift is powered by a sudden surge in the connections between brain cells in the parts of the brain responsible for vision. As the brain puts in place these new connections, the baby is just doing her job of learning all about her world as her new skills bring more of it into view. But, she will temporarily be distracted from feeding by all the new things that she now can see.

Swartz: Just hearing this information must reassure anxious mothers.

Sparrow: The Touchpoints Approach helps parents know, in these disorganizing moments, 鈥淚 am getting it right, and so is my baby.鈥� Just like children and families, schools and other organizations can also go through touchpoints.

It can help to normalize that 鈥渢his is a hard moment for us鈥� and to focus on the opportunities for growth and learning. We can make sense of the hard things that have happened to open up new understandings that point to new solutions.

, the project鈥檚 first major publication, calls for abolition of the current system, which they call family policing, and for 鈥渁 fundamental transformation of the ways in which society supports children, families and communities.鈥� The authors build their case on alarming statistics, such as:

• are investigated by child welfare authorities
• Black children are forcibly separated from their parents at a
• , even when there is no evidence that substance use has affected their child鈥檚 health or their ability to care for their child.

I spoke to Alan Dettlaff, dean & Maconda Brown O鈥機onnor Endowed Dean鈥檚 Chair at the University of Houston Graduate College of Social Work about the paper and its ramifications.

How did you arrive at the term 鈥渇amily policing鈥�?

The term builds upon the work of many others who used the term 鈥渇amily regulation system.鈥� We believe 鈥渇amily policing system鈥� captures all of the roles this system plays in the lives of families, which include surveillance and punishment, in addition to regulation. The ways the family policing system intervenes and the roles of various workers serve to maintain the control and oppression of Black, Native and Latinx families, which is also consistent with the practice of policing. We are speaking to the experiences of families, not aspirations of the system.

The term 鈥渃hild welfare system鈥� is fundamentally inaccurate. Data consistently show that this intervention does not result in overall improved life outcomes for children and youth. The broader public needs to understand how this system operates, and continuing to use the phrase 鈥渃hild welfare system鈥� masks the harms that families experience and the outcomes for children. As this work continues, we hope others will begin to describe the system in this way.

The history of family policing parallels that of incarceration, border protection and more. Our country is undergoing a new round of debates about how history is framed and interpreted. What opportunities and obstacles does this environment present?

The history of family separation is long, horrific and racist. This history has largely been whitewashed, with limited scholarship and teaching about the insidious and persistent White supremacy and racist roots that play out in our public systems of today. We see an opportunity to expose these racist roots and educate the broader public.

An important part of understanding family policing is acknowledging that the forced separation of Black children from their parents is a practice that originated with human chattel slavery as a means of maintaining power and control by a system of White supremacy that is foundational to this country鈥檚 origins. Throughout its history, the notion of White supremacy has been embedded in child welfare systems鈥� policies and structures to first exclude Black children from child welfare services and later to perpetuate oppression against them.

Why abolition? Why not reform?

Racism is so deeply embedded in the policies and practices of the family policing system that it simply cannot be reformed away. It is jarring to many to reckon with the fact that child welfare is not exempt from this history of racism and that it is often not a helpful system, but rather causes harm to families.

Part of our work involves raising awareness of the harms that result from family separation and foster care, and the disproportionate harm this causes to Black, Native and Latinx children, families and communities. Abolition requires both dismantling of the family policing system and the creation, or remembering, of ways of caring for children and families in communities. Many people will have to work through their biases and be willing to give up their power and control over families, to trust new ways of caring for one another.

A statement like 鈥淲e seek to build a world where the care, support and well-being of children, families and communities is fully realized鈥� seems hard to argue with. How do we get there from here?

It starts with ending the use of involuntarily family separation and redirecting the billions of dollars spent on foster care to the families and communities who are most impacted by family policing systems. In addition, we support a universal basic income, child allowances, safe and accessible housing, paid parental leave for families welcoming new children, paid sick leave and a job guarantee with a living wage. Abolition involves simultaneously dismantling the racist policies and practices that produce harm, and replacing them with resources and supports designed by families and communities that promote the safety and well-being of children in their homes. In this way, abolition is not about simply ending the family policing system; it is about creating the conditions in society where the need for family policing is obsolete.

Which organizations or influential individuals do you hope to partner with?

We hope to partner with everyone who is committed to improving the safety and well-being of children, youth and families in their communities who recognize the need to end the harms done to Black, Native and Latinx families by the family policing system. Many parents, youth and advocates have been calling for abolition and doing the work to achieve this for many years, and we hope to join with all of these partners. The movement is not about us, but rather the society we seek to collectively create.

What are the plans for the October summit?

We hope to expand on some of the ideas we offered in How We endUP and strategize with others about how we can, in community, improve support and care for children, youth and families as we move towards the abolition of family policing.

What role do stories鈥攑ositive and negative鈥攑lay in your advocacy?

Stories of the parents and youth impacted by the family policing system are very important because they demonstrate the harm and trauma that result from family policing intervention. Even for families and youth that experience positive outcomes, those outcomes come at a tremendous cost. Throughout our work, we hope to continually amplify these voices and center these experiences.

How can the upEND movement engage organizations that think they’re helping kids but may actually be reinforcing the system鈥檚 negative consequences?

Part of the work is to raise awareness of the harms that result to children and families from family separation and foster care. We recognize that there are incidents of harm to children that occur in society. When this harm does occur, we seek solutions for harm that are non-carceral and do not rely on state-sanctioned separation due to the additional trauma and harm that result from this intervention.

We also recognize that child welfare agencies have often been unable to prevent harm to children, even with their authority to remove children from their homes. In this recognition, we seek to understand why we live in a society where such harm occurs and how we can support the creation of a society where such harm does not occur.

A spotlighted the groundswell of donations, sparked by a Reddit post, to a nonprofit that buys gifts for foster children. How else could charitable money be used to change the system?

Children in foster care certainly need support because of the harms the system has caused to them. However, what is often misunderstood in these stories is the perception that children in foster care lack families who can care for them, when the reality is that most children in foster care have families and extended families who are struggling to have their children returned to them.

As we outline in How We endUP, investments and resources are needed to support children and families within their communities to ensure families have what they need to thrive. Resources can also be used to support the multiple organizations across the country working to dismantle the harmful impacts of the family policing system.

Unfortunately, this seemingly positive result comes at a high cost. Family separation is devastating. after finds high levels of developmental and psychological problems in the lives of children who have been taken from their parents鈥攁nd the trauma is both more severe and more common with Black children.

The human cost is great, and so is the financial toll. While states and cities generally administer family services, it鈥檚 telling that the federal government spends on foster care and adoption than reuniting families.

The story we tell ourselves leaves out a lot, and placement with a foster family doesn鈥檛 always result in a happy ending.

A new project launched by the (CSSP) in conjunction with the , called , seeks to highlight the racial inequities in the existing system and to bring about structural change. Kristen Weber and Alan Dettlaff from upEND share about the initiative, especially as it concerns babies and toddlers. (According to , almost 200,000 children, or more than a quarter of those in the system, are three years old or younger.)

鈥淎ll of our systems suffer under a racist society,鈥� says Weber, CSSP鈥檚 director of Equity, Inclusion and Justice. 鈥淲e formed upEND to dismantle the current child welfare system that is entrenched with racist history, policies and practices. And we have committed to working with parents, advocates and others to reimagine new ways to keep children safe and support families without relying on interventions that are coercive and can result in family separation.鈥�

Weber, an attorney with years of experience representing children in the child welfare, juvenile justice and educational systems, says upEND鈥檚 design work involves not just listening to the voices of those affected but partnering with them on reimagining systems.

The 鈥渇oundational intervention鈥� of the current system, University of Houston鈥檚 Dettlaff explains, is taking kids away from their families. 鈥淭here鈥檚 a myth that the system is helpful, and the media perpetuates the myth by highlighting only the extreme cases.鈥� He acknowledges that instances of brutality and deprivation exist but maintains that the majority of cases represent neglect that is better addressed by means other than separation, which should be considered a last resort.

鈥淲e know that neglect largely stems from poverty,鈥� he says, 鈥渟o direct payments to parents could be more efficient and beneficial than stipends paid to foster parents.鈥�

UpEND is asking existential questions: Why does state intervention come first? Why not partner with families and communities?

鈥淐hildren belong with their parents,鈥� says Dettlaff. As currently configured, the system 鈥渃auses harm to children every day.鈥� He notes that Children and Family Services 鈥渁cts as an arm of the police鈥濃�攁 circumstance that, for many observers, links it with larger systems plagued by racism.

Weber and Dettlaff are two of six authors of a recent paper in the Journal of Public Child Welfare with the blunt title It presents damning evidence of a chain of consequences jeopardizing the well-being and long-term prospects for Black children.

• Black children are more likely to be reported for suspected maltreatment than white children.
• Allegations involving Black children are more likely to proceed to investigation and significantly more likely to be substantiated than those involving white children.
• Black children are more likely to be removed from their homes and placed into foster care than white children.

Too often, what we desperately want to believe as the 鈥渆nd of the story鈥� is a mirage. found that young children involved in the welfare system, those most in need of developmentally appropriate education and care, often are denied these supports.

In the alternative orientation promoted by upEND, communities are 鈥渇irst responders鈥� for families in crisis. This approach is patterned after Black and Native American communities that historically have shown resilience and resourcefulness in addressing maltreatment, often when government agencies have turned a blind eye. By shifting the government鈥檚 involvement upstream to providing the benefits and work supports proven to reduce maltreatment, upEND鈥檚 policy recommendations could be both more humane and more cost-effective.

UpEND was already in the works before the current wave of Black Lives Matter protests and calls to defund or abolish the police in the wake of George Floyd鈥檚 death, but the climate gives new momentum to a mission that goes back to Brenda Scott鈥檚 1994 book Out of Control: Who’s Watching Our Child Protection Agencies, which called for scrapping the system. Dorothy Roberts鈥檚 Shattered Bonds: The Color of Child Welfare (2001) equipped activists and advocates to understand the racial dimensions of the crisis.

鈥淭he word abolition can be scary,鈥� Dettlaff acknowledges. 鈥淏ut it鈥檚 not just about tearing down. It鈥檚 about creating new systems, new structure, a new society.鈥�

In the late 1990s when the term 鈥渢oxic stress鈥� entered our cultural conversation, the term was a game-changer in getting educators and policymakers to grasp the profound and potentially lasting impacts adverse childhood experiences such as crime, poverty and abuse can have on a child鈥檚 developing brain and body. But by the early 2000s, Ellen Galinsky, chief science officer of the Bezos Family Foundation, began to see that, though the term was useful in a number of contexts, it was actually harmful in others.

鈥淚t was a brilliant concept to reach policymakers, who react to words like 鈥榯oxic,鈥� but I began to worry about the impact on families,鈥� Galinsky says. 鈥淥ur team at 鈥� now a program of the Bezos Family Foundation 鈥� was conducting a training program for educators. We were talking about the distinctions between 鈥榯oxic,鈥� 鈥榯olerable鈥� and 鈥榩ositive鈥� stress and one educator said she would never use the word 鈥榯oxic鈥� with anyone because it sounds fatal. 鈥楾oxic sounds like it will kill you.鈥欌��

The conversation around trauma-informed care was beneficial in getting teachers and others to see that children who act out are not being willful or bad but are possibly dealing with minds and bodies that have been overwhelmed by prolonged adversity. Still, many of the people Galinsky and her colleagues were talking to out in communities 鈥� parents, families, teachers and others 鈥� had experienced these adverse events in their own lives, and the conversation felt very different to them. It felt hopeless.

鈥淲e switched to the term 鈥榮evere,鈥� because it didn鈥檛 sound so poisonous and fatal, it sounded as if there were things you could do about it,鈥� Galinsky says. However, she continued to feel unsettled about the term and a second experience in 2016 drove home to her the need to come up with new way to speak about the issue.

鈥淚t was a meeting of researchers and community people and one of the speakers gave a talk on the effects of adverse childhood experiences and some of the statistics in terms of increased substance abuse, depression, health problems and attempted suicide in people who have experienced these experiences,鈥� Galinsky says. 鈥淭he speaker left, and the room absolutely erupted. Community leader after community leader told stories about how children were being stereotyped if they lived in poverty, if there was divorce in their families, if someone in their family had been incarcerated. The absolute worst was assumed of these children.

鈥淎nd that assumption could become self-defining. Stereotyping people in any way is pernicious, and there is research that shows that it actually has negative biological effects on people. Words and assumptions matter. Some of older kids got the message and it began to define the way they saw themselves.鈥� Why bother, and why try if you鈥檙e destined to be a victim of trauma all your life?

At a number of conferences where Galinsky spoke, she said she noticed that school personnel might be behaving better toward the children but some of the educators were still seeing the young people as damaged.

鈥淚 feel that particularly deeply because I grew up in West Virginia,鈥� she says. 鈥淎nd one of my first jobs was to work for a research project where many outsiders came to my state to see what they could do to improve Appalachian poverty. As a member of staff, I heard again and again the awful things that these professionals were saying about my neighbors, my friends, my fellow citizens 鈥� just the worst kind of stereotyping and assuming.

鈥淭he researchers might drive by a house in West Virginia and see that it was made of packing crates and that the kids didn鈥檛 have any toys, and they would assume their lives were terrible. 聽But they never saw the inventiveness with which the children were playing and how courageous the people were.鈥�

An article Galinsky read further influenced her thinking on the need for a shift in language around the issue. on transforming the conversation from trauma-informed care to healing-centered engagement told of working with a group of African American young men. One of them said, 鈥淵es, trauma has happened to me, but I do not want to be defined by it.鈥�

That, for Galinsky, is the crux of the issue. Rather than labeling people鈥檚 life experiences as toxic and trying to change them, she advocates looking at what people are doing right and using that as a foundation for building strength and resilience, which she is calling 鈥渁sset-informed care.鈥�

鈥淭he fact that those families in West Virginia were impoverished and had few materials resources was a huge problem,鈥� she says, 鈥渂ut the fact that the children had no store-bought toys was not the end of the story. They had a family support system that doesn鈥檛 exist in much of the world and that should have been seen as a strength.鈥�

It鈥檚 important not to shy away from the fact of adversity and the feelings associated with it, she says, quoting Fred Rogers (Mister Rogers) in saying that, 鈥淲hat is mentionable is manageable.鈥�

鈥淏ut you don鈥檛 just start with what鈥檚 wrong. You assume the person is active in wanting a better life and go from there. A lot of this has to do with mindset, the explicit assumptions we have about ourselves and others that affect how we behave. If you change the mindset, you can change what matters.鈥�

Galinsky says her mantra has become 鈥淎dversity is not destiny.鈥� Trauma should be a starting point, not the finish line, an access to finding the strengths and resources to grow beyond the circumstances that life has thrown in the way. Successful, asset-informed interventions begin with what all parties are doing right. Catch them in the act of doing something that works and lift that up rather than perpetuating the idea that a damaged child is always and only damaged.

Galinsky acknowledges that shifting the narrative from trauma-informed care to asset-informed care will take time. Since the idea of toxic stress was introduced two decades ago, it has become a widely accepted concept with a great deal of cultural currency. The challenge is to hold onto the important knowledge and insights of that trauma research while broadening our understanding of the bigger picture: People can be strong and able, and with the right support and advocacy, they can grow beyond the worst things that have happened to them.

The Bezos Family Foundation provides financial support to Early Learning Nation.