The Soho Forum Debates Should Child Protective Services Intervene More?
Jan 9, 2026
Naomi Schaefer Riley, a family policy expert, argues for increased intervention by child protective services (CPS) to safeguard vulnerable children, highlighting cases of child fatalities and the shortcomings of current practices. In contrast, Martin Guggenheim, a clinical law professor, advocates against expanding CPS interventions, emphasizing systemic issues and racial biases in child welfare. The debate navigates the complexities of neglect, poverty, and the necessity of reforming existing structures rather than merely increasing removals.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Neglect Drives Worse Long-Term Outcomes
- Riley emphasizes neglect, often tied to parental substance use and mental illness, as the dominant CPS concern with severe long-term harms.
- She cites studies showing children reported for neglect often fare worse than those reported for physical abuse.
Follow Up On Substance-Exposed Infants
- Do ensure reports from medical staff and others about substance-exposed infants trigger CPS follow-up rather than being ignored.
- Monitor newborns after discharge and connect parents to rehabilitation and sober caregivers when needed.
Foster Care Can Improve Some Outcomes
- Riley argues foster care can improve outcomes for some abused or neglected children and cites studies showing reduced criminality and mortality.
- She says foster care often reduces repeat maltreatment and helps parental rehabilitation in some cases.