Why does the child welfare system always seem to have money to remove children, but not enough to help families stay together?

In this episode of Torn, Sonia Johnson and Classie Colinet speak with Richard Wexler, executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, about the financial structure behind family policing in the United States.

Drawing from decades of reporting and advocacy, Wexler breaks down how federal funding streams reward foster care, institutionalization, and adoption while limiting direct support for families.

What happens when the system refuses to name race in a system where race shapes everything?

In this episode of Torn, we welcome back Maleeka Jihad (MJ) for a direct and unfiltered conversation about how racial bias operates within the child welfare system—and why avoiding conversations about race allows harm to continue.

From the concept of “best interest” to visitation, diagnoses, and so-called “evidence-based” practices, MJ challenges the idea that these decisions are neutral. Instead, she examines how they are often shaped by bias, opinion, and frameworks that were never designed with Black and Brown families in mind.

This conversation speaks directly to what many advocates experience in their work:

• Decisions made without cultural understanding or relevant expertise
• Policies that exist on paper but are not followed in practice
• Parenting standards that reflect one perspective, not all families
• Systems that rely on opinion rather than research or science

MJ also breaks down how commonly used concepts—like attachment theory and evidence-based services—can be misapplied or weaponized when used without context, particularly for families of color.

If race were centered honestly in child welfare, the system would be forced to reckon with how it defines safety, parenting, and “best interest”—and who those definitions truly serve.

In this episode of Torn, we go beyond policy and take a closer look at what advocates, attorneys, and families are seeing in real time: how hospital practices—particularly drug testing, consent, and reporting—can lead to child welfare involvement.

Joined by nurse scientist Dr. Kelly McGlothen Bell, we examine how decisions made in clinical settings can have immediate and lasting consequences for families. From unclear consent processes to inconsistent testing practices, this conversation highlights how routine care can quickly shift into investigation.

We explore:

• The critical difference between drug screening and drug testing

• How consent is often misunderstood or not fully informed

• Why testing practices can be inconsistent and influenced by bias

• How and when information is shared with child welfare agencies

• The impact these practices have on trust, care-seeking, and maternal health outcomes

This episode also centers what is often overlooked: the importance of bonding, stability, and support in the immediate postpartum period—and how quickly that can be disrupted.

For those working in child welfare and family defense, this conversation reflects a familiar reality: Cases that begin in hospitals, where decisions are made quickly, often without full context, and where the consequences extend far beyond the delivery room.

At its core, this episode asks:
What would it look like to move from surveillance and reporting toward care and support?

🎧 Listen to the full episode to better understand how hospital practices shape system involvement—and what needs to change.

Follow Torn on LinkedIn.

Learn more about Dr. Kelly McGlothen Bell.

Pregnancy is supposed to be met with care, privacy, and support. But for many—especially Black, Brown, and low-income patients—it has become a point of entry into surveillance and state control.

In this episode of Torn, we are joined by attorney Julia Livingston to unpack how medical settings are operating as gateways into the child welfare system. Drawing from her recent article, Julia walks us through two lawsuits that expose how hospitals, shelters, and social service agencies share information—often without consent—and trigger investigations before a child is even born.

From blanket drug testing of pregnant patients to the creation of “high-risk pregnancy” lists, this conversation reveals how routine medical care can quickly turn into system involvement—with lasting consequences for families.

We also explore:

• How mandated reporting in healthcare settings fuels unnecessary investigations

• The role of consent—and what patients are (and aren’t) told

• How fetal personhood and privacy rights are being redefined

• The disproportionate impact on Black and Brown patients

• What happens to trust when healthcare begins to feel like surveillance

For advocates and attorneys, this episode raises urgent questions about constitutional rights, unlawful searches, and how to challenge cases that begin in hospital settings.

At its core, this conversation asks:
What does it mean for families when seeking care becomes a risk?

🎧 Listen for a critical look at how surveillance is reshaping pregnancy—and what it means for the future of family regulation.

Read: Even Blue States Are Doing Unlawful Surveillance of Pregnant Patients Now

What happens when a parent’s disability is treated as a deficit instead of a difference?

In this episode of Torn, we are joined by Dr. Cheryl Fergerson to examine how the child welfare system responds to parents who are differently abled—and where it continues to fall short.

Through real case examples, this conversation highlights how families are often pulled into the system not because of harm, but because of misunderstanding. From cookie-cutter service plans to the misuse of psychological evaluations, the system frequently fails to account for how parents actually learn, function, and rely on support networks.

Dr. Fergerson introduces a different approach—one that centers strengths, adaptive learning, and individualized supports. She breaks down the gap between traditional evaluations and adaptive parenting assessments, and explains why “reasonable efforts” cannot truly exist without accommodations under the ADA.

This episode also explores:

• How reactive systems create unnecessary removals instead of offering early support

• Why parenting should never be evaluated in isolation

• The critical role of support networks and “eco-mapping” in keeping families together

• How bias—particularly around race, poverty, and language—shapes who is labeled “unfit”

• What advocates can do to push for more individualized, equitable case planning

At its core, this conversation challenges us to rethink what support really looks like—and whether the system is set up to help families succeed or to document their failure.

🎧 This episode is essential listening for anyone advocating for parents with disabilities, challenging compliance-driven systems, or working to ensure that families are supported—not separated.

We are often told that decisions in the child welfare system are driven by science and the "best interest" of the child. But what happens when developmental theory is twisted into a legal weapon to permanently destroy Black and Brown families?

In this episode of Torn, hosts Sonia and Classie are joined by Jessica C. Duesler, a board-certified licensed clinical social worker and forensic consultant with 20 years of experience.

Together, they dismantle the way "attachment theory" is misused in courtrooms to justify legal human trafficking and forced cultural assimilation. Jessica challenges the field to admit that using attachment language to finalize family separation isn't science—it is a tool of cultural judgment used to punish parents for systemic harm.

If attachment theory were used ethically, it would be applied on the front end to prevent unnecessary removals and prioritize keeping families together. Whether you are an attorney, a social worker, or a community advocate, this episode will arm you with the arguments needed to challenge subjective evaluations and demand true, evidence-based family preservation.

Resources Mentioned:

• Article: "The Weaponization of Whiteness in Child Welfare" by Jessica Desler and Malika (MJ) Jihad (The Guardian)

• Jess's Practice & Consulting: Colorado Forensic Family Advocacy

If Part 1 exposed the commodification of children, Part 2 dissects the machinery that keeps it running—and offers a roadmap for how we disrupt it. We return with Astrid Castro (Adoption Mosaic) and MJ (Maleeka Jihad) to move beyond the comfortable checklist of "cultural competency" and demand true Adoption Literacy.

In this conclusion to our conversation, we shift from the "why" to the uncomfortable "how." We discuss the dismantling of the ethical framework of modern adoption. Together, we explore the clash of value systems (axiology) that fuels entitlement—where white cultural values prioritize "ownership" (member-to-object) while Black and Latine values prioritize "relationship" (communal).

The episode concludes with a vision for the future: why adoption must cease to be a cure for infertility, why co-parenting is the only ethical standard, and how projects like "Letters to Stolen Loved Ones" are creating space for grief and repair.

Resources Mentioned:

• Adoption Mosaic (Astrid Castro)
• MJCF Coalition: Letters to Stolen Loved Ones Toolkit
• Study Mentioned: Edwards, Fong, & Apel (JAMA Pediatrics, Dec 2025) on foster care outcomes

When we talk about transracial adoption, the prevailing narrative is often one of "love rescued" and "happily ever after." But for many adoptees, the reality is a complex journey of loss, erasure, and survival.

In this episode, hosts Sonia and Classie are joined by two powerhouse guests: Astrid Castro, CEO of Adoption Mosaic and an intercountry adoptee, and MJ (Maleeka Jihad), an anti-racist strategist and expert on the family regulation system. Together, they dismantle the "rainbows and unicorns" status quo to reveal the transactional nature of the child welfare industry