This article is part of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/upstream" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Upstream</a>, The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.
***
For those who spend far too much time on social media, there is no greater achievement than “going viral.” Not the bad kind of viral — with all the coughing and sores and two-weeks-to-slow-the-spread — but the kind that feeds that insatiable little narcissist inside each of our online personas.
Sometimes, these viral moments are predictable, but sometimes they come from the most seemingly innocuous expressions of obvious truth. A few weeks ago, I experienced just that, even making it into the hallowed “Today’s News” section on the hellscape that is X (formerly known as Twitter). The headline: “New Dad’s Post on Childless Parenting Advice Resonates Widely.” Mission accomplished! After all, who doesn’t dream of resonating widely?
What was this <a href="https://x.com/ighaworth/status/2060135729267704057">post</a>? “Having a baby will make you realize how insanely hilarious it is when childless people give out parenting advice.”
Generally, unsolicited advice is annoying, but when it’s coming from someone who has never had a child, and they’re lecturing you on how to do your job, it’s a whole other level of ridiculousness. I was never one to hand out unsolicited parenting advice either before or after having a baby, but it was only after having a baby that I realized — since parenthood triggers an onslaught of constant unsolicited advice from everyone you meet, everyday, forever — quite how absurd this particular social quirk is.
Before having children, I must admit that I had too many internal thoughts on the parenting of others. I’m not talking about the baseline requirements of parenting — feeding your child, clothing your child, and making sure your child doesn’t wander off into the woods to be eaten by wolves — since these fall into legal observations rather than parenting styles. No, I’m talking about the low-level judgments that slip from our consciousness without a moment’s hesitation before we have any idea what we’re talking about.
Outside of the aforementioned baseline, no one has the right to judge anyone else’s parenting, let alone someone who has never had children, and let alone shared in the form of an all-too-familiar passive aggressive “here’s an idea.” When my wife and I have been up since 4 in the morning, our baby has launched both breakfast, lunch, and dinner in every direction except his mouth; and we’ve battled the dreaded blowout while in traffic. The random childless stranger at the supermarket is simply not equipped to solve the problem demonstrated by their tiny and brief window into our lives.
And I challenge you to find a parent out there who disagrees.
But what I found really interesting about my post was the range of negative reactions (both online and offline) from people who didn’t have children. While most parents agreed — because it was obviously true — there were some who were clearly offended by the notion that childlessness is an indication of ignorance in the realm of raising children.
It’s not like this logic applies anywhere else, of course. Imagine hiring a penniless financial advisor, or a blind traffic warden, or pre-Ozempic Lizzo as your personal trainer. But when it comes to parenting, apparently everyone has some thoughts that we simply must take seriously.
There were some who liken parenting human children to owning a pet. I have a cat that I love almost as much as my wife, but the idea that taking care of a feline is the same as a human being is frankly insane. There are some who pretend that opposing illegal acts of abuse is the same as parenting, which enforces a depressingly low bar for what parenting means. And then there are some who think child-related workers (most notably teachers) are equipped to give parenting advice. Sorry, no.
Most teachers are undeniably wonderful people who have dedicated themselves to the betterment of our society by helping to mold the next generation, forming a crucial element of their students’ lives. But that’s not the same as parenting. Teaching is hard and tiring. But teachers get paid, teachers have a limited scope of expectations, and teachers get to go home at the end of the workday. Unless you’re a single mother or an illegal immigrant in a socialist country, no one is paying parents to be a parent.
Yes, teachers are responsible in the context of education and basic safety and classroom temperament, but parents are responsible for every element of their children’s lives, including their education. When a mom drops little Jimmy off at kindergarten, it’s not like she’s suddenly free of responsibility, and is therefore free to fly to Las Vegas for the afternoon and channel her inner Hunter Biden.
And there is no end of the day for parents. Even teachers with a difficult student are free of this burden when summer rolls around. When your “parenting” is for several hours a day for several months a year, it’s not parenting. It’s a job. Also, when there are potentially dozens of children in each classroom, a teacher’s advice might be more applicable to chimpanzee crowd control workers at your nearby zoo than the parenting of an individual child whose needs, desires, and personality is unique.
But in the end, a simple and tautological fact remains: no one but the parents are parents. No one else created the child, only the mother gave birth to the child, and the parents have a duty to be there for their child in every moment God gives them. That’s not a complaint — the responsibility of parenthood is the most awesome and magical experience imaginable — but it is the reality.
One particular comment by a childless kindergarten teacher really stood out to me, as she criticized poor parents and noted that children are “not property with which the parents can do as they please.” No human being can be property, of course, but children do belong to their parents. And as every parent will attest, anyone who comes within a thousand feet of interfering with my family — let alone taking any form of control — is in for a rude awakening.
And parents, unlike childless teachers, are used to rude awakenings. I was woken up at two in the morning by a baby who was not only kicking me in the face but laughing about it. 
Childless-givers of unsolicited advice: You and I are not the same. 
***
Ian Haworth is a syndicated columnist. You can find his work on <a href="https://www.ighaworth.com/">Substack</a>.

Morning Mood Asian baby wake up early before daddy and playful on the bed

Who Made These People Parenting Experts?

Parenting

Upstream

This article is part of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/upstream" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Upstream</a>, The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.
***
Are todays’ kids too badly behaved and poorly parented to <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/19/us/kid-free-children-public-places-cec">share adult-oriented spaces</a>, such as restaurants, weddings, and public transportation? Or do the childless adults <a href="https://mamasaywhat.com/no-kids-allowed/">demanding insulation</a> from children’s antics as they sip their lattes, say their vows, or commute to work just need to get a grip and grow up already? 
This is one of those <a href="https://x.com/foxnews/status/2059712468092432581?s=43">Internet Discourses</a> in which people are <a href="https://x.com/daniellebfranz/status/2059808260987801815?s=43">talking endlessly</a> past one another, ignoring that both things are true: Yes, American parents absolutely need to raise kids who behave better, and, yes, childless adults who want to live without interruptions from crying babies or laughing preschoolers need to be ignored like the overgrown toddlers they are.
A couple things are happening at once here, confounding our collective ability to see and act on the nuanced reality.
One, lack of accommodation for <a href="https://eppc.org/publication/what-makes-america-family-unfriendly-a-qa-with-tim-carney/">children and families</a> is real, and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy as fewer people have children and it becomes less common to see children out and about. It then also becomes less presumptive to take children into true and special consideration when making policy and other decisions.
Two, millennials, in mass thrall to <a href="https://www.collegiatetimes.com/opinion/gentle-parenting-it-s-setting-kids-up-to-fail/article_cc30dc0d-a40d-4d6f-815b-a339ab012085.html">gentle parenting</a> and its lies about <a href="https://unherd.com/2024/12/the-cruelty-of-gentle-parenting/">child development</a>, have produced way too many badly behaved kids and not enough well-behaved ones. As a result, people see so little decent parenting in public that we’ve forgotten how varied even good child-rearing can look in relation to kids of different ages. 
Children should be expected to exist in public
A few weeks ago, I took my four children — ages 11, nine, five, and two — into the kind of Center City Philadelphia coffee shop where one does not typically see children (let alone four of them in one family). No one bothered us, and everyone was kind to us. But we sure got a lot of stares. You know who did not provoke that level of interest? The several dogs on leashes inside this same establishment. Why? Because that eatery, given its clientele, is clearly more commonly frequented by canines than by kids. 
Is this a problem, in and of itself? Of course not. But when children’s presence is alien to large and growing swaths of the population, an unfamiliarity with kids’ norms and needs takes root far beyond a few froufrou coffee shops. 
Take our response to the <a href="https://www.npr.org/2025/12/12/nx-s1-5638421/new-study-reveals-effects-of-covid-school-closures-on-students-mental-health">coronavirus pandemic</a>. Remember how bars opened ahead of schools in many places? Remember how our inane decision to <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2025/04/school-closures-predictable-disaster/682431/">close schools</a> at all was ultimately a regressive tax on poor and working-class children? Remember how senior citizens and childless adults tended to oppose the reopening of schools more than anyone else? When children are largely hidden from view — when their needs are not apparent to people beyond their parents — the devaluation of their well-being is normalized. 
For example, my sons have provoked their fair share of adult upset over the years for existing in pools. In one memorable incident, an elderly woman came over to yell at my then seven-year-old and five-year-old (and me) because they were jumping repeatedly into the pool, giggling and splashing — and had gotten her wetter than she wished to be. I responded charitably due to her advanced age, but one has to wonder what manner of society produces senior citizens who enter pools of their own free choice during a time designated “family swim” and then publicly react in anger when they encounter, um, water.
Such a curmudgeonly attitude toward children’s noise and play in shared spaces, and our acceptance of it, reflects values that are exactly backwards. Children’s needs should be our top priority; childless adults’ desires should be our last. In a healthy culture, any adult who said or behaved otherwise would thereby forfeit her right to any regard or respect. 
Gentle parents are ruining America — and maybe your dinner
As I <a href="https://lawliberty.org/the-case-against-gentle-parenting/">have written</a> <a href="https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2025/11/99390/">many times</a>, <a href="https://www.deseret.com/opinion/2025/01/01/gentle-parenting-mufasa-lion-king/">gentle parenting</a> — defined as prioritizing young children’s feelings over their behavior — has many unintended, negative consequences for kids and parents alike. A baseline of decreased tolerance for children in public spaces is one of them. 
There are two things at play here. One is that too many of today’s kids really are abominably behaved. A few months ago, I took my five-year-old in for a sleep study. The veteran nurse who cared for him shared with me that she could no longer count on children his age to sit still while she prepared them for evaluation. Many won’t listen when their parents instruct them to sit still. Some kick, scream, or hit. A substantial percentage need to be pacified with screens in order to complete their appointments. 
If you ever frequent restaurants, churches, or other public spaces where children are present, none of this will surprise you. Beleaguered parents weakly pleading with five-year-olds who don’t sit still to “make a better choice” over a plate of French fries at the local diner is common. Indeed, this kind of permissiveness and abdication cuts across enough demographic divides of class and political ideology that it’s no longer accurate to associate it only with those who profess “gentle parenting.” It is, per Hannah Spier, normative “<a href="https://hannahspier.substack.com/p/the-rise-of-the-pathological-mother">millennial parenting</a>.” This is a colossal and multifaceted problem that requires swift and thorough remediation.  
That said, the other aspect of decreasing tolerance for children in public spaces is childless adults’ determination to denigrate whatever inconveniences them without regard to the context — in other words, to be gentle parented by society, including by children, themselves. 
As <a href="https://x.com/stephmurrayyyy/status/2060369884786180504">Stephanie Murray</a> has pointed out, the child throwing a tantrum at Target may actually have great parents. After all, he’s screaming because he isn’t getting what he wants, and that’s likely because the adult in charge isn’t giving in. Sure, the five or six-year-old screaming wildly outside the grocery store while his mom attempts to comfort him is almost certainly a gentle-parented disaster with overindulgent parents. But the two- or three-year-old screaming just as wildly? She usually isn’t!
Indeed, it’s the very parents who are willing to let their toddlers throw tantrums — in public and in private — who produce preschoolers who have long since stopped doing so. Children of such parents were told “no” constantly and consistently in toddlerhood, and they learned that tantrums neither changed “no” to “yes” nor garnered them any attention. 
So, yes, it’s on parents to ensure that preschoolers are civilized into the ability to behave appropriately enough in adult-oriented spaces. But it’s also on the rest of society to have the maturity, decency, and grace to remember that the well-named “terrible twos” should not involve house arrest for young families. Moreover, to any right-thinking person, running and laughing kids are not an affront to public peace but the primary reason to preserve it. The dad of a crying toddler on an airplane or the mom of a grade schooler who accidentally drops some books with a thud at the library, for example, should garner genuine smiles and sincere sympathy from other adults, not scowls and eye rolls. 
Frankly, we should all begin from a premise of gratitude to today’s parents for raising the next generation. After all, in this anti-child, anti-family ecology, that’s no longer a given. 
***
Elizabeth Grace Matthew writes about books, education, and culture, including <a href="https://elizabethgracematthew.substack.com/about" target="_blank" rel="noopener">on Substack</a>.

GettyImages-2162266434

How Gentle Parenting Helped Turn America Against Children

Children

This article is part of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/upstream" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Upstream</a>, The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.
***
Parents, what if there was an easy way to make your kids smarter and happier and it would cost you nothing?
Here is the secret: Stop giving your kids handheld devices. Screens are making our kids <a href="https://www.nprillinois.org/2024-01-08/are-phones-making-kids-dumber-new-data-suggests-the-answer-is-yes" target="_blank" rel="noopener">dumber</a>, less emotionally regulated, and unhappy.
This might sound like just another mommy war issue, but the harm of child screen use isn&#8217;t a matter of opinion; it&#8217;s supported by a growing body of scientific research.
Dr. Mark Williams, a professor of cognitive neuroscience and co-author of the book &#8220;Screen Smart Children,&#8221; warned on <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBedpPCv5c4" target="_blank" rel="noopener">60 Minutes Australia</a> that too much screen time is damaging kids&#8217; brains. Williams referenced brain scans from two- to five-year-olds that showed a significant deterioration occurs in a child&#8217;s brain after spending up to three hours a day on devices.
“The more time a two- to five-year-old is on a device, the more abnormal those white matter tracts are developing in their brains, which is really concerning for later on in life,” Williams said.
I became a mom in 2013 when the so-called <a href="https://archive.nytimes.com/parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/21/parents-of-the-touch-screen-generation-dont-free-your-ipad-yet/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">iPad kid</a> was just emerging. While pregnant, I remember seeing more and more young children staring at screens at restaurants, stores, and public events. It struck me that instead of learning to look up and be curious about the world around them, children were looking down at their screens — not even interacting with their own families. I didn’t want that for my baby.
It&#8217;s estimated that today <a href="https://www.npr.org/2025/02/26/nx-s1-5308593/children-screens-ai-common-sense-media" target="_blank" rel="noopener">40% of toddlers</a> have their own device by age two, more than half of kindergarteners have their own device, and <a href="https://www.edweek.org/technology/heres-how-many-elementary-students-have-their-own-cellphones-and-tablets/2025/02" target="_blank" rel="noopener">one in four kids</a> has a smartphone by age eight. Technology is reshaping American childhood and our future.
<div id="attachment_1090125" style="width: 873px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1090125" class="wp-image-1090125 size-large" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/IMG_4277-863x576.jpg" alt="" width="863" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/IMG_4277-863x576.jpg 863w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/IMG_4277-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/IMG_4277-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/IMG_4277-1536x1025.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/IMG_4277-2048x1367.jpg 2048w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/IMG_4277-1800x1200.jpg 1800w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/IMG_4277-1200x800.jpg 1200w" sizes=" (max-width: 863px) 100vw, 863px" />Photo by Megan Brock</div>
My husband and I grew up in the &#8217;80s and &#8217;90s with plenty of TV, movies, and Super Mario, but without the strain of personal devices. When I was pregnant, we decided we weren’t going to raise iPad kids. We wanted to give them as close to a &#8217;90s analog childhood as possible. For us, this meant no access to cell phones, iPads, immersive video games, or social media. TV and movies were still on the table.
This was a countercultural decision, and some were skeptical it could be accomplished. But we did it. My son is turning 13 this year, and he’s never had his own device. I’m convinced that giving him an analog-ish childhood is one of the best parenting decisions my husband and I have made.
This choice wasn&#8217;t hard to implement, but it did take determination, particularly when our kids were five and under. There were many times I was tempted to use devices to soothe a child’s distress or just get a few moments of peace and quiet.
But deep down, I instinctively knew that handing my kids devices for comfort or ease was taking away opportunities for their growth and development. Science backs this up. A 2025 systematic <a href="https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/bul-bul0000468.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">review</a> found that the more a child used screens, the more likely he was to have socio-emotional problems. And the more such problems he had, the more likely he was to soothe himself with screens. It&#8217;s a lose-lose cycle for kids.
Emotional regulation is something we all have to learn, and we learn it through experience and socialization. As a society, we’ve forgotten that it’s good for kids to be bored at a restaurant. It’s good for a toddler to smile at strangers in the grocery store. It’s even good for preschoolers to see something they want at Target and throw a tantrum because they can&#8217;t have it; they are learning the limits of their will amid the safety of their parents&#8217; love.
Over the years, my husband and I have made some adaptations to our family screen policy. When traveling on a long flight, all screen time bets are off for the sake of our sanity and respect for fellow passengers. We&#8217;ve used video calls to maintain relationships with distant family. We also let our son start playing on a Nintendo Switch at nine and a half — earlier than I would have liked — with parameters: limits on the types of games he can access (no role-playing games), set times when he can play, and no internet gaming with strangers.
We&#8217;ve also let our kids watch TV and movies with moderation. In alignment with our &#8217;90s childhoods, this happened on a social, stationary TV in the living room rather than an isolating handheld device.
Our kids have made it to double digits without the heavy burden of devices, and I see how it’s benefited them. They play outside every day, are very social, and enjoy reading.
<div id="attachment_1090131" style="width: 873px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1090131" class="wp-image-1090131 size-large" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/DSC_0333-863x576.jpg" alt="" width="863" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/DSC_0333-863x576.jpg 863w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/DSC_0333-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/DSC_0333-768x513.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/DSC_0333-1536x1025.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/DSC_0333-2048x1367.jpg 2048w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/DSC_0333-1800x1200.jpg 1800w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/DSC_0333-1200x800.jpg 1200w" sizes=" (max-width: 863px) 100vw, 863px" />Photo by Megan Brock</div>
Increased screen time often goes hand-in-hand with a loss of imaginative and independent play. Today’s parents have embraced a culture of “<a href="https://www.stern.nyu.edu/experience-stern/faculty-research/safety-police-free-speech-being-stifled-college-campuses" target="_blank" rel="noopener">safetyism</a>” that Jonathan Haidt, author of &#8220;The Anxious Generation,&#8221; describes as an extreme elimination of risk in a child’s life that cultivates fragility and ultimately prevents kids from reaching their full potential.
Haidt and Lenore Skenazy, founder of the <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Free-Range-Kids-Parents-Teachers-Grow/dp/1119782147" target="_blank" rel="noopener">free range kids</a> movement, are part of <a href="https://letgrow.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Let Grow</a>, an organization focused on helping parents build resilience and confidence in their children by giving them developmentally appropriate independence.
This is a part of the screen time conversation that often gets lost. It&#8217;s not just about what kids are doing; it&#8217;s about what they’re not doing because they are addicted to screens. They aren’t playing in the woods and riding bikes down the street. They aren’t climbing trees and making new friends. As modern parents, we have to be intentional about making sure our kids are getting outside, playing hard, and scraping their knees from time to time — without us hovering over them.
For young parents who want to give their kids an analog-ish childhood, don’t listen to anyone telling you it’s impossible in 2026. You can do it. And it&#8217;s a decision you won’t regret.
Cultivating curiosity and a love of nature in your kids is one of life&#8217;s great joys. When our kids were little, my husband and I constantly took them to parks, to playgrounds, and on hikes. We let them play in mud and taught them how to skim rocks on a creek. We stayed up late in the summer, having water fights and catching fireflies. Teaching them to look up and see the beauty in the world costs very little money and left us with priceless memories.
We are only beginning to realize the negative consequences of the digital-based childhood revolution. &#8220;The Anxious Generation&#8221; provides a deep dive into how preteens and teenagers are being severely harmed by smartphones and social media. Despite extremely worrisome data, approximately 90% of 13-year-olds have a cell phone, according to <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/teens-and-internet-device-access-fact-sheet/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Pew Research</a>.
Every day, we are making choices with our time and attention. As an adult with a fully developed brain, I often struggle to unplug from my devices. It takes discipline and intentionality to uphold good technology boundaries.
I know my kids will one day have to learn to be disciplined with technology, but I want to give their brains a chance to develop before assaulting them with the constant pull of a screen.
The technology genie is here to stay, and it&#8217;s not going back into the bottle. But as parents, we don’t have to put the genie in the hands of our children. We can say no. We can choose a different path for our families.
Let&#8217;s direct our children’s minds, curiosity, and attention toward our big, beautiful world that’s full of mystery. Let’s help them look up and out — toward friends, nature, and creativity instead of down at a lifeless screen. Their brains will thank us later.

A beautiful little girl having fun at the seaside

The ‘90s Childhood Comeback

Motherhood

Technology

This article is part of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/introducing-upstream-a-lifestyle-and-culture-section-of-the-daily-wire" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Upstream,</a> The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.
***
Feeling anxious while being a parent is no joke. We have real stressors that affect us. But there are a variety of things that we put on our plates that don’t belong there. Your child&#8217;s report card is not your report card; their cleanliness is not a reflection of your cleanliness. Your children are humans that are totally separate from you.
Parents have become so anxious about their children succeeding or not being lazy or clumsy or whatever other unfortunate adjective you can suggest. Some parents worry so much that they inadvertently make the thing they are concerned about happen because they don’t think with intention; they allow their emotions to dictate their decisions. 
The Pew Research Center reported in 2023 that as many as <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2023/01/24/parenting-in-america-today/">45% of parents</a> described themselves as overprotective. For this, you can thank the limbic system, which oversees behavioral and emotional responses as well as memory formation. The system includes the amygdala, the part of your brain that&#8217;s responsible for emotional processing and is key in fear and survival instincts.
A drastic number of parents, <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2023/01/24/parenting-in-america-today/">three out of four</a>, are concerned that their children will develop anxiety or depression issues. Do you know what happens when we worry about that happening? Instead of looking at a situation where we notice our children show fear, anxiety, or sadness and allowing them to work through it, we may step in or try to distract them. We hop in to fix it. If we don’t want them to develop those mental health issues, that means keeping them away from those feelings, right? Wrong. As a clinical counselor, I will tell you right now that this is going to hurt them in the long run. 
When a child doesn’t face the things that bother him and has someone else step in for him, what he learns is that he is not capable of doing things on his own and that those feelings should be avoided. He wonders if there is something wrong with him for feeling those emotions, and he doesn’t believe in his own abilities.
Other parents worry about their children getting kidnapped, so they listen to their limbic systems and start tracking and monitoring where their children go all the time. They check in over and over. They don’t allow sleepovers. Would you like to know what kids learn from this? They assume that the whole world is totally dangerous and that they should fear it. They believe that they can’t trust their own abilities. They miss out on developing the skills of managing a healthy amount of risk. Then those kids may do one of two things: push back really hard on all the rules or internalize the belief that they are constantly in danger and are incapable of taking care of themselves.
When your amygdala jumps to the worst-case scenario, remember this: Most <a href="https://leb.fbi.gov/spotlights/crimes-against-children-spotlight-child-abductions-known-relationships-are-the-greater-danger#:~:text=Moreover,%20despite%20media%20reporting,%20the,the%20FBI's%20Criminal%20Investigative%20Division.&amp;text=en_US&amp;PageId=4046%20(accessed%20April%2026,%202011).&amp;text=For%20the%20purpose%20of%20this,of%20a%20parent%20or%20guardian.%E2%80%9D&amp;text=The%20FBI's%20Child%20Abduction%20Rapid%20Deployment%20(CARD)%20team%20was%20established,most%20deployments%20since%20its%20inception.&amp;text=Based%20on%20FBI%20investigations.&amp;text=Ibid.&amp;text=National%20Center%20for%20Missing%20and%20Exploited%20Children,%202009%20AMBER%20Alert,accessed%20April%2026,%202011).">kidnappings</a> are done by a biological parent, and the type of kidnapping people are most worried about has almost a one in a <a href="https://letgrow.org/crime-statistics/">million</a> chance of happening. If you were a sociopath who wanted your child to be abducted, he would have to be left outside on his own for <a href="https://letgrow.org/crime-statistics/">750,000</a> years before it even became a statistical likelihood. You’re welcome.
Here&#8217;s what parents can do instead. A lot of the work is going to be cognitive, meaning it will be based on what you tell yourself. This is a key component because when we have awareness of our thoughts, we can challenge them and not let the anxious thoughts dictate our choices. When you notice that initial uptick in anxiety (stomach hurting, heart rate increasing, something sitting on your chest feeling), acknowledge it. Don’t ignore it. Get curious. Use that glorious prefrontal cortex.
If the anxiety is rooted in your child struggling with a task, take time to observe how she is navigating it and see what she comes up with; talk with her about how things can be hard sometimes and that we can try again or continue to work at something because it doesn’t have to be perfect the first time. Remember that kids doing things differently doesn’t mean they are doing them wrong. Your kid can ask you for help if she needs it. What your child will learn is that she can figure out things on her own. She will also learn that her parent believes in her abilities! This leads to confidence in oneself.
If the anxiety is rooted in your child&#8217;s physical safety, take a beat to observe what is happening in front of you and determine if he is engaging in age-appropriate risky play or exploration. Let your prefrontal cortex know that the physical world is much safer than we think it is. (Violent crime has been <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/us-crime-rates#:~:text=Violent%20crime%20rates%20increased%20during,overall%20trend%20has%20been%20downward.">decreasing</a> since the &#8217;90s, there is CCTV everywhere, and most of the predators are online now.) If he wants to go for a sleepover, get to know the parents and his friends. What your child will internalize is that he can conquer hard things, he can navigate social situations on his own, and the world is his oyster. He will be able to problem solve, use risk management skills, and know how to operate in the real world.
If the anxiety is rooted in the pain of experiencing “bad” emotions, please let me assure you that our emotions are there for us to feel. All emotions are okay (but not all behaviors). In order to support your child in developing healthy emotional regulation skills, name the emotion you see her experiencing, let her tell you about it, give her empathy and validation (this doesn’t mean you accept a poor choice she made; it just means you understand how she feels), work together to problem solve (don’t just give her the answer), and let her try out what she comes up with.
This can be a really hard balance. We hate to see our children struggle through emotions that feel heavy. But if we don’t let them navigate those emotions, they will have zero idea what to do when they are independent adults. By pushing through hard things, your child will realize that emotions are a normal part of life and that when there is a struggle, he can handle it. This will lead to increased frustration tolerance, emotional regulation skills, self-confidence, and competency.
What I want parents to know is that you don’t have to let your anxiety or worry or fear control how you make decisions. Be intentional. Work on wrangling your limbic system so that it can balance emotion and reason. And believe in your child’s abilities.
***
Gabrielle Frook is a licensed clinical professional counselor who has worked with children, adolescents, and adults, delivering evidence-based treatment for PTSD, depression, and anxiety. She writes her own <a href="https://theclinicianstea.substack.com/">Substack</a> and has been published in <a href="https://medium.com/@gemfrook">Medium</a> publications.

GettyImages-2226790560

The Moment You Step In To Help Your Kids Might Be The Moment You Hurt Them

California Governor Gavin Newsom’s &#8220;first partner&#8221; Jennifer Siebel Newsom is going viral after a video resurfaced in which she said she gives her sons dolls and changes male protagonists in books to female protagonists when reading to her children.
The resurfaced conversation comes from a 2019 interview with the Los Angeles City Council President Nury Martinez honoring Women’s History Month. 
“I’ve given our boys dolls … to learn that care and caregiving is not just an activity reserved for women but is also an activity that is a responsibility for men,” she said. Later in the interview, she added, “If I’m reading a book and the protagonist is a male, I just change the he to a she.” She said it normalizes women being the star of a story and that “women matter and women are interesting.”
Her comments were quick to draw criticism from the Right.
Conservative commentator Allie Beth Stuckey said, &#8220;Being a boy isn&#8217;t a disease that needs to be cured. Masculinity is a strength that needs to be fostered and encouraged.&#8221;
Fox New&#8217;s Tomi Lahren added, &#8220;I told yall the other night on Watters PrimeTime as bad as Gavin is, the wife will be the woke weight on his ankles.&#8221;
Popular commentator Link Lauren said, &#8220;I&#8217;e sounded the alarm for years. Jennifer is on eof the most radical women in public life. Imagine how she is behind closed doors if this is what she says publicly.&#8221;
The Daily Wire obtained the interview in its entirety and found that in addition to her parental advice, Siebel Newsom said conservative politics conflict with viewing women as equal.
“I grew up revering Ronald Reagan … my father did, so therefore we did,” she said. “My dad has always been the biggest champion of women, especially marginalized and vulnerable women, but unfortunately his politics led him in a direction that is sort of in conflict with seeing women as equal.”
She also <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7_5zEr_OuM">blames</a> California’s K-shaped economy on the “devaluation of all that we’ve feminized.”
“Everything that we’ve feminized in American culture — whether entire industries like education, health care, etc., or just attributes like empathy, care, and collaboration — because of the devaluation of all that we’ve feminized, we actually have this incredible inequitable system whereby socioeconomic mobility has never been as poor.” She added that “with California, for example, being the richest and poorest state in our country, we know that we have a lot of work to do to ensure that every California resident achieves not just the American dream, but the California dream.”
Siebel Newsom concluded, saying this is a policy she’ll champion as &#8220;first partner&#8221; of California, a title she created, explaining that she sees it as a more inclusive alternative to the traditional title of “first lady.”
It’s not the first time critics have questioned the first partner’s beliefs and word choices. Siebel Newsom even mentioned her husband has at times been a critic. “Every once in a while, he’ll [Governor Gavin Newsom] say, ‘That’s not really helpful that you said that,’ and I’m like, ‘I know, I’m sorry,’ but it’s the truth and I’m always going to speak the truth, and I’m always a mama and I always care about not just my children, but California’s children, and I’m always going to advocate for women.”
CNN’s Scott Jennings has <a href="https://www.instagram.com/reel/DWjVVMgAtfI/">argued</a> Siebel Newsom will be a problem for the governor of California if he chooses to run for president in 2028. Jennings made his remarks after Siebel Newsom discussed traveling to red states to learn about racism and misogyny.

California Governor Gavin Newsom Interview On The Circuit

‘I Just Change The He To A She’: Wife Of Gavin Newsom Draws Backlash With Parenting Advice

California

Gavin Newsom

General

Politics

The First Lady is meant to embody unity, home, and family. She is the right hand of the president and, in her own way, a mother to the nation. Melania Trump has taken that charge seriously — focusing her platform on children’s well-being, online safety, and opioid abuse prevention, placing service above self and motherhood above politics.
So as 2028 rumors gather and the question of our next president looms, it’s worth considering who would stand beside him and what she would do with the platform.
If California Governor Gavin Newsom becomes our next president, ask yourself how detrimental it would be for our nation if his First “Partner,” Jennifer Siebel Newsom, assumes greater power. Not First Lady — First Partner. The title she bestows on herself tells you everything you need to know, and the damage would follow accordingly.
Siebel Newsom wouldn’t be the mother of our nation. She’d be the caregiver, the parent, whatever gender-neutral term doesn’t upset the acolytes of the far Left who propelled the couple to power.  She wouldn’t reserve that terminology for herself alone; she would conscript the rest of us into it as well.
We need not wonder how she would parent the country. She’s already told us by how she parents her kids.
I recently wrote about how she’s taken her children on what amounts to a Racism Safari through Red State America — hunting for “misogyny, racism, and bullying, oh my!” But a newly resurfaced video reveals the indoctrination began far earlier.
Siebel Newsom told an interviewer that she gives her boys dolls &#8220;to learn that caregiving is not just an activity reserved for women.&#8221; She added that when reading a book with a male protagonist, she simply &#8220;changes the he to a she&#8221; so her sons can see that &#8220;women can be at the center of a story. That women matter. That women are interesting.&#8221; You have to rewrite literature to teach your children that women are interesting? Isn’t this something they should be able to observe at home, or is that a problem in the Newsom household?
Then she went further. We are all, she said, &#8220;recognizing what it is to ultimately deconstruct all of these gender roles and ultimately be human.&#8221; She will &#8220;continue to do her work to try and deconstruct these limiting narratives about what it means to be human.&#8221;
Read that again. In order for the Newsom family to be fully human, they must first dismantle what it means to be a man or woman. I can’t imagine what their dinnertime conversations sound like, but it seems as if the Newsoms are engaging in a war against the imago Dei — the truth that every person is made in God’s image, with an unchangeable, sexed soul.
When elites like Newsom use their platform to rewrite children’s books, hand boys dolls as ideological instruments, and treat biology as a social construct to be dismantled, they don’t make us more human. They make us less. They tell boys that the natural drive to protect and provide is toxic. They tell girls that the capacity to nurture is something to be questioned.
The result? Confused children, skyrocketing rates of anxiety, depression, and identity disorders, and a culture that treats objective reality as bigotry.
The leftist upper echelon calls this harmless. It isn&#8217;t. It is state-adjacent indoctrination with a smile and a reading circle.
True humanity is not found in endless deconstruction. It is found in accepting the Creator’s blueprint, in living out complementarity, and in rejecting the nihilism that insists man can redefine what God has made.
If the Newsoms become our nation’s next parents, we can be sure that their form of “progress” will aggressively erode that very humanity they openly vow to deconstruct — in the form of gender clinics in schools, pronouns in kindergarten, and a generation that no longer knows what a mother is.

California Governor Gavin Newsom Meets With Campaign Staff And Volunteer On Day Of Recall Election Vote

The Newsoms Are Parenting From Another Planet And They Want To Be America’s Parents, Too

Elections

First Lady

gender ideology

Leftists

United Airlines is introducing a new seating option aimed at making long flights more comfortable, especially for families traveling with young children. 
The airline recently unveiled &#8220;Relax Row,&#8221; which transforms three adjacent economy seats into a lie-flat space. The feature, announced on social media, is expected to roll out in 2027.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
The entire row is alllllll yours.
Welcome to United Relax Row, three adjacent United Economy seats with adjustable leg rests that can each be raised or lowered to create a cozy lie-flat space for stretching out&#8230;
You&#8217;ll also get a mattress pad, blanket and two pillows. If… <a href="https://t.co/Q6gcOuXbXo">pic.twitter.com/Q6gcOuXbXo</a>
— United Airlines (@united) <a href="https://twitter.com/united/status/2036505633470431412?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 24, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“The entire row is alllllll yours,” the X caption says. “Welcome to United Relax Row, three adjacent United Economy seats with adjustable leg rests that can each be raised or lowered to create a cozy lie-flat space for stretching out.”
Passengers will also receive a mattress pad, blanket, and two pillows. Families traveling with children will be offered a plush toy. United said the option would be available on more than 200 Boeing 787 and 777 aircraft, with up to 12 designated rows per plane.
According to the airline, the setup is designed to give travelers more flexibility and comfort.
“Whether you’re traveling as a family, solo or as a couple, you’ll have the freedom to stretch out, cozy up and make the journey your own,” United said on its website.
The announcement drew mostly positive reactions online.
“Much needed. United is innovating faster than anyone,” one reply <a href="https://x.com/DrWilliamBrady/status/2036532429846917544">said</a>.
“Good idea. Finally, something new from the airlines,” another commenter <a href="https://x.com/LeviSpires/status/2036519609558262177">replied</a>.
“May this set the standard for more child-friendly travel!” a third <a href="https://x.com/The_Nomad_News/status/2036613595925303521">added</a>.
United has not yet released details on pricing or how the seats will be booked.
This is the second encouraging update from the airline, which made <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/united-airlines-threatens-to-ban-passengers-who-make-this-noisy-faux-pas">headlines</a> recently when it added language to its contract of carriage stating it may refuse to transport passengers who fail to use headphones while listening to audio or video content. 
A spokesperson for United noted that headphone use had long been encouraged.
“We’ve always encouraged customers to use headphones when listening to audio content — and our Wi-Fi rules already remind customers to use headphones,” the spokesperson said. “With the expansion of Starlink, it seemed like a good time to make that even clearer by adding it to the contract of carriage.”
The policy change was widely supported on social media, with many travelers saying it addressed a long-standing frustration and should become standard across the airline industry.

Traveling family

United Airlines Just Changed The Game For Families Traveling With Kids

Air Travel

Airlines

United Airlines

Large American Family Group Gathering

Why Kicking Your Kids Out At 18 Is Actually Insane

family

Family Values

Gen Z

Marriage

Matt Walsh

Opinion

Teenagers

A new ad for Disney Cruise Line is receiving rave reviews online thanks to its pro-family messaging and touching storyline.
The 90-second ad “Midnight Magic,” which debuted on Sunday during the Academy Awards, focuses on a father’s bond with his son. 
It opens with a father walking his infant son around on the ship in the middle of the night. The ad follows the pair as the son grows into an older kid and then a teen who briefly rejects the ritual. This heartwarming tale ends when the adult son knocks on the door and asks his now elderly father to go for a late-night walk on the cruise ship with him and his young daughter. 
Social media users loved the message of present fathers, family traditions, and making memories.
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Where Magic Meets The Sea | Disney Cruise Line" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/yw922nyPxZs?start=3&#038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
“Challenge any father to watch this without crying,” one commenter <a href="https://x.com/mondoggg/status/2033347711261348292">wrote</a>. 
“You crushed it with this one!!  Dads are amazing and well worth those quiet moments of reflection and the impact it has on kids. Love this!!!” another <a href="https://x.com/oyveynottoday/status/2033608013773148624">said</a>. 
Other commenters delighted in the company promoting traditional values once again.
“Back to the basics Disney..  your BRAND was built on this RIGHT HERE….,” one person <a href="https://x.com/THEprivbnkr/status/2033374671379247267">responded</a>.
“You guys really nailed it with this,” another reply <a href="https://x.com/JoshChavis65/status/2033351196174360701">said</a>. “More of this from this brand, please. It’s what it’s supposed to be.”
“The culture shift is real, this Disney cruise ship ad aimed at dads is fantastic,” echoed <a href="https://x.com/claytravis/status/2033719663624888745?s=43">another</a>.
“Disney has brought families closer together for generations,” <a href="https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/news/midnight-magic-cruise-line/">said</a> Asad Ayaz, Chief Marketing and Brand Officer for The Walt Disney Company. “This campaign embodies what guests tell us time and again: that the Disney experiences they cherish most are the ones spent with the people they love. We’re grateful to make that kind of Disney magic a reality.”
The ad comes as fans speculate over Disney veering away from the woke path it had been traveling down. The entertainment giant ended 2024 by <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/will-woke-exit-stage-left-hollywoods-culture-clash-in-trumps-second-act">erasing a trans character</a> from one of their shows, followed weeks later by walking back their DEI policies.
While Disney hasn’t done a complete about-face, the company has been less controversial over the last year, especially as compared to when it was bragging about a “not-at-all-secret gay agenda” in 2022.

Disney Cruise

Did Disney Finally Get The Memo? Surprising New Cruise Ad Has Viewers In Tears

Disney Got The Memo? New Cruise Ad Celebrating Dads Has Viewers In Tears

advertising

Disney

fatherhood

Fathers

Last week, the Supreme Court of the United States issued an important ruling in Mirabelli v. Bonta, a case addressing whether schools can implement policies that deliberately exclude parents from critical decisions about their children’s well-being. The Court answered that question with a clear and resounding no.
In its order, the Court reinstated a prior injunction, barring California schools from enforcing policies that conceal students’ gender transitions from parents or require teachers to use names or pronouns inconsistent with biological sex. Under these rules, this information was withheld from parents unless the child consented. Naturally, many parents and teachers challenged these policies, arguing that they violated constitutional rights.
The Court agreed that the parents raising religious objections are likely to win their claims under the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause. The justices also found that the policies are likely to interfere with parents’ long-recognized constitutional right to direct the upbringing and care of their children under the Fourteenth Amendment.
In reaching that conclusion, the Court relied on decades of precedent that affirm the role of parents in guiding their children’s development, including Wisconsin v. Yoder and Troxel v. Granville. The message is straightforward: when it comes to consequential decisions affecting a child’s identity, mental health, and moral development, the government cannot simply push parents aside.
This ruling arrives amid a broader national debate over how schools respond to students experiencing gender dysphoria. In many districts, policies have emerged that treat transgender identity as a matter between the student and the school, <a href="https://www.americafirstpolicy.com/issues/protecting-children-from-social-transition-act">rather than between the child and their family</a>. Supporters argue that such policies protect vulnerable students. But the Court’s decision highlights a critical problem: removing parents from the conversation can undermine the very support systems children need most.
Parents are typically the first line of care when a child is struggling emotionally or psychologically. The Court recognized this reality, noting that <a href="https://www.americafirstpolicy.com/issues/gender-dysphoria-and-the-social-transition-intervention">gender dysphoria</a> is a condition with significant <a href="https://www.americafirstpolicy.com/issues/gender-dysphoria-and-the-social-transition-intervention">mental health implications</a>. When schools conceal information about a child’s confusion with their biological sex from parents, they risk shutting out those most responsible for providing guidance, counseling, and medical care.
The Court’s reasoning also exposes an uncomfortable truth that has been too often ignored in public policy debates: decisions about “gender” identity during adolescence can have profound and lasting consequences.
That reality becomes particularly important as more individuals speak openly about the experience of detransition — discontinuing gender transition procedures after coming to regret them. While research on detransition remains limited, emerging evidence suggests that some young people who went through so-called “gender affirming care” did so because of social pressure. Others say the real reason for their psychological distress was not addressed, and the transition process only further complicated their existing pain.
This is why parental involvement matters. Adolescence is a time of rapid emotional and cognitive development. Decisions made during that process should not occur in isolation from parents who are legally and morally responsible for their children’s welfare.
This week, advocates and researchers will observe Detransition Awareness Day on March 12. The day highlights the experiences of individuals who have reversed or questioned their earlier identification as transgender and seeks to promote better research and support for those navigating a similar path.
Their stories underscore an important point: the debate surrounding our biological sex is not simply theoretical. It involves real people whose lives are shaped by the policies adopted by schools, medical institutions, and governments.
Acknowledging detransition means recognizing the complexity of adolescent identity and the need for careful, responsible approaches that prioritize long-term well-being.
The Supreme Court’s decision in Mirabelli does not resolve every problem that surrounds the gender topic, but the ruling establishes a vital principle: parents cannot be treated as obstacles in their children’s lives. In fact, they are the opposite – parents are the people primarily responsible for guiding their children through the most difficult and formative stages of adolescence. To exclude them from decisions that carry permanent, harmful, and lasting consequences is contrary to the very concept of what it means to raise a child.
As the nation reflects on detransition and the broader questions surrounding the gender issue, policymakers would do well to remember what the Court reaffirmed this week — families matter, and parents deserve a seat at the table.
* * *
Dr. Jennifer Bauwens is America First Policy Institute’s Director of American Values.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Mother hold hand schoolboy walking to bus. Energetic pupils running crossway.

The Parent Trap: The Detransition Reality Schools Tried To Hide From Moms And Dads

detransitioner

Parental Rights in Education

Parents rights

Public Schools

Supreme Court

Transgender

This article is part of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/introducing-upstream-a-lifestyle-and-culture-section-of-the-daily-wire" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Upstream,</a> The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.
***
I’ve spent my entire life watching people’s eyes widen when they discover I have 10 siblings.
“Any twins?” they always ask.
&#8220;Nope.&#8221;
“All from the same parents?” they wonder.
“Yes!” I tell them.
“It must be loud around there,” they laugh.
It&#8217;s louder than you think. And I wouldn’t have it any other way.
So you can imagine my amusement when I stumble upon very-online big family debaters clutching their pearls over influencer Hannah Neelman — better known as Ballerina Farm — and her nine children.
Some argue that big families just aren&#8217;t for everyone. Others, like pro-abortion playwright Rebecca Reid, suggest parents of large families cannot give their children adequate “time, attention, and connection.”
Very few people, if any, are telling young women that they must have big families. We do hear constant warnings about how unfathomably hard and expensive children are and how children limit your freedom, your fun, and your time with your spouse. On the flip side, we also hear constant chatter about how women can balance career and family if they truly want to. Are we not allowed to hear about the women, like my mother, who defied the world and raised a clan at home?
As the oldest daughter and second-oldest child in a very large family, I can tell you firsthand that big families are not universally wealthy, and parents of such broods certainly aren’t calculating how much each child costs before they make the decision to have one more. These mothers and fathers look at life and family differently.
When you ask them how many children they are going to have, they’ll probably tell you with a big smile, “As many as God sends us.” And if you question how on Earth they plan to pull this off, they will probably say something to the effect of what my own mother told me: “God gives you the grace, one child and one day at a time.”
Families like mine don’t have a dozen children to “own the libs” or populate an aesthetic Instagram page. They’re open to life and to as many children as God blesses them with based on their deeply held religious convictions. They view each child as a gift from God, and they trust that He will provide for them.
I’m well aware that this reasoning sounds crazy to secular outsiders. But at the end of the day, does it matter? God has, in fact, provided for us, and my siblings and parents are the greatest blessings of my life.
<div id="attachment_1055369" style="width: 778px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1055369" class="size-large wp-image-1055369" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/IMG_7618-2-768x576.jpeg" alt="" width="768" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/IMG_7618-2-768x576.jpeg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/IMG_7618-2-300x225.jpeg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/IMG_7618-2-1536x1152.jpeg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/IMG_7618-2-2048x1536.jpeg 2048w" sizes=" (max-width: 768px) 100vw, 768px" />The author and a smattering of siblings.</div>
I could never imagine life without my six brothers: Tommy, Patrick, Michael, Barry, Daniel, and Seamus. I certainly can’t picture a world without my sisters: Catherine, Theresa, Janey, and Brigid. While we may all look alike, thanks to some good Irish genes, each one of us was uniquely created and brings a diverse array of talents, interests, virtues, and vices to the table. It has been my parents’ role to sort through all of that and to raise us to be the men and women we were created to be.
A large family necessitates a different kind of lifestyle than a smaller family might have, of course: My parents didn’t take our growing family on exotic vacations, and when I was a child, we had PB&amp;J lunches and spaghetti dinners probably more often than my father and mother would have liked. There isn’t as much room in the budget for going out to eat after sports practice or daytime kid activities. The other big families I have known throughout the course of my life are largely the same.
I have never wished for anything different. When I think about my childhood, I don’t really even remember the PB&amp;Js, except maybe the 11 I made for an infamous road trip. (The siblings still accuse me of sitting on them. I maintain my innocence.)
<div id="attachment_1055393" style="width: 877px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1055393" class="size-large wp-image-1055393" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/image1-867x576.png" alt="" width="867" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/image1-867x576.png 867w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/image1-300x199.png 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/image1-768x510.png 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/image1.png 1253w" sizes=" (max-width: 867px) 100vw, 867px" />The author giving piggybacks.</div>
What I do remember is eagerly waiting by the phone with my grandmother and the other kids as my parents called from the hospital to tell us that our ninth child would be a boy (Daniel, who now towers over me at 6&#8217;3&#8243; and texts me after my TV hits to say, “Well done, Marg”). Believe it or not, I cried that day because I wanted a girl. I got her when my mother had our 10th baby, Brigid, my goddaughter and close friend.
I remember sitting at the kitchen table with all the siblings, a toddler on my lap as always, as we begged my dad for stories about his childhood in Massachusetts, or standing, at his request, on the brick hearth of our fireplace with my sisters to sing Irish ballads to company.
I think of our cozy school days all working away in our makeshift classroom, my mom waking us up early to go to daily Mass, hours and hours of sister doll games, swinging the baby to sleep on the play set, and the fun we had teaching the little ones to walk, play games, and propose like Mr. Darcy (jury’s out on that one, but we tried).
In functioning big families, kids necessarily help out with chores, with babies, and with each other. We each had our designated chores every day, and we did them with gusto. To this day, we help each other review resumes, emails, job applications, middle school papers, you name it.
Eleven kids means 55 unique relationships between the siblings, and in big families, those relationships hold so many possibilities: the friend, the mentor, the confidante, the babysitter, the tutor, the partner in crime. As we grow older and start families of our own, those relationships necessarily evolve.
The constant in our lives remains the same: We are the Olohan family, and we will always be there for one another.
Of course, the life of a big family is not without its crosses. I grew up with a number of large families, including my own, who have dealt with hardship and tragedy. We know that nothing worth having is easily come by, and for my part, I know I’m very lucky to have been given the parents God gave me. As I’m sure my readers are well aware, every family is the product of the caliber of its parents, and mine are made of good stuff.
Being open to the children God sends you is absolutely a leap of faith. It’s a leap of faith that my parents took and the parents of most big families take. It&#8217;s a surrendering of your will, time and time again, and it&#8217;s a beautiful sacrifice with a beautiful reward. As my grandmother, the mother of 10, would tell us, “Love multiplies; it never divides.”
That is why failing to include God in the conversation about big families doesn&#8217;t make any sense. He’s woven into every step of the way.
***
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Father carrying baby son while pulling four children in a wagon

I’m One Of 11 Kids. Here’s Why The Internet Doesn’t Realize Big Families Are Great.

kids

Religion

This article is part of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/introducing-upstream-a-lifestyle-and-culture-section-of-the-daily-wire" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Upstream,</a> The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.
***
In the first two months of 2026, there were <a href="https://x.com/GunDeaths/status/2026794212671332570">more than 50</a> mass shootings in the U.S., many in schools and churches. Assassination attempts on public figures have swelled. We see constant talk about syndromes such as &#8220;gender dysphoria&#8221; that were once almost unknown. At elite institutions such as Stanford University, four out of 10 students now <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/2026/01/elite-university-student-accommodation/684946/">claim</a> they have a disability. These occurrences illustrate a troubling paradox.
Americans today are wealthier than ever before. We&#8217;ve jumped ahead of Europeans and other developed nations in national economic growth and household income. Our technology has dramatically improved. Our houses are much more comfortable. Our medical care and diets are richer. Yet all around us, especially among the young, we see record levels of depression and loneliness, addiction, crime, educational failure, economic disappointment, and community decline.
There is a root to these social and psychological maladies: the explosion of out-of-wedlock births, divorce, single-parenting, father flight, careerism, and child neglect that began in the 1960s. More than half of all young Americans now live separated from one or both of their parents for at least part of their childhood. Millions of kids from all income levels, races, and localities bear scars from family instability.
Youth suicide jumped 62% from 2007 to 2021. Drug-overdose deaths among young people were nearly twice as high in 2022 as 10 years earlier. In 2023, 4,450 kids were killed by guns, most of them by other youths. Family breakdown now drives many of our collective social problems: poverty, homelessness, street crime, drug abuse, educational failure, and economic lags.
These heartaches and these social problems will not go away until we manage to knit mothers and fathers and children more tightly together in natural families (biological parents committed to each other and their children). Such families are not perfect, but as a source of human happiness and success, they greatly surpass single-parent families, step-families, scientifically designed group homes, hired care, and every other alternative that has been tried.
You see, we Homo sapiens have a serious biological problem called childhood. As Harvard scientist Stephen Jay Gould pointed out, &#8220;Human babies are born as embryos, and embryos they remain for about the first nine months of life.&#8221; If humans were born at the stage of development more typical of other mammals, a baby would remain in utero for up to a year longer than the nine months it already does. The reason we are born &#8220;premature&#8221; instead is elemental: Very few female pelvises could expel a neonate the size of a one-year-old infant. Human labor is already quite difficult compared to that of other animals, and newborns are only 40% the size of the average one-year-old.
Premature birth solves a human physiological dilemma, but it creates a cultural one. Monkey infants can navigate independently and find and cling to their mother when they need her. Newborn horses can run from danger just a few hours after birth. Other animals can hunt, dig, swim, or fly within days of their arrival into the world. But human young remain utterly helpless for an extended period, unable even to control their own temperature, see clearly, grasp, or roll over. Even the healthiest of babies thus requires intensive care and supervision.
And the incapability of humans extends far beyond infancy. It is a long time before we are finally able to survive on our own. Most mammals are autonomous and essentially full-grown within a single season, but it takes our brains about 15 annual cycles to reach their final capacity, and our bodies even a little longer. We are far slower to develop to independent maturity than any other living creature.
This problem is made even knottier by the fact that human culture is so complex that no individual can begin to be a competent citizen until he or she has undergone years and years worth of intensive acculturation. We must absorb millions of bits of information from our progenitors — on everything from desirable foods to language — before we can safely navigate our world.
The combined result of our premature launch and our heavy dependence upon cultural transmission is an extraordinarily long and demanding childhood. Absent a critical cultural adaptation, human beings could never have thrived in the face of this constraint. But they did fashion an adaptation, and a brilliant one: the family. The traditional family was a way of capturing the energy of the male parent as well as the female and channeling it into the rearing of the young.
In this way, mothers gained an ally to help them through their vulnerable periods of pregnancy and lactation. Frail youngsters won the benefit of not one but two protectors, producers, and caretakers. And under this joint nurturing structure, reproductive success soared. Even prior to the advent of the civilized era, one out of every two human babies survived to adulthood, thanks to the aid of their families. This compares to between 10 and 30% for other primates and group-hunting carnivores, which lack any counterpart to the nuclear family. And parent-guided humans turned out to be unusually competent creatures, bearers of a rich culture.
By stitching fathers to mothers and mothers to fathers, and weaving both to their children in a mission of mutual aid, the traditional family allowed humans to transcend brutish self-interest and produce higher civilization in its full splendor.
The evidence for this is ample and ancient. In 1978, anthropologist Mary Leakey made a breathtaking discovery in a fossil lava bed in East Africa: the first human footprints, 3.6 million years old. They clearly indicate two creatures walking upright, between four and five feet tall, one larger than the other, apparently a male and a female. They were walking next to each other, perhaps holding hands, Leakey thinks. There is also a third set of prints, much smaller, belonging to a child. These are carefully placed within the larger prints — as a youngster playfully following his parents through soft ground would do. Leakey&#8217;s find disputes the claim that the traditional family was invented in Victorian Europe, or some other moment, and forced on humanity by narrow-minded manipulators.
Over the last generation, heaps of research findings have proven the irreplaceable benefits of the natural family, particularly when it comes to raising healthy children. I recently collected some of this evidence in a book, and it demonstrates clearly that where the traditional family is in trouble, there will be trouble all across society. This is no longer scientifically controversial. It is merely inconvenient for ideologues promoting the kind of radical individualism, sexual autonomy, and economic selfishness that are incompatible with loyal family life.
As I summarize in my book, biology, human history, recent psychological discoveries, and much more demonstrate that the traditional family is a natural and irreplaceable component of human society. It will be with us so long as our civilization flourishes. And if natural families continue to crumble, no amount of money, technology, personal liberation, artificial intelligence, or wishful thinking will be able to fend off the chaos that results when wounded youngsters grow into our next generation of citizens.
***
Karl Zinsmeister is author of the new book <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Natural-Family-will-never-obsolete/dp/B0GQBD7JV3">&#8220;The Natural Family Will Never Be Obsolete.&#8221;</a> He has written 20 other books and served in the White House and U.S. Senate as a policy adviser.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

GettyImages-1345161790

America’s Kids Are In Crisis — One Cultural Shift May Explain Why

Menu