Judge Says California Must Pay Foster Parents More
Host:
Produced by:
Subscribe to this Podcast:
Listen to/Watch entire show:
Despite a federal court order, California waited for three years before increasing payments to foster parents, at a total cost of only $2 million a year. There wasn’t enough to cover food, shelter and other essentials for 18,500 kids. Now the judge has finally cracked down. We find out what that means. Also, how come more school kids aged 12 to 17 don’t participate in physical education? A new study shows that 38 percent manage to avoid PE, even though state law requires it. We hear what the consequences might be. On our rebroadcast of To the Point, is a connection between cell phones and Cancer?
Banner image: California Department of Child Support Services
Main Topic
Judge Says California Must Pay Foster Parents More ()
A federal judge ordered California to increase the reimbursement of foster parents, the people who care for wards of the state from infancy until age 19. That was three years ago, with a cost of just $2 million out of a multi-billion dollar state budget. But the state did nothing for parents who care for some 18,500 children. Yesterday, Judge William Alsup ordered immediate compliance and, finally, the state came around.
Guests:
- Regina Diehl: Legal Advocates for Permanent Parenting
- Garrett Therolf: Los Angeles Times, @gtherolf
Links:
Reporter's Notebook
Kids Need More Exercise ()
State law requires that high school and junior-high students get 400 minutes of physical education every ten days. But UCLA's Center for Health Policy Research found that 1.3 million kids are avoiding PE. That’s 38 percent of students between the ages of 12 and 17. Dr. Allison Diamant is faculty associate at the Center and a co-author of the study.
Guests:
- Allison Diamant: UCLA Center for Health Policy Research
- Mark Gomez: Manual Arts High School
Main Topic
WHO Says Cell Phones Could Be Carcinogenic ()
Last year, the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer, IARC, spent $24 million to study cell phone use. Its conclusion was that there was no increased risk of brain cancer. But yesterday, that same organization said review of other available evidence suggests there might be a link after all. Scientists are sharply divided. We look for a common sense path through contradictory findings.
Guests:
- Bryan Walsh: Time Magazine, @bryanrwalsh
- Keith Black: Cedars-Sinai Medical Center
- Bernard Leikind: independent physicist
- Devra Davis: Environmental Health Trust
Links:
- FDA on cell phones and cancer
- Walsh on cell phone radiation
- Black discusses cell phones and cancer on 'PBS NewsHour'
- Leikind on the cell phone-cancer link
- Environmental Health Trust on cell phones and brain tumors
- EHT's Safer Phone Zone
- Davis' 'Disconnect: The Truth about Cell Phone Radiation, What the Industry Has Done to Hide It, and How to Protect Your Family'
Underwriters
Which Way L.A.? is made possible in part by the Ralph M. Parsons Foundation, the Nathan Cummings Foundation, and the John Randolph Haynes and Dora Haynes Foundation, which supports study and research into policy issues of the Los Angeles region.
Engage & Discuss
Further the conversation with your thoughts and comments. Agree, disagree, present a different perspective -- engage.
For information and guidelines click: Terms of Service | Privacy Policy
Please note, comments are moderated. KCRW reserves the right to edit and or remove posts deemed off-topic, abusive or not in accordance with KCRW's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
BROUGHT TO YOU BY
