October 26, 2012

ICWA prevents child kidnapping

In a previous posting, people noted how Dr. Phil's show on Baby Veronica was unfair and upsetting. Here's a more rational critique of his presentation of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA):

NICWA responds to Dr. Phil's coverage of S.C. ICWA caseOn October 18, 2012, the Dr. Phil show aired an episode that focused on a disputed custody case involving an American Indian child, Veronica. The case pits a loving father’s attempts to parent his daughter against a non-Indian couple from South Carolina–the Capobiancos–and their attorneys who orchestrated an illegal attempt to adopt Veronica. The National Indian Child Welfare Association (NICWA) is gravely disappointed in the heavy slant toward the Capobiancos’ recounting of the situation and interpretation of the legal issues in the case.

Veronica’s father, who has been relentlessly vilified in the media as a “deadbeat dad” is, in fact, a loving parent and a decorated Iraq war veteran. Rather than acknowledge his right to protect his daughter from a media firestorm that has proven deeply biased, the Dr. Phil show instead allowed personal attacks on his character and speculation on his parenting–from those who admittedly have had no contact with him–to continue unchallenged. We find these attacks unsupported by court records and unacceptable.

Veronica’s pre-adoptive placement was kept secret by her mother and attorneys representing the Capobiancos. Her placement with them was not revealed to Veronica’s father for four months–just days before he was sent to Iraq. Upon learning of his daughter’s proposed adoption, the father quickly moved to affirm his rights to parent Veronica. After three decisions supporting his rights in the South Carolina courts, he has been parenting her since January 2012.

Dr. Phil and several of his guests ignored the fraudulent process attorneys representing the Capobiancos used to help them gain custody of Veronica during their unsuccessful attempt to adopt her. That Veronica is American Indian was known by the Capobiancos and their attorneys, as was the fact that any adoptive process involving her would be covered by the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA). Instead of delving into why the Capobiancos were advised to circumvent the law, putting Veronica at high risk, Dr. Phil instead chose to rebuff the two guests with the most knowledge of this case and experience in such matters, Assistant District Attorney of the Cherokee Nation Chrissi Nimmo and Les Marston, attorney and tribal judge.

NICWA understands this case is emotionally-charged and has attracted worldwide attention. Nonetheless, we must reject the subjective definitions of what is in Veronica’s best interest that Dr. Phil disappointingly reinforced. Not only did the discussion of Veronica’s “best interest” completely discount the importance of her cultural identity and rights as a tribal citizen, it more shockingly ignored the significance of her being raised within a loving home with her father, sister, stepmother, and loving grandparents–and among a community that includes extended family and tribal members who love her. As Nimmo correctly stated, if Veronica was a non-Indian child, existing state and federal laws would have afforded the father an opportunity to seek custody of her and not reward those who violated the law.

Furthermore, NICWA firmly believes that Veronica’s best interest is not served by the continued negative media campaign currently pursued by the Capobiancos and their public relations firm. We have no doubt they love Veronica, but in this case, the ends they hope to accomplish certainly do not justify the means. Dr. Phil’s portrayal only serves to put Veronica at further risk.

The show’s characterization of ICWA was also filled with misinformation and inaccuracies. ICWA is a law that has helped protect thousands of American Indian children and keep them with their families. Veronica’s story illustrates the clear ongoing need for federal protections like ICWA for American Indian children who continue to be the victims of questionable, and sometimes illegal, attempts to adopt them out.

To learn more about how you can support the National Indian Child Welfare Association’s efforts to strengthen protections for American Indian children and families and to access more information on this case, please visit our website at www.nicwa.org.
Kidnapping past and present

Here's some background on why the ICWA was and is needed:

Dr. Phil and the Real Purpose of the Indian Child Welfare Act

By Donna EnnisI recently became aware of a group that is called Coalition for the Protection of Indian Children and Families. On the surface that sounds legitimate but upon further investigation it turns out to be another group attempting to diminish the sovereignty of our tribes and undermine the structure of the Native family. There have been over 200 years of federal policy aimed at the extermination of Native American people. Some of these attempts have been subtle and others more blatant.

The federal government began sending Native children to off-reservation boarding schools in the 1870’s, when the United States was still at war with Indians. An Army officer, Richard Pratt, founded the first of these schools. Pratt believed that the Indian Wars weren’t extinguishing the culture fast enough and so he came upon the idea to separate the children from their parents. Children as young as 4 or 5 were forcibly taken from their homes and brought to the boarding school where they were stripped of their language, culture and family ties. It was many years before the era of the boarding schools was over and by then irreparable damage was done to Native people and the ripple effects are still felt today as evidenced by the historical, intergenerational and cultural trauma that we see in our people.

In 1978, the Federal Indian Child Welfare Act was passed to remedy the disproportionate number and widespread removal of children that were being taken from their homes. After the Boarding Schools were over, but before the passage of the federal law protecting Native children, they were again being forcibly removed from their families and placed cross-culturally; away from their language, culture and family ties. Sound familiar?
Native Foster Care: Lost Children, Shattered Families

By Laura Sullivan and Amy WaltersNearly 700 Native American children in South Dakota are being removed from their homes every year, sometimes under questionable circumstances. An NPR News investigation has found that the state is largely failing to place them according to the law. The vast majority of native kids in foster care in South Dakota are in nonnative homes or group homes, according to an NPR analysis of state records.

Years ago, thousands of Native American children were forcibly removed from their homes and sent to boarding schools, where the motto of the schools' founder was "Kill the Indian, Save the Man." Children lost touch with their culture, traditions and families. Many suffered horrible abuse, leaving entire generations missing from the one place whose future depended on them—their tribes.

In 1978, Congress tried to put a stop to it. They passed the Indian Child Welfare Act, which says except in the rarest circumstances, Native American children must be placed with their relatives or tribes. It also says states must do everything it can to keep native families together.

But 32 states are failing to abide by the act in one way or another, and, an NPR investigation has found, nowhere is that more apparent than in South Dakota.

"Cousins are disappearing; family members are disappearing," said Peter Lengkeek, a Crow Creek Tribal Council member. "It's kidnapping. That's how we see it."
Comment:  For more on the subject, see Dr. Phil's Horror Show and Baby Veronica Case on Dr. Phil.

Below:  "Derrin Yellow Robe, 3, stands in his great-grandparents' backyard on the Crow Creek Reservation in South Dakota. Along with his twin sister and two older sisters, he was taken off the reservation by South Dakota's Department of Social Services in July 2009 and spent a year and a half in foster care before being returned to his family." (John Poole/NPR)

No comments: