|
comment Thursday. • Some American Indian families have argued that South Dakota does not do enough to comply with federal laws dealing with removing Indian children from their families, but the Supreme Court said state officials complied with those laws. • In his appeal, the man argued that South Dakota child welfare officials had not complied with federal law requiring an active effort to prevent the breakup of an American Indian family. • The Supreme Court for the first time ruled Thursday that the federal law's requirement of an active effort to keep an American Indian family together imposes a higher standard than the reasonable effort required in state law for non-Indian families. • The high court said the South Dakota Department of Social Services made both an active and reasonable effort to help the man gain custody of his child by paying for an alcohol treatment program, providing him with a list of free parenting classes and giving him stamped envelopes so he could send mail to his daughter. • "While these efforts cannot be considered herculean, they are active as opposed to passive," Justice Glen A. Severson wrote for the Supreme Court. • The court also said those efforts were unsuccessful because the man had not completed all the required treatment programs and California could not approve placement of the girl in his home while his other children had been removed. • The girl "should not be required to wait for father to develop parenting skills that may never develop," Severson wrote. • Court documents indicate the girl's foster parents want to adopt her and the Fort Peck tribe has urged that she be adopted by the foster parents, the Supreme Court said.
(Continued on page 20)
|
|