Quarterly Report

Indian Child Welfare Court Monitor
Quarterly Report
July, August & September, 2003

I monitored 88 hearings this quarter. Eight (9%) were out of compliance with the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA).   Eleven of the hearings monitored were hold hearings.
            Twenty-two children were found to be children in need of protection and services. Thirteen of the CHIPS findings entered were the results of settlements; nine resulted from defaults. CHIPS jurisdiction over two children who had previously been reunified with a parent or prior legal custodian was dismissed by the Court. A transfer of legal custody to a relative was ordered for six children. One child was ordered into long-term foster care. Eight children who had been in placement were reunified this quarter with a parent or previous legal custodian. The Court terminated the parental rights of one parent. This termination of parental rights was the result of a settlement. Four of the hearings were continued without having a hearing on the record.
                ICWA requires notice of the proceeding to be sent by registered mail, return receipt requested, to the parents or the Indian custodian, and the children’s tribe. One hearing monitored violated the notice requirements of ICWA.

This was a termination of parental rights (TPR) admit/deny hearing heard on September 4, 2003, before Judge Reilly. Formal notice of the TPR petition had not been provided to the tribe.

ICWA gives parents the right to counsel in the proceeding. The Court may also appoint counsel for a child. There were three instances where counsel for a party failed to appear at a hearing.

This was a children in need of protection or services (CHIPS) review hearing heard on July 28, 2003, before Judge Lefler. The attorney for the children failed to appear for the hearing. At issue was the placement of the children.

This was a TPR pretrial heard on September 4, 2003, before Judge Lefler. Father was present and had been appointed a public defender from the conflicts panel, but no attorney appeared on behalf of father.

This was a long-term foster care review hearing heard on September 22, 2003, before Judge Reilly. The attorney for the child failed to appear for the hearing. The child waived his right to have an attorney present. The Court, upon recommendation of the Hennepin County Children, Family & Adult Services Department (CFASD), dismissed long-term foster care jurisdiction.

ICWA requires the testimony of a qualified expert witness to support an out of home placement. The testimony must be provided within 90 days after an emergency removal. The testimony is also required before the Court can order termination of parental rights. There were three hearings where live testimony was presented to fulfill the expert witness requirement. The County Attorney’s office filed with the Court eight affidavits from tribal representatives to satisfy the expert witness requirement of ICWA.

Four hearings violated the expert witness requirement of ICWA.

This was a settlement of a CHIPS petition at a pretrial hearing. Six children had been in placement over ninety days with no expert witness testimony to support the placement. The Court stayed the adjudication of the children until the expert testimony was received. The children were subsequently determined by the tribe to be ineligible for enrollment.

This was a CHIPS pretrial heard on September 4, 2003, before Judge Reilly. Five children had been in placement over three months with no expert testimony to support the placement. The tribe had formally intervened in the proceedings at the last hearing, but the county attorney’s office was unsuccessful in obtaining testimony from the tribe. The Court attempted to telephone the tribal representative to obtain the testimony, but was unable to reach the tribal worker. The Court made a default CHIPS finding, but stayed the adjudication pending receipt of the expert testimony.

This was a CHIPS hearing heard on September 4, 2003, before Judge Reilly. One child had been in placement over three months with no expert testimony to support the placement. An affidavit of expert testimony was filed with the Court on September 5, 2003.

This was a TPR admit/deny hearing heard on September 4, 2003, before Judge Reilly. One child had been in placement almost four months with no expert testimony to support the placement. Neither of the parents was present for the hearing. The Court continued the placement of the child.

ICWA requires placement of a child in the least restrictive setting which most approximates a family. A child may be placed in a non-Indian foster home only when the tribe has licensed or approved the home, or good cause exists to place outside the placement preferences of ICWA. One hearing violated these placement provisions of ICWA.

This was a CHIPS review hearing heard on July 29, 2003, before Judge Reilly. The mother who is a minor and her baby were placed in a non-Indian foster home pursuant to delinquency jurisdiction. The mother failed in this placement, but the baby continued in this home under CHIPS jurisdiction. The tribe did not approve of the placement, but had no input in the placement since the placement started as a delinquency placement.

The court hearings involved a total of 151 children. Twenty-four of the children were enrolled members and 127 were eligible for membership. The number of hearings, by the child’s tribal affiliation, is as follows:

TRIBE	NUMBER OF HEARINGS	TRIBE	NUMBER OF HEARINGS
Leech Lake Band of Chippewa	18	St. Croix Chippewa Nation	2
Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe	13	Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa	1
White Earth Band of Chippewa	11	Flathead Reservation	1
Bois Forte Band of Chippewa	6	Fort Peck Reservation	1
Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux Nation	6	Hannahville Band of Pottawatomie	1
Oglala Sioux Nation	5	Hopi	1
Red Lake Band of Chippewa	5	Hualapai Nation	1
Rosebud Sioux Nation	5	Menomonie Nation	1
Standing Rock Sioux Nation	5	Omaha Tribe of Nebraska	1
Shakopee Mdewakanton	4	Sac & Fox Nation of Mesquakie	1
Cheyenne River Sioux Nation	3	Santee Sioux Nation	1
Spirit Lake Sioux Nation	3	Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa	1
Crow Creek Sioux Nation	2	Yankton Sioux Nation	1
Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Chippewa	2

The placements of the children were as follows: twenty-four of the children were either returned home or remained at home under protective supervision; fifty-two children were placed with relatives; fifty-one children were placed in Indian foster care; one child was placed in a non-Indian foster home with the approval of the child’s tribe; one child was placed in a non-Indian foster home without the approval of the child’s tribe; ten children were in emergency shelter placement; two were in group homes; six were in residential treatment centers; one child was in the hospital; one child was ordered to remain in detention pending further hearings regarding placement; and the whereabouts of two children were unknown at the time of the hearing.

Mothers of the children were present at sixty-one of the hearings. There were a total of thirty-three fathers present at the hearings. Guardians ad litem were present at forty-three of the hearings. Tribal representatives were present at forty-five of the hearings. Minneapolis American Indian Center advocates were present at twenty-seven of the hearings. Advocates from other community agencies were present at eight of the hearings. There were thirteen hearings where no tribal representative or Indian advocate was present.

Prepared by:

Paul T. Minehart

ICWA Court Monitor

TRIBE