Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience
description
Transcript of Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience
![Page 1: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act
Codification ExperienceMCWIC Tribal Child Welfare Gathering
Odawa Casino Resort, Petoskey, MIMay 5, 2010
Mark S. Mitchell, Special Projects ManagerOffice of Legal Counsel
WI Department of Children & Families
![Page 2: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act
Codified into Statutes by 2009 Wisconsin Act 94
Effective December 22, 2009
![Page 3: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Historical Background
![Page 4: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Stenzel, 2007
History & PurposeWhen ICWA passed, the risk of parents in Wisconsin being separated from their children was 1,600 times greater for Indians than for non-Indians.
![Page 5: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Compliance IssuesChild and Family Services Review (CFSR)
The federal CFSR in 2003 found that Wisconsin was deficient in the following areas:
Identification of Indian childrenNotification to Tribes of cases in a
timely manner
![Page 6: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Child and Family Services Review (CFSR)Additional deficiencies: Involving Tribes in child welfare planning Ongoing consultation with Tribal
representatives Soliciting input from the Tribes on the
goals and objectives of the State Child and Family Services Plan (aka the IV-B Plan)
![Page 7: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
0
200
400
600
eWiSACWIS Data - ICWA Compliance
OHC 470 538 502 469Subject to ICWA 122 475 448 418ICWA Notice 82 88 59 32Placement 70 73 46 23
2005 2006 2007 2008
![Page 8: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Codification InitiativeSeven tribal priorities in 2003-04 developed byICW Directors and Social Services Directors of
Wisconsin’s 11 federally-recognized Tribes, in conjunction with the WI Department of Children & Families:
Included codification of the federal Indian Child Welfare Act
Document was included as addendum to Wisconsin’s 2005 CFSR Program Improvement Plan
![Page 9: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Public Hearings and Negotiations
![Page 10: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Bill Drafting and Initial Outreach DCF and 11 tribes (ICWA Codification
Workgroup) drafted the bill over a four-year period (2005-2009)
In-depth research, case law analysis In 2007, 4th draft of the bill sent to
representatives of stakeholders for initial review (County social services, District Attorneys, Judges)
Consensus: need for codification
![Page 11: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
FormatTwo primary options:1. Subchapter of each statutory chapter2. Spread throughout the chapters as
appropriate
Result:A combination (s. 48.028 and inserted as
appropriate throughout the case process)
![Page 12: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Public Hearings
November 13, 2008 September 16, 2009
January 7, 2009 February 2, 2009 March 4, 2009
March 23, 2009 April 20, 2009 May 4, 2009 June 29, 2009
Negotiation Meetings
![Page 13: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Stakeholders
Children & the Law Section, WI State Bar WI District Attorneys’ Association WI Association of Corporation Counsel WI Counties Association WI County Human Services Association Office of the State Public Defender Court-Appointed Special Advocates Assn.
![Page 14: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Tribal and State Strategies
Trust Relationship
Consensus Building
Consistent Response
Lobbying Efforts Research
![Page 15: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Steps through the Legislature Bill first introduced end of session March
2008 Joint Senate and Assembly Committee
Hearing (9/16/09) Unanimous vote in Assembly (9/30/09) and
Senate (10/7/09) Committees Unanimous floor vote in Senate and
Assembly (10/20/09) Governor Doyle Signs Bill
December 7, 2009
![Page 16: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
The Legislative/Negotiation Process and Final
Content
![Page 17: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Best Interests of an Indian Child/Juvenile: ChallengesStakeholders’ Position: No need for a distinction to be made between
best interest of an Indian child and a non-Indian child
Having such a distinction would be treating Indian children differently than non-Indian children
Would result in violating other laws (e.g., the 15/22 timelines in the Adoption and Safe Families Act)
Ultimately, wanted any language reflecting this moved so that it would be clearer and not conflict with other provisions of state law
![Page 18: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Best Interests of an Indian Child/Juvenile: ChallengesResult: Negotiation process revealed the full importance
of including definition in statute (was a recurring question from stakeholders)
Language in the bill largely remained the same but was relocated to a different section of the bill
Stakeholders never really seemed to embrace or understand the need for the recognition of the best interest of the Indian child. If this issue was understood by the stakeholders, it would have made the negotiation of other issues easier.
![Page 19: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Best Interests of an Indian Child/Juvenile S. 48.01(2) Best interest determined in
accordance with ICWA and the policy in this section:
Courts and agencies will: (a) Cooperate fully with Indian tribes in order to
ensure that the federal Indian Child Welfare Act is enforced in this state.
(b) Protect the best interests of Indian children and promote the stability and security of Indian tribes and families by doing all of the following:
![Page 20: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Best Interests of an Indian Child/Juvenile
1. Establishing minimum standards for the removal of Indian children from their families and placing those children in out-of-home care placements, preadoptive placements, or adoptive placements that will reflect the unique value of Indian culture.
![Page 21: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
S. 48.01(2) continued
2 . Using practices . . . that are designed to prevent the voluntary or involuntary out-of-home care placement of Indian children and, when an out-of-home care placement, adoptive placement, or preadoptive placement is necessary, placing an Indian child in a placement that reflects the unique values of the Indian child’s tribal culture and that is best able to assist the Indian child in establishing, developing, and maintaining a political, cultural, and social relationship with the Indian child’s tribe and tribal community.
![Page 22: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Definition of Parent Stakeholders: Include any person (including a non-Indian)
who adopts an Indian child (statutory construction issue) Stakeholders: Workgroup’s interpretation violated the equal
protection clause and cited a case in Iowa dealing with the definition of Indian child (Woodbury Cty. Assoc. and A.W. and S.W. v. Iowa Atty. Gen and Winnebago Tribe of NE, 2007 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 137)
Workgroup: This is specifically not included in ICWA; agreed to recommend use of the language in ICWA and would see how the drafters worded it given the Wisconsin rules of statutory construction
Result: WICWA uses the language that was proposed in the bill.
![Page 23: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Existing Indian Family Doctrine In 1982 the KS Supreme Court upheld the
EIFD [In re Adoption of Baby Boy L., 231 Kan. 199, 643 P.2d 168(Kan. 1982)]
Stated that a court can determine that an Indian child is not an Indian child under ICWA because the child is not from an EIF (i.e., whether there is an active connection with the Tribe)
![Page 24: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Existing Indian Family Doctrine Point of contention with many stakeholders,
who argued that a ban would too greatly undermine judicial discretion
KS Supreme Court overturned its own decision in 2009 early in our negotiations [In re AJS, 288 Kan. 429, 204 P.3d 543 (2009)]
6 States have legislatively banned the doctrine
21 States have judicially banned the doctrine
![Page 25: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Existing Indian Family Doctrine
S. 48.028(3)(a) A court assigned to exercise jurisdictionunder this chapter may not determinewhether this section and the federal ICWAapply to an Indian child custodyproceeding based on whether the Indianchild is part of an existing Indian family
![Page 26: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Notification
Generally same language as federal ICWA Registered mail, return receipt requested (Fed. Regs.: Certified mail, return receipt) File the return receipt with the court
Point of contention: Stakeholder request for mandatory time frame for response from Tribe
![Page 27: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Jurisdiction: Good Cause Not to TransferStatutory Language
S. 48.028(3)(c)3. a. The Indian child is 12 years of age or over
and objects to the transfer. b. The evidence or testimony necessary to
decide the case cannot be presented in tribal court without undue hardship to parties or witnesses Tribal court unable to mitigate hardship by use of:
Telephone or live audiovisual means Location that is convenient to the parties Other means permissible under tribal court’s rules of
evidence c. “Advanced stage”
![Page 28: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Jurisdiction: Good Cause Not to Transfer Contention: Should “advanced stage”
argument (BIA guidelines) be allowed?
Historical problems regarding notice
Mistrust and misunderstanding of tribal courts contributed to the issue (e.g., everything starts over)
![Page 29: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Jurisdiction: Good Cause Not to TransferCompromise reached: IF Tribe received notice, and Tribe has not indicated to the Court in
writing that it is monitoring the proceeding and may request a transfer at a later date, and
Motion to transfer is filed by the tribe, but Petition is filed more than 6 months after
the notice of a CHIPS/JIPS proceeding, or more than 3 months after the notice of a TPR proceeding,
Then good cause argument may be made
![Page 30: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Qualified Expert Witness: Negotiations Stakeholders: Felt strongly there
should be no hierarchy because finding a QEW is so difficult
Workgroup: Stressed the importance of the cultural aspect of the testimony, and argued that a hierarchy is necessary to ensure that proper efforts are made to produce the best testimony available
![Page 31: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Qualified Expert Witness: NegotiationsCompromise language: Petitioner may choose a QEW from a lower
order of preference if he/she shows that diligent efforts have been made to secure a QEW from a higher order of preference
Order of preference of qualified expert witnesses may not be sole consideration in weighing their testimony
Not added (but a given): Prosecutor is not required to bring forth hostile witness
![Page 32: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Qualified Expert WitnessS. 48.028(4)(f) a. A member of the Indian child’s tribe b. A member of another tribe c. A professional person d. A lay person In weighing the testimony of all witnesses, the
court shall consider as paramount the best interests of the Indian child as provided in s. 48.01(2)
All QEWs must have knowledge of the Indian child’s tribe’s family organization and child-rearing practices.
![Page 33: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Qualified Expert Witness:Other Clarifying Language in WICWA The party seeking to place the Indian child
in out-of-home care or to terminate parental rights to the Indian child must utilize a qualified expert witness
Any other party may utilize a qualified expert witness
![Page 34: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Fact-Finding vs. Disposition:Contention WI law allows jury trial in CHIPS (child
protection) and TPR cases
Stakeholders: Wanted QEW and active efforts testimony before judge at dispositional hearing
Workgroup: argued this evidence should be presented to judge or jury at fact-finding hearing
![Page 35: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Fact-Finding vs. Disposition: Compromise
If District Attorney gets partial summary judgment at fact-finding, then QEW and Active Efforts are provided at disposition
Otherwise this evidence is presented at fact-finding, because it goes to issue of whether grounds are met
![Page 36: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Active Efforts AACWA 1980 ICWA does not define Reasonable efforts vs.
active efforts in Wisconsin
Inclusion of cultural component
Discussions with county agencies regarding workload implications
![Page 37: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Active Efforts: Statutory Language
S. 48.028(4)(g)
Ongoing, vigorous, concerted level of casework
![Page 38: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Active Efforts: Statutory Language Active efforts takes into account
Prevailing social and cultural values, conditions, and way of life of the Indian child’s tribe
Utilizes the available resources of the Indian child’s tribe
Tribal and other Indian child welfare agencies, Extended family members of the Indian child Other individual Indian caregivers Other culturally appropriate service providers
![Page 39: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Active Efforts: Statutory Language If any of the activities were not conducted,
petitioning agency shall submit documentation to the court explaining why
![Page 40: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Voluntary Placements and TPRsS. 48.028(5)(a): Out-of-home placement Any consent given under this paragraph
prior to or within 10 days after the birth of the Indian child is not valid. Parent may: Withdraw the consent for any reason at any
time The Indian child shall be returned to the parent
or Indian custodian
![Page 41: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Voluntary Placements and TPRsS. 48.028(5)(b): Termination of Parental
Rights Any consent given under this paragraph
prior to or within 10 days after the birth of the Indian child is not valid. Parent may: Withdraw the consent for any reason at any
time prior to the entry of a final TPR order Indian child shall be returned unless an
order or agreement specified in ss. 48.368(1) or 938.368(1)
![Page 42: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Voluntary TPRs: Unusual Question District Attorneys’ Association sought to prohibit
Indian parent from withdrawing consent to voluntary TPR if consent was given subsequent to filing of a petition to involuntarily TPR (to prevent delays in court proceedings)
No consensus reached, little case law found making a distinction of “truly voluntary” TPRs
![Page 43: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Withdrawal of ConsentAfter Order Granting Adoption
Indian child shall be returned to the parent unless an order or agreement specified in ss. 48.368(1) or 938.368(1) that was in effect prior to placement provides for a different placement
Concerns for safety (workgroup and stakeholders agreed)
![Page 44: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Further Legislation Needed:Voluntary Placements and Safe Haven
Any such consent given prior to or within 10 days after the birth of the Indian child is not valid
WI infant relinquishment law requires relinquishment while child is less than 72 hours old
![Page 45: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
WICWA: Implications for Tribes
Increased caseloads Increased Tribal court
transfers Increased need for
Indian foster homes Increased
communication with state/county agencies
Increased involvement of tribes in services to children
![Page 46: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
ReferencesWisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act (Act 94)
http://www.legis.state.wi.us/2009/data/acts/09Act94.pdf
Ch. 48, Wis. Stats., (Children’s Code)http://www.legis.state.wi.us/statutes/Stat0048.pdf
Ch. 938, Wis. Stats., (Juvenile Justice Code)http://www.legis.state.wi.us/statutes/Stat0938.pdf
WI Dept. of Children & Families Tribal Relationshttp://dcf.wisconsin.gov/tribal_relations/default.htm
Tribal Child Welfare Prioritieshttp://dcf.wi.gov/children/icw/pdf/priorities.pdf
Frequently Asked Questionshttp://dcf.wi.gov/children/icw/statsadmin/pdf/faq.pdf
![Page 47: Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act Codification Experience](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051117/56815a87550346895dc7f96a/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
ContactsMark Mitchell, Special Projects ManagerOffice of Legal CounselWI Department of Children & Families(608) [email protected]
Loa Porter, Indian Child Welfare ConsultantDivision of Safety & PermanenceWI Department of Children & Families(608) [email protected]