Pala Tribe to protect Children in California's Welfare System

October 16, 2015 | (more tribes need to take this action in 2019)

PALA, CA – The Pala Band of Mission Indians is the first tribe in California to receive clearance to conduct LiveScan background checks for tribal foster homes under new State law (Senate Bill 1460). 

The tribe is also the first to apply to the Bureau of Indian Affairs' Office of Justice Services (BIA-OJS) program,  Purpose Code X, to assist tribal services agencies within federally recognized tribes that are seeking to place children in safe homes during an emergency situation, when parents are unable to provide for their welfare.                                                                                                                                                       

"We are very excited to be a part of this momentous change to protect our Native youth in the welfare system," said Robert Smith, Chairman of the Pala Band of Mission Indians. "For years, Native American children have been placed in homes that do not reflect their cultural heritage and placed with foster parents who have not had their criminal history thoroughly vetted because the tribe was not allowed to conduct these background checks. Now we can certify tribal homes that are prepared to care for these children in a timely manner and ensure that Native American children are maturing in an appropriate environment."

The Purpose Code X program provides BIA Office of Justice Services with the ability to provide tribal social service agency partners with much-needed information to help make sure children requiring emergency placement will be placed in safe homes. The program arose out of a 2014 working group formed by the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Interior (DOI) to identify sustainable solutions addressing the civil needs of the tribes. Under this program, BIA dispatch centers will be available to provide 24-hour access to criminal history records, so name-based checks can be done immediately.

With the changes made in California law, tribes are now able to receive criminal history and child abuse information from the California DOJ and be involved in the approval of tribal foster homes. The law also provides for the transfer of Native American children case records from a county to tribal government. Under new standards for foster homes, the tribe will be provided with a federal criminal offender check of all adults residing in a family home, as a condition for approval.

"It has been an honor to be part of the work behind SB 1460 and to see the positive impact it has made for Pala and the other California Tribes," said Season Brown, Director of Social Services of Pala Band of Mission Indians. "I'm very excited for Pala to begin the new venture of piloting Purpose Code X and being able to reduce the trauma experienced by our Native children, which is often associated with being placed outside of their Tribal community in Non-Native homes."

Purpose Code X and California State law are now working cohesively to ensure that tribes are able to effectively serve and protect their communities by ensuring the exchange of critical data.

California State Attorney General Kamala D. Harris has made it a priority to protect the rights of children and focus the attention and resources of law enforcement and policymakers in safeguarding every child so that they can meet their full potential. These measures will ensure that laws and regulations enacted to protect children, inclusive of Indian welfare children, are consistently and effectively enforced.

The Pala Band of Mission Indians is a federally recognized tribe whose reservation is located along the Palomar Mountain range approximately 30 miles northeast of San Diego. The majority of the over 900 tribal members live on the 12,000-acre reservation, established for Cupeño and Luiseño Indians, who consider themselves to be one proud people - Pala. WIKI

====================

TRIBAL HISTORY

TRAIL OF TEARS

Background:

President Rutherford Hayes, prompted by the Supreme Court holding, declared the Indians "trespassers" and ordered the tribe relocated to Pala, California, just beyond the Palomar Mountains where a 10,000-acre reservation had been established. Pala was a Luiseno reservation then, not Cupa.

This act marked the first time in U.S. history that two distinct Indian tribes were herded together in one reservation. This was a blemish upon a nation that prided itself on leading the world into the 20th Century and the cultural and political renaissance that accompanied such a transition.

On the morning of May 12, 1903, Indian Bureau agent James Jenkins arrived with 44 armed teamsters to carry out the eviction. Rosinda Nolasquez — the last survivor of the expulsion — later testified that "Many carts stood there by the doors. People came from La Mesa, from Santa Ysabel, from Wilakal, from San Ignacio to see their relatives. They cried a lot. And they just threw our belongings, our clothes, into carts."

The 40-mile journey from Cupa to Pala took three days. The Cupeños call it their "Trail of Tears."

WEBSITE 

Our friend, the late Karen Vigneault, was a tribal member at Pala and a tribal historian and MLIS librarian. Many adoptees credit her for their reunions in the book series LOST CHILDREN.

ICWA on Native America Calling

Monday, March 11, 2019 - The human faces of the Indian Child Welfare Act

 

Autumn Adams spent a good portion of her life in foster care. She says the Indian Child Welfare Act saved her life because she was able to stay in her tribal community. ICWA is called the 'gold standard' of child welfare policy. The 40-year-old law is under fire through a number of court cases, including a recent federal court ruling out of Texas that deemed the law unconstitutional. We'll hear from individuals who have been affected by ICWA. 

 

Native America Calling is a national call-in program that invites guests and listeners to join a dialogue about current events, music, arts, entertainment and culture.

The program is hosted by Tara Gatewood (Isleta Pueblo) and airs live each weekday from 1-2 pm Eastern.

Join the conversation by calling 1-800-996-2848. 

I am living proof that it’s best to keep Native children with their tribal communities

Strong relationships with family and culture should be a priority for Native foster youth.

By Autumn Adams

Special to The Seattle Times

(excerpt) No placement may be perfect when you are a foster youth. I can speak from personal experience.
I have been in and out of the foster system with my younger siblings since I was 9. Amid so many unknowns, one thing remains certain: I am grateful I was placed within my tribal community....

I am now raising my younger siblings, getting a degree in anthropology at Central Washington University and applying to law school. I wouldn’t be able to say that I’m graduating in June without the strength of my culture and the support from my family. In five years, I hope to be surviving law school while raising a teenage girl, my youngest sibling.

Losing our culture is not an option for us.

We go to longhouse when we can; we feast and perform traditional funerals for departed loved ones. My siblings know this history. They know these protocols and they know how to complete them in the traditional way. They know their identity. We are all stronger for this connection to our people.

It is imperative that the appeals court keeps ICWA intact, because it has allowed me to build the strong foundation to the person I am today.

READ: I am living proof that it’s best to keep Native children with their tribal communities | The Seattle Times

Another Judge, another ICWA violation in Brackeen v. Bernhardt

Judge: State deference to U.S. law in Native American adoptions is unconstitutional

By Mary Huber | Mar 1, 2019

A Tarrant County judge on Friday ruled that the state’s requirement for family law judges to apply the federal Indian Child Welfare Act to child custody cases is unconstitutional.

Tarrant County state district judge Alex Kim issued the ruling in response to the adoption of an 8-month-old Native American girl into a non-Native American family.

Chad and Jennifer Brackeen had been seeking to adopt their second Native American child but ran into problems in the court with a portion of the Texas Family Code, which requires that family law judges apply the Indian Child Welfare Act to child custody cases involving Native American children.

State law says judges should should defer to the federal act, which says that placement of Native American children must go first to the child’s extended family, then to other members of the child’s tribe or other Native American families.

Kim said in his decision that the federal law is not applicable in the Brackeens’ case because it is unconstitutional.

On Friday, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton lauded the ruling.

Paxton’s office in October 2017 filed a federal lawsuit alongside the Brackeens, challenging the constitutionality of the Indian Child Welfare Act is it applies to child custody cases, saying that it places race-based restrictions on the adoption of Native American children and does not consider the best interests of the child.

A U.S. district court the following year ruled the law as applied was unconstitutional. That decision is currently being challenged in the federal 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.

15 years later, how much changed #ICWA Brackeen v. Bernhardt

UPDATE

15 years already? How I changed...but has adoption perception changed?

By Trace Hentz, ADOPTEE ACTIVIST

If  you had asked me in 2004 or 2014 what I had planned for myself, I would have not said “writing” about adoption, child trafficking, Indian Adoption Programs/Projects, the 60s Scoop, Stolen Generations and Cultural Genocide research.


As an adoptee, I'd attended the first Wiping the Tears ceremony in Wisconsin and met the organizers Sandy White Hawk (an adoptee) and elder Chris Leith.  Then my world changed.
I'd learn more hidden history. 

How adoption affected me: I'd never told my story of opening my adoption while I lived it. A few friends knew details but not all of it. I got the idea for a book when I wrote an article in 2005 about stolen generations of North American Indian children placed for adoption with non-Indian parents. That article, "Generation after Generation, We are Coming Home" was published in Talking Stick magazine in New York City and then in News from Indian Countryin Wisconsin. It took me down a path I never expected.

I'd find new information, new history, meet new adoptees, and grow more concerned.*

It's true many bloggers hoped we made a strong and lasting impression, to impact and end the propaganda since the early 2000s. I am not sure we can actually gauge or measure how world views of adoption have changed. (If books on Amazon are an indication, memoirs by adoptees are now climbing the ranks over all the propaganda books about how to buy/adopt a baby.)

It's also true some blogger friends stopped blogging on adoption out of pure exhaustion!

SUPPLY AND DEMAND

If the statistics on adoption are any indication, the number of babies adopted by Americans are dropping each and every year.  There is definitely a BIG demand for infants (primarily because of infertility) but there remains a short supply of newborns/babies to adopt.  (I do think the adoption traffickers are constantly reinventing new ways to grab a fresh supply of infants.

What new poor countries or communities they will invade as this demand increases?! Read THIS) On this website we published stories ( Adoption Reality: Adoptee returned to Russia #NAAM(and)Adoption Reality: Guatemala #NAAM) and (Trafficking) on many countries who became the suppliers and traffickers of newborns and children. Child exploitation, labor bondage, organ trafficking and illegal adoption is also an ongoing problem that award winning Moroccan medical doctor in pediatrics and UN expert Dr. Najat Maalla M’jid says is not decreasing.

Indian Country has lived through this over a century with forced assimilation, child snatching and disappearing children. The government's motive: take more LAND (or what is on or under the land). Targeting children, the future of Indian Country, was obvious.

White people believe they deserve the right to adopt without considering the best needs of the Native child who is sovereign and future of their tribal nation.

On January 16, 2019, 325 tribal nations, 57 Native organizations, 21 states, 31 child welfare organizations, Indian and constitutional law scholars, and seven members of Congress joined the United States and four intervenor tribes in filing briefs to urge the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to uphold the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), the long-standing federal law protecting the well-being of Native children by upholding family integrity and stability.

THEY WILL STOP THE MADNESS - They know the HISTORY!


The Goldwater Institute, a libertarian think tank, litigation organization and veteran opponent of ICWA, joined the Brackeen lawsuit in 2018 to challenge the federal law ICWA.  (Use the search bar on this website and use keyword: Goldwater.)   Brackeen v. Bernhardt is a lawsuit brought by Texas, Indiana, Louisiana, and individual plaintiffs, who allege ICWA—a federal statute that has been in effect for more than 40 years and has helped thousands of Native children maintain ties to their families and their tribes—is unconstitutional.
  

With this action: Such groups have attempted to capitalize on misinformation and stereotypes as a way to undermine ICWA.

FEDERAL LAW:

ICWA only applies to citizens of federally recognized tribes. Indeed, the statute has no application unless an “Indian child” is at issue, and “Indian child” is defined as “Any unmarried person under the age of 18 and is either (a) a member of an Indian tribe or (b) is eligible for membership in an Indian tribe and is the biological child of a member of an Indian tribe.“ The act is directly and inextricably linked to citizenship in a sovereign nation.

*A couple night ago I wrote several pages of notes of what I would say to the Brackeens about this Navajo child they wish to adopt and how their legal actions seek to undermine his sovereignty and the future of ICWA. (I will publish these thoughts soon.)



PROBLEMS ADOPTING

What I’d hoped would change is the overall perception of closed adoptions, how it’s not as great for adoptees as most people were made to believe.  PAPS (potential adoptive parents) (the Saviors and Do-Gooders) have the common "saving the child mentality" which the billion dollar adoption industry banks on... The adoption industry still prefers newborns, hoping the younger the child is, a baby will bond better with the strangers who adopt them. (Again, that is a proven fallacy. No matter the age, adoptees will have issues: such as severe narcissist injury or post-traumatic stress disorder. There is new science called birth psychology so I read studies about adoptees in treatment for identity issues, reactive attachment disorder (RAD), depression and suicidal thoughts.)


The idea of an OPEN ADOPTION was a strong indication that times and opinions were changing but already…they are failing too. Some children have been re-homed or un-adopted in what they call Failed Adoption.

This is a quote I saved about open adoption:

…ignored by the adoption agencies is the reality of “open adoption.” Only 22 of fifty states in America recognize open adoption agreements, but failure of the adoptive parents to comply with the agreement is not legally enforceable by the surrendering mother.

Broken Adoptions: When Parents "Re-Home" Adopted Children ...

As countries such as Guatemala and China close their international adoption programs or implement strict new rules, the pool of adoptable babies has shrunk dramatically in recent years, leading to a rise in more challenging types of adoption of older or disabled children that are more likely to end in dissolution.

HOW ADOPTION REALLY WORKS

A quote by adoptee-author-blogger Elle Cuardaigh:

And adoption certainly is “worked.” When supply of newborns decreased in the 1970s, the adoption industry had to put a new spin on relinquishment  to stay in business. Since women could not be so easily shamed by single motherhood, they changed tactics. Potential suppliers (pregnant women) are now encouraged to “make an adoption plan.” She reads the “Dear Birthmother” letters and interviews hopeful adoptive parents. She is provided with medical care and possibly even housing.  She is promised this is her choice, and that she can have ongoing contact with her child in an open adoption. It would seem she has all the power, but she is being systematically conditioned to accept her role, her place. She doesn’t want to hurt the baby’s “real parents,” feels indebted to them, emotionally invested. She is soon convinced they are better than she is. She becomes “their birthmother.” It almost guarantees relinquishment.  

Visit: http://ellecuardaigh.com

Adoption is still in the headlines but not nearly as often...

Why Do Some Adoptions Fail?

It takes more than love: What happens when adoption fails

The Dark, Sad Side of Domestic Adoption - The Atlantic

This website AMERICAN INDIAN ADOPTEES has reached over 900,000 hits/reads! If that is any indication, history is changing.  We thank you readers. It's worked!


So what will the next 10 years be like? Sign up for future posts via email and find out.

(How I Changed, Part 8 was the final installment in 2014) 

Brackeen v. Bernhardt | National Native Organizations Respond

National Native Organizations Respond to Reply Briefs in Brackeen v. Bernhardt

Portland, Oregon

In reply briefs filed Tuesday with the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in the case Brackeen v. Bernhardt, the United States and defendant tribal nations reaffirm the constitutionality of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA).

The briefs also underscore why ICWA’s protections continue to be vital for Native children and families.

For over 40 years, ICWA has acknowledged the inherent right of tribal governments and the critical role they play to protect their member children and maintain the stability of families.
Brackeen v. Bernhardt is the lawsuit brought by Texas, Indiana, Louisiana, and individual plaintiffs, who allege ICWA—a federal statute that has been in effect for more than 40 years and has helped thousands of Native children maintain ties to their families and their tribes—is unconstitutional.

It is the first time that a state has sued the federal government over ICWA’s constitutionality. 

The lawsuit names various federal agencies and officials as defendants, and five tribal nations (Cherokee Nation, Morongo Band of Mission Indians, Navajo Nation, Oneida Nation, and Quinault Indian Nation) also have intervened as defendants. In addition, amicus briefs in support of ICWA were filed on behalf of 325 tribal nations, 21 states, several members of Congress, and dozens of Native organizations, child welfare organizations, and other allies.

The U.S. Constitution specifically gives Congress the power to legislate for the benefit of Native people and tribal nations. ICWA falls within that constitutional authority because it applies only to children who are either citizens (referred to as “members” in ICWA) of a federally recognized tribe, or who are both eligible for citizenship and the biological child of a tribal citizen parent. In addition, Congress has enacted laws concerning Native children from the earliest days of the United States government. ICWA provides a productive framework for states and tribal nations to partner in protecting the health and well-being of Native children.

There is a long history of Native children being removed from their families and communities without sufficient reason and often with little consideration of the rights of either the Native children or their families.

Before ICWA was enacted in 1978, as many as one out of every three Native children was removed from their home. ICWA has helped to reduce these alarming removal rates and helped more Native families stay together.  Child welfare research clearly shows that children are best served by preserving connections with their birth family and community.

Child welfare experts across the country are working together with tribes, states, and allies to continue implementing and protecting ICWA as the “gold standard” in child welfare law and ensuring Native children and families receive the services they deserve.


Striking down ICWA would not only be wrong as a matter of law; it also would have devastating real-world effects by harming Native children and undermining the ability of child welfare agencies and courts to serve their best interest.

Evidence shows that ICWA’s framework achieves better outcomes for children. National Native organizations stand with tribal nations and non-tribal ICWA allies to take action to protect ICWA and end the unnecessary removal of Native children from their families, tribes, and communities.

A copy of the reply brief of the Federal Defendants can be found here, a copy of the reply brief of the Intervening Tribes (Cherokee/Morongo/Oneida/Quinault) can be found here, a copy of the reply brief of the Navajo Nation can be found here.

A Court Battle Over a Dallas Toddler Could Decide the Future of Native American Law #ICWA

The federal lawsuit challenges a 1978 law that sought to reckon with America’s history of discriminating against Native Americans. Does it hold up 40 years later?

The Brackeens decided to fight the court’s ruling, which would send A.L.M. to an unrelated Navajo family (his biological mother is a member of the Navajo Nation) in New Mexico whom he had met once. They printed out the eight-page law and pored over it. They heard, on a foster-care podcast, about a lawyer who specialized in ICWA. After connecting with him, they soon had a powerful legal team comprising family attorneys and high-profile lawyers from a national firm. While Chad and Jennifer made their case in state court for adopting A.L.M., their lawyers sued the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Indian Affairs.

ICWA is one of the only parts of the foster-care system that actually works, argues Kathryn Fort, a Michigan State law professor and one of the nation’s foremost ICWA experts. Fort is one of the lawyers representing the tribes in the Brackeen case. “ICWA is trying to get better outcomes for a small group of children in a system that has just horrific outcomes,” she told me. White social workers often approach her at conferences to complain about the law in a way that plays on antiquated stereotypes about Native people. “I've had many social workers ask me about why we let ‘these people’ play their Indian card at the last minute,” she said. Fort is white; they assume, she said, that she’ll be on their side.

READ: The Indian Child Welfare Act's Uncertain Future - The Atlantic

Case by case, Goldwater is attempting to undo federal law.

One Small Sacrifice: Four Traumas #ICWA

The Special Place of Children in Aboriginal Cultures

Children hold a special place in Aboriginal cultures. According to tradition, they are gifts from the spirit world and have to be treated very gently lest they become disillusioned with this world and return to a more congenial place. They must be protected from harm because there are spirits that would wish to entice them back to that other realm. They bring a purity of vision to the world that can teach their elders. They carry within them the gifts that manifest themselves as they become teachers, mothers, hunters, councillors, artisans and visionaries. They renew the strength of the family, clan and village and make the elders young again with their joyful presence. Failure to care for these gifts bestowed on the family, and to protect children from the betrayal of others, is perhaps the greatest shame that can befall an Aboriginal family.  It is a shame that countless Aboriginal families have experienced some of this repeatedly over generations.  

 By Trace Hentz (formerly DeMeyer)

I saw a photo today (see below) This book cover reminded me of this excerpt and chapter in my memoir.

via

Four Traumas (published in 2012)

            Now that we have the internet and many ways to find information, I read that adoptees are more traumatized than a prisoner of war. That’s right. It’s called post-traumatic stress disorder. A prisoner of war may escape or be released, but an adoptee may suffer their entire life.

             
I believe there are four distinct traumas in being an adoptee. They are: 1) in utero, when you feel what is happening to you or sense what is coming; 2) when you are delivered, abandoned, and handed to strangers; 3) later when you are told you are adopted and realize fully what it means; and 4) when you realize you are different, from a different culture or country, and you can’t contact your people, or know them, or have the information you need to find them.
            
 It took me years to get this. There are more traumas, too – like when I’d fill out forms at the doctor’s office. I had no medical history. I had no idea if I was sitting next to someone who could be my biological brother, sister, mother or father. It was terrifying to think I could marry my own relative! I could carry a gene or trait that I pass down to my children – and I wouldn’t know until it’s too late. If my birthparents were alcoholics, then I really shouldn’t drink. I could be pre-disposed to diabetes or heart disease or cancer or depression and not even know. My list went on and on.

             
In 2006, I found out my birthmother had diabetes, which came as another shock.

             
I realize a powerful link exists between what I’m feeling, and what happens in my body. Years ago I’d use emotional binging, working more than one job, creating drama, just to numb my emotional pain. By 18 I was a total workaholic!  I blamed myself and hated myself for everything.  What grief, too young to understand. My birthmother’s rejection destroyed my ability to trust anyone.

           
There may be some adoptees who do not wish to heal this and go on as they are, holding on to these sad feelings and self-pity, rather than do the mental work to heal. Recognizing a pattern of belief is tough, partly because you gain sympathy by stealing (or sucking) energy from others when you act sick. That is no way to live. You need to be your own person, self-energizing, and not steal energy from anyone.

            Adoptees are meant to survive this, no matter who we are or how we were traumatized. It’s a test.

            Can we heal our own minds? Yes.

            Can we love two families? Yes.

            Can we take our recovery and story back to our families? Definitely.

           
Some adoptees believe that when we meet mother or father, all pain and agony will disappear. That sadly is just hope. That is not the way it works. A reunion is just one step on the journey and it helps, but there are many many more steps just as difficult. It’s truly a test.       

Regardless of ancestry, creed or complexion, adoptees can heal this. The only one who can fix it is you.

   
 I’m uneasy around new people, reserved and shy at times. I’ve lived through many disappointments. It’s very upsetting to find out about orphan trauma now, years later, knowing no one bothered to tell me or help me while I was experiencing it. 

After multiple traumas, which I’ll describe, I came to terms with it… eventually.


P.S.
I am working on a new book with some memoir in the coming months. I wrote a research paper "Disappeared" and I want to add some of this paper to the new book.
I have a doctor appt. next week, my cancer check-up. I am not worried, I feel fine.