Parents Are Excluded From ICWA Debate
by Lisa Morris

U.S. Senator McCain is pushing an amendment.to the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) through the Senate. Senator McCain says that this amendment is a "fragile compromise" between tribal administrations and adoption lawyers.
    Only tribal government and adoption lawyers? What about the voice of the parents? Last year, when committee hearings were being held, we asked if we could testify before the committee as parents. We were told, "No, Senator McCain already has everyone he wants." So who was there testifying? Tribal government, adoption agencies and social services. But not one person was allowed to testify as a parent. We weren't important in this issue.
    Most people think ICWA and McCain's amendment are good because they keep kids in the tribe. And sometimes, because social workers are afraid of ICWA, it helps keep kids with their parents, even if the parents are messing up. But most people don't know what the law actually says.
    Do you know it says Tribal government has a right to your kids? "An Indian tribe shall retain exclusive jurisdiction over any child custody proceeding that involves an Indian child..." and "An Indian tribe and an Indian child have an interest in maintaining ties independent of the interests of the birth parents." So in the extreme event you die, or even if you're just going to treatment, the tribal government has the right to decide where your child stays. And not only do they have the right to decide your child's home, they have a right to decide your child's lifestyle: there is "a requirement that... cultural and social standards of the Indian community be applied...." So if you're raising your kids in a religion other than traditional, the tribe has a right to ignore your religion.
    Also, "Indian tribes have the authority to define membership..," and can claim unenrolled children. So not enrolling your children won't keep them out of it. Because "If, (after placing a child) a party...discovers that the child... may be an Indian child...the party shall provide notice (to the tribe) no later than 10 days after the discovery.." And finally: "a person,..shall... be subject to a criminal sanction ...if that person knowingly...covers up ...fact concerning whether a child is an Indian child"...
    So a grandmother who chooses to keep her heritage private will be a criminal? A dad who wants to have his kids placed in a Lutheran home might not get his way? Is this what everyone wants? Last year, some lawmakers tried to let kids who have very small amounts of Indian blood, or little to do with the Rez, out of ICWA, but tribal governments made a stink over that, saying that would violate treaties. So even those kids couldn't get out of it, let alone families that are mostly Indian but don't want tribal government to be controlling them.
    Who is this really benefiting? Why are tribal governments fighting to keep control over everyone's kids, even against the wishes of some parents? Senator Orrin Hatch has spoken up recently and said he is concerned about the wishes of the Indian birth parents. Please call Sen. Hatch at 202-224-5251 and tell him it matters and to stay with it! Too often Washington DC hears only from the tribal council leaders and not from regular people! Please also call Minn. Sen. Grams, (a member of the Adoption Caucus) at 202-224-3244, Sen. Wellstone, (a member of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs) at 202-224-5641, and Rep. James Oberstar at 202-225-6211. Parents should have the rights, not tribal governments and adoption lawyers!

Roland and Lisa Morris
221 Round Butte Rd.
Ronan, Mt. 59864