Indian Child Welfare Act

Indian Child Welfare Act

History and context of the policy

The Congress enacted the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) in 1978. This Act was a result of a series of deliberations, debates, and hearings to alleviate a terrific crisis of national proportions: the separation of Indian children from their families. The act was implemented due to the high rate of removal of Indian children from their traditional families and homes, primarily their Indian culture. Before its implementation, most Indian children were removed from their Indian families and put in non-Indian homes: presumably, with no Indian culture. The states received payments from the Bureau of Indian Affairs to remove Indian children from their traditional homes and place them with non-Indian homes. In a few cases, the rate of per capita of Indian children in foster homes doubled as compared to the rate for non-Indians. Such a dramatic rate of removing Indian children from their homes would threaten tribal survival. Congress was the first institution to recognize this, and it developed an interest in tribal stability (MacEachron et al., 1996).

Ideology/values/politics influencing the policy

The Act has deep roots in ideology that paints American Indians as savage heathens who have to be civilized for the defined goal of assimilation into the American society. Assimilation is the political erasure of the existence of the Indian community. It was perceived to be the answer to the American's Indian issues. Manifested in the idea of "save the man and kill the Indian" espoused by the Indian Industrial School, most people believed that it was a compassionate approach toward the Indian Child Welfare Act: separating Indian children from their culture. This was manifested in various forms, but the most aggressive was the removal of Indian children from their traditional families, starting with the Indian Boarding Schools.

Goals of the policy

The Indian Child Welfare Act intends to curb the historical practice of removing Indian children from their family and tribe and putting them in non-Indian institutions and families. The stated goal of the policy sought to safeguard the best interest of Indian children and support the security and stability of the Indian tribes (Connors, 2011). The policy endeavors to achieve the goals through three prime methods:

I. Establishing minimal standards for removing Indian children from their families and homes

II. Through putting children who have been removed from their families in adoptive or foster homes, which depict unique values of the Indian culture and III. By giving support to family programs operated by Native tribes

Description of the policy

The Act is described as the federal law endorsed by the Congress in 1978 responding to the alarming high rate of removing Indian children from their families and homes by both private and public agencies. It sought to safeguard the interests of Native children and to foster the security and stability of Indian families and tribes.

Problems it seeks to address

The Indian Child Welfare Act seeks to solve the problem of removing Indian children from their homes and placing them in non-Indian homes and foster cares. The Act establishes the minimal federal standards for removing Native children from their homes. Its focus is on proceedings of child custody such as termination of parental rights, foster care, and adoption. It targets to make sure that Native children are put in homes consistent with values of Native culture and lifestyle. This is achieved through demanding that Indian children be put with a tribe or family members if possible and requiring that states must provide more resources to Indian families (MacEachron et al., 1996).

Beneficiaries of the policy

The Congress enacted the Indian Child Welfare Act to benefit the Indian child and the Indian family.

Advocates of this policy, who argued against it

Over the recent years, policy makers have continued to develop an increasing awareness of the peculiar needs of the Indian children. Tribes of the North Dakota too have been influential in the garnering support and evidence necessary for reforming the decision-making process relating to placement of Indian children. Congress representative, Morris Udall of Arizona, lobbied the then president, Jimmy Carter to endorse the bill (Tebben, 2006).

How it will be funded

The availability of resources and the ability of North Dakota to access federal foster care funding directly has enabled the tribes to work together and develop productive and positive relationships. The state has created various agreements, unique collaborations, and partnerships that have potential to attract both private and state funding for the successful implementation of ICWA.

How it will be implemented

The Indian Child Welfare Act will be implemented in four different contexts:

I. For children still living at home, the Act will initiate active efforts to deter child removal from their homes. In terms of Indian children, active efforts to prevent removal will be initiated.

II. In terms of in-home cases where children are at the risk of being removed and it is believed to be Indian children, knowing the Indian status of the children will help engage the tribe of the children by offering culturally relevant services (Connors, 2011).

III. In cases of immense danger where the family of the child is anonymous, collecting information about the Indian status of the child will be imperative to initiate active efforts of reunifying the child immediately.

IV. In case an Indian child is removed, early identification will support the child being put according to the Indian Child Welfare Act placement preferences and permits the child's tribe timely court notice proceedings and the opportunity to participate case planning in the tribal court.

How it will be evaluated for effectiveness

Three metrics will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of The Indian Child Welfare Act.

I. First, officials will evaluate whether state adoption rates of Indian children has decreased. If the rate increases, then this will provide adequate evidence that the Act has failed.

II. Rates of state foster care placements of Indian children will be evaluated to establish whether the rate has decreased (Lorie, 2001).

III. The discrepancy between the adoption rates of Indian and non-Indian children will be evaluated to establish the difference. If the adoption rate of Indian children is still higher than that of non-Indian children, then this will be enough evidence to support the ineffectiveness of the act and vice versa