I attended a very interesting permanency planning hearing today and learned a little about having tribal law take precedence. When children are in foster care, the State Department must make reasonable effort to reunite the children with their parents. Making reasonable effort means offering assistance in a passive manner. For example, the worker offered the parents bus passes, the worker made a referral for counseling, the worker suggested the parents put in applications at subsidized housing.

If the parents do not follow up on the workers recommendations, then after a year, the worker must request a permanency planning hearing. If the worker receives permission, at this hearing, to file a petition for termination of parental rights a trial is scheduled. At that hearing, the parents will have their rights to parenting their children terminated. The children will then become available for adoption.

Now, consider the same case, only the parent and child involved are registered members of a Native American tribe. Now tribal law takes precedence at the permanency planning hearing. Tribal law says that the worker must make an active effort to reunite the child with the parents. How is that different from reasonable effort?

Instead of the worker providing a bus pass for public transportation, the worker must make herself or himself available to transport the parent. If need be, the worker must transport the parent to any scheduled appointments, including but not limited to, visitation with the minor children, counseling, Urine (drug) drops, and parenting classes.

Usually after a year has passed, the department of state would not assist the parents financially in obtaining housing. This is because the parents are usually required to maintain housing and employment for three to six months before the children can be returned. Binsfield legislation requires the state to attempt permanency for the child within the 12 month period.

However, because the state worker did not actively help the parent reunite with the child that is no longer significant. Permission to proceed to a termination hearing was denied. The state was ordered by the court to actively assist the parent in obtaining housing and services. We will return to court in 90 days to see if progress has been made with active services.

If progress was made, the child should be returned to the parent. If not, the case will proceed to termination and the child will need to be moved to an American Indian home for adoption. In the meantime, the tribe is allowing her current placement, because her parents have requested that placement.

Related blogs
Making Sense of a Sibling’s Death at Four
Rocking a Traumatized Child's Tantrum Away