http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/6-year-old-girl-taken-longtime-california-foster-
- Thread starter Dude653
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Here's the link since the one in the title is incomplete.
6-Year-Old Girl Taken From Longtime California Foster Family for Being 1/64 Native American - NBC News
6-Year-Old Girl Taken From Longtime California Foster Family for Being 1/64 Native American - NBC News
Thanks for the "link."
My first question is:
Who proposed and who SUPPORTED the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978?
Seems to me, this would be an important point to clarify. Was it requested/driven by Native Americans?
Yes, this single instance is very, very sad........and reveals how Laws enacted by our Government are NEVER perfect.
However, are there instances on record where this Law/Act was enforced that actually benefited a child?
We don't know, do we?
My first question is:
Who proposed and who SUPPORTED the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978?
Seems to me, this would be an important point to clarify. Was it requested/driven by Native Americans?
Yes, this single instance is very, very sad........and reveals how Laws enacted by our Government are NEVER perfect.
However, are there instances on record where this Law/Act was enforced that actually benefited a child?
We don't know, do we?
So, you are saying that there were NO.....NONE.....ZIP.....ZILCH......NO minorities serving in our Government in 1978 that took part in the passage of the Indian Child Welfare Act? Is this a FACT? Or just your belief?
Do you know for a FACT that this Act did not come about at the request/insistence of Native Americans who wanted to preserve their Heritage?
Do you know for a FACT that this Act did not come about at the request/insistence of Native Americans who wanted to preserve their Heritage?
EXCERPTS:
[h=3]General[edit][/h]ICWA gives tribal governments a strong voice concerning child custody proceedings that involve Indian children, by allocating tribes exclusive jurisdiction over the case when the child resides on, or is domiciled on, the reservation, or when the child is a ward of the tribe; and concurrent, but presumptive, jurisdiction over non-reservation Native Americans’ foster care placement proceedings.[SUP][2][/SUP]
[h=3]History[edit][/h]ICWA was enacted in 1978 because of the high removal rate of Indian children from their traditional homes and essentially from Indian culture as a whole. Before enactment, as many as 25 to 35 percent of all Indian children were being removed from their Indian homes and placed in non-Indian homes, with presumably the absence of Indian culture.[SUP][3][/SUP][SUP][4][/SUP] In some cases, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) paid the states to remove Indian children and to place them with non-Indian families and religious groups.[SUP][5][/SUP] Testimony in the House Committee for Interior and Insular Affairs showed that in some cases, the per capita rate of Indian children in foster care was nearly 16 times higher than the rate for non-Indians.[SUP][6][/SUP] If Indian children had continued to be removed from Indian homes at this rate, tribal survival would be threatened. Congress recognized this, and stated that the interests of tribal stability were as important as that of the best interests of the child.[SUP][7][/SUP] One of the factors in this judgment was that, because of the differences in culture, what was in the best interest of a non-Indian child were not necessarily what was in the best interest of an Indian child, especially due to extended families and tribal relationships.[SUP][8]
[/SUP]
As Louis La Rose (Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska) testified:
"I think the cruelest trick that the white man has ever done to Indian children is to take them into adoption court, erase all of their records and send them off to some nebulous family ... residing in a white community and he goes back to the reservation and he has absolutely no idea who his relatives are, and they effectively make him a non-person and I think ... they destroy him."[SUP][9]
FOUND HERE: (hope this link works)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Child_Welfare_Act[/SUP]
[h=3]General[edit][/h]ICWA gives tribal governments a strong voice concerning child custody proceedings that involve Indian children, by allocating tribes exclusive jurisdiction over the case when the child resides on, or is domiciled on, the reservation, or when the child is a ward of the tribe; and concurrent, but presumptive, jurisdiction over non-reservation Native Americans’ foster care placement proceedings.[SUP][2][/SUP]
[h=3]History[edit][/h]ICWA was enacted in 1978 because of the high removal rate of Indian children from their traditional homes and essentially from Indian culture as a whole. Before enactment, as many as 25 to 35 percent of all Indian children were being removed from their Indian homes and placed in non-Indian homes, with presumably the absence of Indian culture.[SUP][3][/SUP][SUP][4][/SUP] In some cases, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) paid the states to remove Indian children and to place them with non-Indian families and religious groups.[SUP][5][/SUP] Testimony in the House Committee for Interior and Insular Affairs showed that in some cases, the per capita rate of Indian children in foster care was nearly 16 times higher than the rate for non-Indians.[SUP][6][/SUP] If Indian children had continued to be removed from Indian homes at this rate, tribal survival would be threatened. Congress recognized this, and stated that the interests of tribal stability were as important as that of the best interests of the child.[SUP][7][/SUP] One of the factors in this judgment was that, because of the differences in culture, what was in the best interest of a non-Indian child were not necessarily what was in the best interest of an Indian child, especially due to extended families and tribal relationships.[SUP][8]
[/SUP]
As Louis La Rose (Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska) testified:
"I think the cruelest trick that the white man has ever done to Indian children is to take them into adoption court, erase all of their records and send them off to some nebulous family ... residing in a white community and he goes back to the reservation and he has absolutely no idea who his relatives are, and they effectively make him a non-person and I think ... they destroy him."[SUP][9]
FOUND HERE: (hope this link works)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Child_Welfare_Act[/SUP]
there is so much corruption on the reservations. I once did a job for the tribes and sent them an invoice. It was about a 15k job. They sent me a check and I deposited it. Two weeks later I got another and called them asked them if I should shred it or send it back. No one ever called me back. My guess is that they watched to see if I deposited it, they probably doctored my invoice and it went in someone's pocket. Of course I tore it up.
The sad thing about this case is that albeit the appeals judge decided the case by the letter of the law, the spirit of the law was completely ignored. The child was native american indian through her father who was not active in his tribe or culture whatsoever. The spirit of the law was keeping native children within their culture, but in this case she was NEVER a part of that culture.
this difference in the "application" of Law has caused great harm to our Nation and it's Peoples for years. Letter vs. Spirit of the Law............."Original Intent vs. Interpretation." SCOTUS has been creating Constitutional havoc for years IMO.
The Native American situation is one I freely admit to not having a complete understanding of. Given that the Tribes still exist under Treaties signed with the US Government, and that they enjoy a certain amount of Sovereignty and self-rule, yet Federal Authorities also have powers on Reservations.
The real problem (as far as there never seeming to be an honest attempt to resolve the situations that exist on the various Reservations) is that the Native American population IS NOT a large or influential VOTING BLOCK.
Ergo.........Politicians hardly even pay lip-service to them.
The Native American situation is one I freely admit to not having a complete understanding of. Given that the Tribes still exist under Treaties signed with the US Government, and that they enjoy a certain amount of Sovereignty and self-rule, yet Federal Authorities also have powers on Reservations.
The real problem (as far as there never seeming to be an honest attempt to resolve the situations that exist on the various Reservations) is that the Native American population IS NOT a large or influential VOTING BLOCK.
Ergo.........Politicians hardly even pay lip-service to them.