Gila River Tribe v. State of Ohio?

This past Tuesday, the appellate court in Franklin County, Ohio, ruled that a juvenile court that granted jurisdiction and custody of a five year old boy in Coshocton County to the Gila River Indian Community did not conduct a full evidentiary hearing considering the best interests of the child prior to making the aforementioned decision. Such a ruling indicates that the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 does not supersede a child’s best interest in custody or adoption cases and, therefore, a child’s best interests should be given full consideration in custody or adoption hearings conducted by the court.

After reading about this case, many people have asked: What exactly is the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 and how did it come to affect the custody of this five year old boy?

The Indian Child Welfare Act (“ICWA”) was enacted in 1978 after studies revealed that many native children were being separated from their families by state welfare agencies and private adoption agencies. The ICWA was created to “protect the best interests of Indian Children and to promote the stability and security of Indian tribes and families.” 25 U.S.C. §1902. ICWA established federal requirements that apply to state child custody proceedings involving an Indian child who is a member of or eligible for membership in a federally recognized tribe. Many tribal governments use blood quantum or ancestral descent to determine a child’s membership in a specific tribe. Pursuant to ICWA, in cases involving native children caseworkers must, among various other requirements, identify a child placement that fits under the ICWA preference provisions; notify the child’s tribe and the child’s parents of any custody proceedings; and work to actively involve the child’s tribe and parents in the proceedings.

 In the case of this five year old boy, the child’s father is a member of the Gila River Tribe and resided on the reservation during his childhood. The tribe has argued that Ohio caseworkers did not properly notify the tribe when the child was placed in foster care in 2015. The tribe argues that the child should have been placed with relatives of the tribe and not a foster family in Coshocton County. After the Gila River Tribe became involved in the case, the child’s attorney, court appointed guardian, and biological mother pleaded with the juvenile court to allow the child to remain in Ohio instead of being placed with the Gila River Indian Community in Arizona.  As stated above, the juvenile court granted custody to the Gila River Tribe before that decision was overturned this week by the appellate court. The Gila River Tribe has stated that they will continue to fight for the best interests of the child as they believe he belongs with the Gila River Tribe in Arizona.

Compared to the western half of the nation, there are relatively few custody or adoption cases in Ohio that involve ICWA. Therefore, it will be quite interesting to see how this case continues to play out in the Ohio court system.