|
ICWA had a purpose for its enactment--to prevent what was becoming an underground railroad for taking Indian children from their cultures. That is why ICWA must be strictly and narrowly construed. The mother's apparent argument is that the adoption is void. Having lived in South Dakota for 15 years, I can appreciate the reluctance to return a child to the "reservation." But it defeats ICWA itself to argue that time and separation justify the legal error when less-than-honorable separation is what ICWA was meant to prevent. However, it would be very interesting if an attorney experienced with ICWA could shed some light on what legal arguments the aparents have.
Erik L. Smith
__________________
Erik L. Smith
|