1.    As used in this section:

Ask a criminal law question, get an answer ASAP!
Click here to chat with a criminal defense lawyer and protect your rights.

     a.    “Active efforts” means affirmative, active, thorough, and timely efforts intended primarily to maintain or reunite an Indian child with the child’s family. Active efforts are required if the federal Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 [25 U.S.C. § 1901 through 1963] applies or may apply, including during the verification process. If an agency is involved in the child-custody proceeding, active efforts must involve assisting the parent or parents or Indian custodian through the steps of a case plan and with accessing or developing the resources necessary to satisfy the case plan. To the maximum extent possible, active efforts should be provided in a manner consistent with the prevailing social and cultural conditions and way of life of the Indian child’s tribe and should be conducted in partnership with the Indian child and the Indian child’s parents, extended family members, Indian custodians, and tribe. Active efforts are to be tailored to the facts and circumstances of the case. The term includes:

(1) Conducting a comprehensive assessment of the circumstances of the Indian child’s family, with a focus on safe reunification as the most desirable goal, with ongoing timely assessment to determine if the threat is resolved and placement of the child can be returned to the custodian; (2) Identifying appropriate services and helping the parents to overcome barriers, including actively assisting the parents in obtaining such services; (3) Identifying, notifying, and inviting representatives of the Indian child’s tribe to participate in providing support and services to the Indian child’s family and in family team meetings, permanency planning, and resolution of placement issues; (4) Conducting or causing to be conducted a diligent search for the Indian child’s extended family members, and contacting and consulting with extended family members to provide family structure and support for the Indian child and the Indian child’s parents; (5) Offering and employing available and culturally appropriate family preservation strategies and facilitating the use of remedial and rehabilitative services provided by the child’s tribe; (6) Taking steps to keep siblings together whenever possible; (7) Supporting regular visits with parents or Indian custodians in the most natural setting possible as well as trial home visits of the Indian child during any period of removal, consistent with the need to ensure the health, safety, and welfare of the child; (8) Identifying community resources, including housing, financial, transportation, mental health, substance abuse, and peer support services and actively assisting the Indian child’s parents or, if appropriate, the child’s family, in utilizing and accessing those resources; (9) Monitoring progress and participation in services; (10) Considering alternative ways to address the needs of the Indian child’s parents and if appropriate, the family, if the optimum services do not exist or are not available; and

(11) Providing post-reunification services and monitoring.

b.    “Extended family member” means a relationship defined by the law or custom of the Indian child’s tribe or, in the absence of such law or custom, means an individual who has reached the age of eighteen and who is the Indian child’s grandparent, aunt or uncle, brother or sister, brother-in-law or sister-in-law, niece or nephew, first or second cousin, or stepparent.

c.    “Indian” means an individual who is a member of an Indian tribe, or who is a native and a member of a regional corporation as defined in 43 U.S.C. § 1606.

d.    “Indian child” means an unmarried individual who is under the age of eighteen and is either a member of an Indian tribe or is eligible for membership in an Indian tribe and is the biological child of a member of an Indian tribe.

e.    “Indian child’s tribe” means the Indian tribe in which an Indian child is a member or eligible for membership or, in the case of an Indian child who is a member of or    eligible for membership in more than one tribe, the Indian tribe with which the Indian child has the more significant contacts.

f.    “Indian custodian” means any Indian individual who has legal custody of an Indian child under tribal law or custom or under state law or to whom temporary physical care, custody, and control has been transferred by the parent of the child.

g.    “Indian tribe” means an Indian tribe, band, nation, or other organized Indian group or community of Indians recognized as eligible for services provided to Indians by the United States secretary of the interior because of their status as Indians, including any Alaska native village as defined in 43 U.S.C. § 1602(c).

h.    “Parent” means any biological parent or parents of an Indian child or any Indian individual who has lawfully adopted an Indian child, including adoptions under tribal law or custom. The term does not include the unwed father if paternity has not been acknowledged or established.

i.    “Termination of parental rights” means any action resulting in the termination of the parent-child relationship. The term does not include a placement based upon an act by an Indian child which, if committed by an adult, would be deemed a crime or a placement upon award of custody to one of the child’s parents in a divorce proceeding.

2.    Before removal of an Indian child from the custody of a parent or Indian custodian for purposes of involuntary foster care placement or the termination of parental rights over an Indian child, the court shall find that active efforts have been made to provide remedial services and rehabilitative services designed to prevent the breakup of the Indian family and that these efforts have proved unsuccessful. The court may not order the removal unless evidence of active efforts shows there has been a vigorous and concerted level of casework beyond the level that would constitute reasonable efforts under section 27-20.3-26. Reasonable efforts may not be construed to be active efforts. Active efforts must be made in a manner that takes into account the prevailing social and cultural values, conditions, and way of life of the Indian child’s tribe. Active efforts must utilize the available resources of the Indian child’s extended family, tribe, tribal and other relevant social service agencies, and individual Indian caregivers.

3.    The court may order the removal of the Indian child for involuntary foster case placement only if the court determines, by clear and convincing evidence, that continued custody of the child by the parent or Indian custodian is likely to result in serious emotional or physical damage or harm to the child. Evidence must show a causal relationship between the particular conditions in the home and the likelihood that continued custody of the child will result in serious emotional or physical damage or harm to the particular child who is the subject of the proceeding. Poverty, isolation, custodian age, crowded or inadequate housing, substance use, or nonconforming social behavior does not by itself constitute clear and convincing evidence of imminent serious emotional or physical damage or harm to the child. As soon as the threat has been removed and the child is no longer at risk, the state should terminate the removal, by returning the child to the parent while offering a solution to mitigate the situation that gave rise to the need for emergency removal and placement.

4.    The court may only order the termination of parental rights over the Indian child if the court determines, by evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, that continued custody of the child by the parent or Indian custodian is likely to result in serious emotional or physical damage or harm to the child.

5.    In considering whether to involuntarily place an Indian child in foster care or to terminate the parental rights of the parent of an Indian child, the court shall require that a qualified expert witness must be qualified to testify regarding whether the child’s continued custody by the parent or Indian custodian is likely to result in serious emotional or physical damage or harm to the child and should be qualified to testify as to the prevailing social and cultural standards of the Indian child’s tribe. If the parties stipulate in writing and the court is satisfied the stipulation is made knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily, the court may accept a declaration or affidavit from a    qualified expert witness in lieu of testimony. An individual may be designated by the Indian child’s tribe as being qualified to testify to the prevailing social and cultural standards of the Indian child’s tribe. The court or any party may request the assistance of the Indian child’s tribe or the bureau of Indian affairs office serving the Indian child’s tribe in locating individuals qualified to serve as expert witnesses. The social worker regularly assigned to the Indian child may not serve as a qualified expert witness in child-custody proceedings concerning the child. The qualified expert witness should be someone familiar with the particular child and have contact with the parents to observe interaction between the parents, child, and extended family members. The child welfare agency and courts should facilitate access to the family and records to facilitate accurate testimony.