legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re A.R. CA2/6
A.R. (father) appeals the juvenile court’s orders terminating parental rights to his two-year-old daughter, A.R. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26.) He contends the juvenile court and Ventura County Human Services Agency (HSA) failed to comply with their duties of inquiry under the Indian Child Welfare Act (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.; ICWA) and related California law.
The juvenile court found ICWA did not apply based solely on the parents’ denials of Indian ancestry. Neither HSA nor the court asked any of A.R.’s extended family members whether she is or may be an Indian child, as required by section 224.2, subdivision (b).
HSA concedes that “because certain relatives were readily accessible in this case . . . father is probably correct that HSA and the court could have asked those relatives about Indian ancestry and that the court may have erred by accepting just mother’s and father’s denial of any Indian ancestry.”

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2024 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2024 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale