Podcast: Play in new window | Download (54.0MB) | Embed
The Indian Child Welfare Act has some tough opponents in the courts and in the court of public opinion. ICWA proponents suffered a setback in the Brackeen vs Bernhardt case. Both sides just presented oral arguments in the appeal. We will go live from the annual Protecting Our Children National American Indian Conference on Child Abuse and Neglect to hear first-hand stories from those affected by ICWA. We’ll also get expert analysis about the possible trajectory for the 40-year-old law going forward. (Poster artwork by Orlando Begay)
Guests:
Angel Smith (Cherokee Nation) – attorney practicing in the Indian Child Welfare Act
Jessica Mateu-Newsome – program director for San Francisco Child Welfare
Nikki Baker-Limore (Cherokee Nation) – executive director of Indian Child Welfare for the Cherokee Nation
Sarah Kastelic (Allutiq) – executive director of the National Indian Child Welfare Association
Break 1 Music: All My Relations (song) Spirit Nation (artist) Winter Moons (album)
Break 2 Music: Prayer Loop Song (song) Supaman (artist) Illuminatives (album)
I hear reasons to make ICWA unconstitutional by One: each state gets $62,000.00 per native child, $50,000.00 goes to the state were the child is placed in foster care, usually with a non-native family and the other portion of the $12,000.00 . This is all about money, and I am sure many of these workers talking like they care know about the collection of the money given to the states vs staying within the families. All about money.
So not true, all children in care receive the same regardless of race/classification etc and it amounts to 500-1000 per month to foster parents depending on their age and if have special needs. Money is not the issue. Do your own research and you will find the truth.