Johnson v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 481 S.W.3d 463

Melissa Johnson’s parental rights to L.R. and R.R. were terminated; the ICWA applicability and right to a qualified expert witness were at issue.
Johnson was arrested on drug charges; DHS took the three children into custody and adjudicated them dependent-neglected on February 2, 2014.
The Cherokee Nation participated via Tad Tehee starting April 2014; Johnson’s mother sought intervention through DHS; trial returns occurred and a second removal happened in September 2014 after Johnson tested positive for methamphetamine and THC.
DHS sought termination; two DHS witnesses, White and Eneeks, testified regarding lack of progress and risks; Tehee recommended termination and adoption, opining return would cause harm.
Johnson did not object to the witnesses’ qualifications or voir dire; the trial court terminated parental rights on June 29, 2015; Johnson appealed claiming lack of qualified expert testimony under ICWA § 1912(f).
The court held the preservation issue was not properly raised and affirmed termination; a concurrence offered an alternative reasoning emphasizing Cherokee Nation participation did not compromise the Act’s purpose.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the ICWA expert-witness requirement was preserved on appeal	Johnson argues DHS failed to present a qualified expert under ICWA §1912(f).	DHS contends the issue was not properly preserved at trial and thus not reviewable.	Issue not preserved; affirmed termination.

Philpott v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 2011 Ark. App. 572 (Ark. App. 2011) (preservation required objection to expert testimony)
Renfro v. Ark Dep’t of Human Servs., 2011 Ark. App. 419 (Ark. App. 2011) (party cannot raise waived issues on appeal)
Burks v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 76 Ark. App. 71, 61 S.W.3d 184 (Ark. App. 2001) (tribal-nation participation and ICWA findings)
Contreras v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 2014 Ark. 51 (Ark. 2014) (preservation and ICWA findings framework)