Native Village of Tununak v. State, Department of Health & Social Services, Office of Children's Services
2013 Alas. LEXIS 77
Alaska2013Background
- ICWA establishes adoptive placement preferences: extended family, other tribal members, or other Indian families; good cause allows deviation.
- In this CINA case, OCS placed Dawn in a non-Native foster home to facilitate reunification with her mother.
- Tribe (and Dawn’s maternal grandmother Elise) sought to enforce ICWA preferences for Dawn’s placement.
- Foster parents (the Smiths) petitioned to adopt Dawn; the superior court found good cause to deviate and approved adoption by the Smiths.
- On appeal, Tribe argues the court used the wrong standard, that findings were not sufficiently supported, and the good-cause analysis was flawed.
- Supreme Court reverses, holding ICWA good-cause determinations require clear and convincing evidence and remands for new proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| What standard of proof governs good cause? | Kotzebue argues for clear and convincing standard. | OCS argues Adoption Rule 11(f) preponderance applies. | Clear and convincing standard applies; overrules prior rule. |
| Are there suitable ICWA preferred placements for Dawn? | Tribe contends Elise or other relatives are suitable. | OCS asserts insufficiency of viable preferred placements in Alaska village settings. | Court must assess both existence and suitability of preferred placements on remand. |
| Did the superior court properly balance good-cause factors under ICWA? | Smiths’ stability and Dawn’s bond favored deviation. | Elise's age and home conditions could support suitability with safeguards. | Remand required to reevaluate factors under the heightened standard. |
| Was Elise’s suitability (and the tribal cultural considerations) properly analyzed? | Tribe emphasized cultural ties and traditional guardianship. | OCS argued Elise’s age and health made adoption unlikely in practice. | Remand to conduct separate suitability analysis respecting prevailing Indian community standards. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians v. Holyfield, 490 U.S. 30 (Supreme Court 1989) (supports uniform, heightened proof for ICWA-related issues)
- In re Adoption of Sara J., 123 P.3d 1017 (Alaska 2005) (establishes separation of suitability and good-cause inquiries; sets precedent for standard of proof)
- In re Adoption of F.H., 851 P.2d 1361 (Alaska 1993) (preponderance rule for good cause; foundational for Adoption Rule 11(f))
- In re Adoption of N.P.S., 868 P.2d 934 (Alaska 1994) (preponderance standard applied to ICWA good-cause determinations)
- C.L. v. P.C.S., 17 P.3d 769 (Alaska 2001) (clarifies boundaries between suitability analysis and good-cause inquiry)