In re B.A. CA4/2
Mother appeals orders which resulted in the termination of her parental rights over BA, her six-year-old daughter, and JA, her three-year-old son. She argues the trial court erred when it determined (i) the protections of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 do not apply to her children, (ii) she did not establish a change of circumstances to justify reinstating reunification services, and (iii) the parent-child relationship did not outweigh the benefits of adoption as to BA. Mother’s appeal of the trial court’s ICWA ruling presents the question: Does California Rule of Court, rule 5.484(c)(2) require social services departments to take affirmative steps “to secure tribal membership for a child if the child is eligible for membership in a given tribe,” even if the eligible child does not qualify as an “Indian child” as defined by statute? Because we conclude the answer is no and the department provided substantial evidence BA and JA, though eligible for membership.
Comments on In re B.A. CA4/2