Dvorak v. S.H.

Summary

The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed an order terminating a mother’s parental rights to her daughter, an Indian child and member of the Yankton Sioux Tribe. The court held that the state-law requirements for termination were established by clear and convincing evidence, while the Indian Child Welfare Act’s continued-custody-damage requirement was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The court also concluded that active remedial efforts had been unsuccessful and that the testimony satisfied the Act’s qualified-expert-witness requirement.

Holdings

1. Termination of parental rights was proper because the child was deprived, the conditions and causes of deprivation were likely to continue, and the child was suffering or would probably suffer serious harm; those state-law elements were established by clear and convincing evidence.
2. For an Indian-child termination, the federal requirement that continued custody by the parent is likely to result in serious emotional or physical damage must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, in addition to the clear-and-convincing-evidence standard applicable to the state-law termination elements.
3. A petitioner must demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that active efforts were made to provide remedial services and rehabilitative programs designed to prevent the breakup of the Indian family and that those efforts were unsuccessful; proof beyond a reasonable doubt is not required under § 1912(d).
4. When cultural bias is not implicated in the alleged parental deficiencies, § 1912(f)'s qualified-expert-witness requirement may be satisfied by qualified professional witnesses who do not possess specialized knowledge of Indian customs, traditions, or culture.

Questions Presented

1. Whether clear and convincing evidence established the state-law grounds for termination of S.H.'s parental rights.
2. Whether evidence beyond a reasonable doubt was required to prove that active efforts under 25 U.S.C. § 1912(d) had been made and had failed.
3. Whether the evidence satisfied 25 U.S.C. § 1912(f)'s qualified-expert-witness requirement when the witnesses lacked specialized knowledge of Indian customs, traditions, and culture.
4. Whether evidence beyond a reasonable doubt established that S.H.'s continued custody was likely to result in serious emotional or physical damage to M.S.

Disposition

affirmed