Attacking #ICWA: Goldwater, RadioLab's bias is blaring #BabyVeronica

By Trace L Hentz  (adoptee, author and activist)

Remember this photo? In the big world out there, few people even knew about the Indian Child Welfare Act until Baby Veronica was adopted out... Then headlines were screaming for months. Indian Country responded and fought back using the federal law but even that wasn't enough to allow a Cherokee father to keep and raise his own daughter.

I have wanted to say something about the RadioLab program/podcast about Baby Veronica and the Supreme Court Case. This was a few years ago and rebroadcast a few days ago.

More Perfect presents: Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl
I spoke with the interviewer. He didn't use one word of my story in his RadioLab report. I have no clue why not. I did give him names of other adoptees he could speak to... He spoke to many many people and quoted them but not one adoptee!  I recall I told him I was Baby Veronica just 50 years later.  My dad would have raised me. There was no Indian Child Welfare Act when I was adopted by strangers. I was traumatized. I was not going to stop looking for my family, even if my records were sealed in Wisconsin and Minnesota. I was one of thousands who lost their family connections and tribal connections. I didn't want Veronica to go through what I did.  Our culture matters and adoption steals years of our lives.

These Goldwater and RadioLab people didn't and don't want to hear me, or adoptees (young or old). They simply don't. Their bias is blaring. (It's been drilled into their minds how adoption is always good and saving poor kids.)

I wrote an essay in 2013 about this case and submitted it to the Atlantic editors but they didn't publish it. WHY? I didn't get a reason but it's clear...they don't consider Indians and adoptees interesting enough or news-worthy, let alone a federal law concerning Indians.

Finally (with utter frustration) I sent it to Indian Country Today Media in New York. They published it.

I’m a “lost bird," one of thousands of Native children adopted-out of tribal communities from the late 1950s to late 1960s as part of a federal program called the Indian Adoption Projects. The Project came after the decades long boarding school era when government and missionary schools aimed to “kill the Indian to save the child.”

 

Read more at https://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/08/12/baby-veronica-case-david-vs-goliath

 

Is that fair reporting and analysis if "THEY" (the mainstream radio, TV, newspaper media) don't consider WHY there is an ICWA?  Have they considered Baby V will grow up and not be a child anymore and imagine her loss of family and culture?  Who better to ask than an adoptee who has lived through it?

Why are they ignoring the ADOPTEE STORY in this story?

In San Diego a few weeks ago, Diane Tells His Name, Leland Kirk, Karen Vigneault, Tom Lidot (Tribal Star) and I had breakfast and we discussed this. (We were together, presenting at the California State ICWA Conference on June 7, 2016.)

"...There is an ICWA because of us, all the American Indian Adoptees, Lost Birds, Stolen Children, 60s Scoop, and Indian Adoption Project adoptees. WE are the reason there is a law. We are still called the Stolen Generations. We are the second phase of atrocities committed against Indian People before during and after the boarding schools. (WE were supposed to permanently disappear in closed adoptions with sealed records, living "happily ever after" with our white parents.) There is a federal law ICWA because of us, because adoption trafficking in Native babies and children was clearly genocide. With ICWA, there will be many less adoptees... We get that; in Indian Country we know this."

.@Sherman_Alexie We thought you should know ur quote opens this viciously anti-ICWA article by Goldwater https://t.co/mVKJhMAZYm #DefendICWA

— NICWA (@NativeChildren) June 20, 2016

“And finally this, when the sun was falling down so beautiful we didn’t have time to give it a name, she held the child born of white mother and red father and said, ‘Both sides of this baby are beautiful.’”

—Sherman Alexie

The ICWA Penalty Box: In Defense of Equal Protection for Indian Children By Timothy Sandefur (Goldwater Institute) used this quote.

Adoption Propaganda: Silenced Adoptees

What is disturbing to me is the amount of money spent on ads promoting adoption - in 2013 - right now. I had planned to use google adwords (or ad choices) on this blog (but I didn't)... WHY?
Every single ad that popped up was Adoption Agencies or Newborn Wanted or Couple wants to buy, etc....
Have you noticed this on boards and websites where the word adoption is used???
I have said this before but the ones who need to be advertising or promoting their views BIG TIME are adoptees who want to share their truth about what it's like being adopted...but alas, we are not a billion dollar business like the adoption industry.
The way it is when adoption stories run on websites, every comment is in praise of the adopter, like somehow they are heroes and saved someone. Zilch about the adoptee as a human being or their trauma or loss.
The story that ran on Radio Lab about Baby Veronica was not balanced - there was not one adoptee who made a statement and hey, I did give them an interview for the story.
Silenced? Maybe.

Does this bug you?
Please comment... Trace
 

Radio Lab: Baby Veronica

Veronica at duck pen (courtesy of John Nichols)

Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl, http://www.radiolab.org/blogs/radiolab-blog/2013/may/30/adoptive-couple-v-baby-girl/

This is the story of a three-year-old girl and the highest court in the land. The Supreme Court case Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl is a legal battle that has entangled a biological father, a heart-broken couple, and the tragic history of Native American children taken from their families.

When producer Tim Howard first read about this case, it struck him as a sad but seemingly straightforward custody dispute. But, as he started talking to lawyers and historians and the families involved in the case, it became clear that it was much more than that. Because Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl challenges parts of the 1978 Indian Child Welfare Act, this case puts one little girl at the center of a storm of legal intricacies, Native American tribal culture, and heart-wrenching personal stakes.

Background and Reporting from a range of different perspectives

"Couple forced to give up daughter"
An introductory article by Allyson Bird, for the Charleston, SC Post and Courier
Comprehensive coverage of the case by the Charleston Post and Courier
"Supreme Court Takes on Indian Child Welfare Act in Baby Veronica Case" 
A report for Indian Country Today by Suzette Brewer, who has also written a two-part series on the case.
"Supreme Court hears Indian child custody case"
Tulsa World article by Michael Overall which includes Dusten Brown's account of his break-up with Veronica's mother, and his understanding about his custodial rights. Plus photos of Dusten, Veronica, and Dusten's wife Robin in their Oklahoma home.
Randi Kaye's report for CNN on the background of the case, and interviews with Melanie and Matt Capobianco: "Video: Adoption custody battle for Veronica"

Nina Totenberg’s report for NPR: "Adoption Case Brings Rare Family Law Dispute To High Court"
Reporting by NPR's Laura Sullivan and Amy Walters on current ICWA violations in South Dakota.
Dr. Phil's coverage: "Adoption Controversy: Battle over Baby Veronica"

Analysis and Editorials

Colorlines report "The Cherokee Nation’s Baby Girl Goes on Trial:"

Americans remain dangerously uninformed about the basics of tribal sovereignty, and what it means for the relationship between the United States and Native tribes and nations.

The Weekly Standard's Ethan Epstein argues that ICWA is "being used to tear [families] apart]: "Mistreating Native American Children"
Andrew Cohen considers the trickier legal aspects of the case for the Atlantic in "Indian Affairs, Adoption, and Race: The Baby Veronica Case Comes to Washington:"

A little girl is at the heart of a big case at the Supreme Court next week, a racially-tinged fight over Native American rights and state custody laws.

Marcia Zug's breakdown of the case (Marica Zug is an associate professor of law at the University of South Carolina School of Law who she specializes in family and American Indian law) "Doing What’s Best for the Tribe" for Slate:

Two-year-old “Baby Veronica” was ripped from the only home she’s known. The court made the right decision.  

Marcia Zug for the Michigan Law Review: "Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl: Two-and-a-Half WAys To Destroy Indian Law"
From Walter Olson, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute’s Center for Constitutional Studies: "The Constitutional Flaws of the Indian Child Welfare Act"
Rapid City Journal columnist David Rooks poses a set of tough questions about ICWA: "ROOKS: Questions unasked, unanswered"
From Johnston Moore, an adoptive father of six children, three of whom are part Indian. (Moore is director and co-founder of Home Forever, and a founding member of the Coalition for the Protection of Indian Children & Families. NewsOK): "Some different talking points about Indian Child Welfare Act"
Editorial coverage from The New York Times:
"A Wrenching Adoption Case"
"Adoptive Parents vs. Tribal Rights"

Contemporary, Historic, and Legal Source Materials

Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl on the SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) Blog
Audio from the oral arguments in the Supreme Court

Official website for ICWA (the federal Indian Child Welfare Act)
1974 Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs "on problems that American Indian families face in raising their children and how these problems are affected by federal action or inaction." PDF
The National Indian Child Welfare Association
SaveVeronica.org

The First Nations Repatriation Institute, which works with and does advocacy for adoptees

Guests: Tim Howard

 

I will be posting about this case ...Very disappointed that AN ADOPTEE PERSPECTIVE was not a part of this RADIO LAB discussion. Adrian Grey Buffalo, Patricia Busbee and I were interviewed by Tim Howard but apparently we didn't make the final cut... Trace