Federal Law Gives Tribe Ruling in Baby Talon's Fate

Lady_Di · Dec 16, 2008

Six months ago, Utah couple Clint and Heather Larson adopted a baby boy named Talon who was born with drugs in his system and nursed him back to health.

The baby's biological mother is a member of the Leech Lake band of the Ojibwe American Indian tribe. A few months later, the tribe went to court, saying the mother had changed her mind and wanted the baby back -- a legitimate claim, they say, under the federal Indian Child Welfare Act.

So Sunday evening, with tears streaming down her face, Heather Larson surrendered Talon to the tribe.

"We don't understand," she told "Good Morning America" today. "The only thing we care about is Talon's welfare. ... But imagine your child being taken from you. And you may never see them again. And you may never know where they are. And you may never know if they're safe, if they're being fed, if they're being cared for."

According to Frank Bibeau, the tribe's lawyer and member, the fight is about his tribe's self-preservation, which is why the law was written to give American Indians more leeway in reversing adoptions.

"Congress put the law into effect because of the detriment and destruction to our culture and to our people and to our future existence because we are losing so many children," Bibeau said.

But the Larsons told "GMA" that they will appeal the decision to try and get back Talon, whom they still call their son.

According to the act, which was passed in 1978, its intent was to "protect the best interests of Indian children and promote the stability and security of Indian tribes and families" -- an intent that the Larsons say is not served in this case.

"His biological parents have been deemed by the state and by the tribe as unfit," Heather Larson said. "And he will not go back to them. To take them out of a stable home, where he has been nursed from a drug addiction, forced upon him at birth."

Talon will likely enter an American Indian foster family, where his two biological siblings already live.

"He's not only Indian," Heather Larson said. "He has Caucasian blood. He has Mexican blood. As important as it is for him to learn his heritage, it's just as important if not more that he's cared for and loved."

According to the National Indian Child Welfare Association, Congress passed the Indian Child Welfare Act "in response to the alarmingly high number of Indian children being removed from their homes by both public and private agencies."

"This is who we are. We've been here forever. We're down to 7,000 people on our reservation. We have to make the best of what we have and go forward. We need all of our people. We can't afford to lose anyone," Bibeau said.

The Larsons, however, do not see Talon as anyone's but theirs.

"He's our son. He always will be even if we don't get him back," Clint Larson said. "He's ours."

"He does not have our blood running in his veins, but he does have our hearts," Heather Larson said.
Click to expand...

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Story?id=6470441&page=1

I think they need to revise the federal law. Why let the baby to be adopted in first place when the tribe can put him in a foster home on their reservation? I think it was wrong on their part taking the baby away from the family. It will have some adverse effects on the baby even though he's too young to remember but there is the parent-baby attachment to consider. A sad story, regardless.

rhadamanthus · Dec 16, 2008

Under no circumstance should a biological parent be able to "change their mind" regarding adoptions.

Absolutely not.

bnb · Dec 16, 2008

I think it's pretty common for a biological mom to have a length of time to change her mind. I can't imagine the turmoil she goes though when making the decision to put her child for adoption. The adopting parents know this when they accept the adoption, though it doesn't make it any easier. Six months does seem long.

It's also common for there to be additional considerations for aboriginal kids. Keeping the culture and all that.

What makes this case difficult is that the kid is going into foster care. Even though the boy will be with his siblings -- and the care is with the tribe -- doesn't seem right.

Sad for the adoptive parents. Hopefully works out for the kid.

rocketsjudoka · Dec 16, 2008

Historically Native American children have been forcibly taken away from their families and raised white as an attempt to wipe out there culture which is why this law is there and why they are so sensitive about this in the first place. Obviously in a situation like this its a tough call but I wouldn't change the law.

JuanValdez · Dec 16, 2008

The article doesn't make it clear, but the foster family might be on the "rent-to-own" plan. It is a common method of adoption to take a child on a fostering basis while you wait for the parents to make a decision whether to take the baby back or permanently release him for adoption. At that time, the foster family can choose to adopt. So, Talon's new situation might not be as temporary as it looks.

As for the ability to reverse the adoption, it sucks but thems the rules. The whole system of quasi-sovereignty for Indian tribes is messy.

WhoMikeJames · Dec 16, 2008

People are still seriously using the word "Indian" to describe Natives...

Forums

Federal Law Gives Tribe Ruling in Baby Talon's Fate

Lady_Di Member

rhadamanthus Member

bnb Member

rocketsjudoka Member

JuanValdez Member

WhoMikeJames Member

Share This Page

About ClutchFans

Rockets Content

Support ClutchFans!