In Bill S. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services,[1] the Supreme Court held that clear and convincing evidence of active efforts to prevent the breakup of an Indian Family under the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) must include documented efforts to provide specific assistance rather than vague and overgeneralized testimony. The Office of Children’s Services (OCS) sought to terminate Bill’s and Clara’s parental rights to their children. In accordance with ICWA, OCS attempted to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence active efforts to provide remedial services and rehabilitative programs designed to prevent the breakup of an Indian family. The superior court granted the termination order, finding that termination was in the children’s best interests and agreeing with OCS that the parents had demonstrated an unwillingness to change or engage in rehabilitative efforts to address their alcohol use and domestic violence. The Supreme Court found that the parents’ lack of effort did not excuse OCS’s failure to make and demonstrate its efforts. It expressed that active efforts required OCS’s caseworker to take Bill and Clara through the steps of remedial and rehabilitative plans rather than letting them perform plans on their own. Further, the Supreme Court found that OCS, by entirely relying on a single caseworker’s testimony, did not meet ICWA’s documentation standards for active efforts. The Supreme Court reversed the superior court’s active efforts finding, vacated the termination order, and remanded, holding that clear and convincing evidence of active efforts under ICWA requires documented and specific assistance rather than vague and overgeneralized testimony.
[1] 436 P.3d 976 (Alaska 2019).
