In re M.D. CA4/2

I. BACKGROUND

In November 2020, plaintiff and respondent Riverside County Department of

Public and Social Services (DPSS) filed a petition pursuant to section 300 for M.D.,

whose parents are defendants and appellants D.R. (Mother) and S.D. (Father). Because

this appeal raises only ICWA compliance, we need not discuss the circumstances leading

to the child’s removal or the parents’ reunification efforts, other than to note that the

juvenile court terminated Mother’s and Father’s parental rights to M.D. in April 2022.

Only Mother’s potential Indian ancestry is at issue in this case. In a report

submitted November 24, 2020, DPSS stated that on November 13 Mother had “claimed

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code. In addition, because ICWA uses the term “Indian,” we do the same for consistency, even though we recognize that other terms, such as “Native American” or “indigenous,” are preferred by many.

2 she had Indian Ancestry” but “was unable to provide any information such as the tribe

name or the name and information of a relative to contact.” The social worker reported

that Mother “indicated that she would send me the information…