In re A.H. CA4/2

background discussion accordingly.

1 All further undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.

2 In investigating a referral the day after A.S.H. was born, DPSS inquired regarding

A.H. and A.S.H.’s potential Native American ancestry, which both parents denied. The

children entered DPSS’s care under protective custody warrants, first A.S.H. and then

A.H. after the parents initially absconded with her. At the ensuing detention hearing, the

court found DPSS’s ICWA inquiry adequate to date and that ICWA did not apply.

In follow-up investigation a week later, the parents again denied Indian heritage.

The parents submitted signed Judicial Council Forms, form ICWA-020 to this effect at

the next hearing in November 2021, and the court noted on the record the parents’

responses on the forms.

The juvenile court sustained DPSS’s failure-to-protect allegations (§ 300,

subd. (b)(1)) at the jurisdiction hearing in March 2022. The court also found that DPSS’s

ICWA inquiry was sufficient, ICWA did not apply, and the girls were not Indian children.

The parents denied Native American ancestry in further DPSS inquiries, and the juvenile

court made…