As someone who has been organizing with Lakota people for the past seven years for the Lakota People's Law Project--and as someone who has spent months at a time living on reservations in South Dakota--I find the ombudsman's effort to gloss over South Dakota state illegality and insensitivity to Native families appalling. Please read our report about the ombudsman's glaring failures here:
www.lakotalaw.org/watching-the.... The Indian Child Welfare Act was passed in 1978 as an effort to roll back centuries of systematic abuse of Indian communities, whereby both federal and state law--often intentionally--broke up Native communities and destroyed Native culture by removing Indian children and relocating them to usually Christian environments. This assimilationist creed is alive and well in South Dakota. Those of you who live outside of South Dakota wouldn't believe the racism still extant in the plains...For instance, just two months ago I was living in McLaughlin, SD, a town on the Standing Rock reservation but named (remarkably) after a white military leader who was part of the campaigns to devastate Sioux people, and the mayor of the town literally choked an Indian man standing on the street. THE MAYOR of the town did this. The FBI is now investigating this, and I and my Native friends from McLaughlin (Bear Soldier is the name given the town by its Native inhabitants...) are hoping that justice will be done. What this story illustrates is the type of racism in South Dakota which the NPR ombudsman totally fails to appreciate. Meanwhile, the ombudsman's ignorance is not impossible to comprehend, considering that he never traveled to South Dakota (as did Laura Sullivan and Amy Walters, multiple times). Nor did he speak to virtually any Lakota people when preparing his report. Schumacher-Matos completely misses the broad, political context of what is happening to Lakota families in South Dakota. Indian people are marginalized there in a way that is unique throughout the country. This is why they are literally the poorest communities in America--rock bottom. And, the state of South Dakota, which receives the lion's share of its funding for foster care and adoption from the federal government, has a legal responsibility to keep Native communities intact. I am very, very tired of interviewing Lakota parents and grandparents who, through tears, explain how they were made to sit at the back of court rooms while parental rights were terminated in relation to their children/grandchildren; or, how evangelical Christian DSS workers and foster parents glowered at Lakota parents as they, slowly and meticulously, worked their way through a maze of restrictions in the interest of gaining their children back; or, how Lakota grandmothers, entirely capable of caring for their children--especially with the assistance of federal programs like TANF--tell about how they have been denied custody of their grandchildren so that those children could be placed into white homes, often hundreds of miles away from where they were born. Lastly, I don't want to leave out the Mette sexual abuse scandal. You can read about it here:
http://lakotalaw.org/press/spe.... In this affair, the state of South Dakota placed several Lakota girls in a white foster home where they were sexually abused for ten years, while the DSS knew all about it. An appointed guardian ad litem in South Dakota has even recommended that the state be sued on account of its behavior in this case. What did the state do as a response to this guardian ad litem's decision? It criminally prosecuted those who were trying to look out for these children...Absolutely remarkable. And right now NOTHING is being done about this affair. You can sign our petition about it here:
https://www.facebook.com/Lakot.... These kinds of developments happening in South Dakota are precisely the things that Schumacher-Matos might have concerned himself with, had he been more interested in preserving the integrity of Lakota families and culture, as is his obligation as a media "watchdog."