I’d like to ask you to engage your imagination. Think of someone you love who has struggled or is struggling with their mental health, maybe a family member, a close friend, or maybe yourself. Many of us know someone who has turned to drugs to cope; certainly, the rest of us can imagine such a circumstance.

Has this person made mistakes because of mental illness or drug use? Could some of those mistakes have gotten them in trouble with the law?

As a country, we disproportionately incarcerate individuals with serious mental illnesses, but our carceral system does little to nothing to address their needs.

Keep your loved one in mind: what are your hopes and dreams for this person? Do they get help for their mental health struggles? Do they participate in an evidence-based drug treatment program? Do they continue to have support even if progress is slow and non-linear? If they get the help they need, would it allow them to make fewer mistakes in the future?

As a country, we disproportionately incarcerate individuals with serious mental illnesses, but our carceral system does little to nothing to address their needs. In fact, studies show that incarceration can trigger and worsen symptoms of mental illness, and those effects last long after someone has been released. As a result, many people return to their communities worse off than before they were incarcerated, making it even more difficult to avoid the mistakes that got them there in the first place.

In a blog posted on the ACLU of New Mexico website, a suicide watch observer describes prison staff at Western New Mexico Correctional Facility (WNMCF) further traumatizing people with mental health conditions by putting them in solitary confinement, confining them to cages for rec time, bullying them and not allowing them to shower.

She tells the haunting story of one woman who was refused mental health support. Instead, the staff bullied her to the point where she saw no way out; she died by suicide, leaving behind three children.   

The conditions that the companion observer at WNMCF describes and that we know happen in New Mexico’s prison system every day also violate state and federal law.

State law prohibits placing mentally ill people in solitary confinement. Solitary confinement causes lasting harm, and its effects can be lethal, increasing the risk of premature death after incarceration. Still, prisons across the United States and in New Mexico use solitary confinement regularly to “address” a wide variety of concerns, including housing people who are at risk of self-harm.

The U.S. Constitution prohibits dangerous and categorically inhumane prison conditions and requires that incarcerated individuals be provided adequate medical and mental healthcare. Conditions like the ones described by the companion observer also violate federal laws meant to protect people with disabilities.

The U.S. Constitution prohibits dangerous and categorically inhumane prison conditions and requires that incarcerated individuals be provided adequate medical and mental healthcare.

When we think of our loved ones who are struggling with mental illness or addiction, most of us don’t have to imagine them being locked in a small cell 23 or 24 hours per day. We know it would be harmful to deprive them of appropriate mental healthcare, especially in a traumatic carceral setting. We know that isolation from loved ones and healthy coping mechanisms won’t help them find a different path.

The things we want for our loved ones can and should be available to every person who struggles like they do, regardless of income, circumstance or what kinds of mistakes their mental illness has contributed to. We simply need our decision-makers to commit to this shared vision.

My mom was born in 1958 and given up for adoption by her biological mother. Her maternal aunt, known to my brother and me as “Grandma Louise,” who only spoke Navajo, stepped in to be her mom. Grandma Louise loved my mom and raised her under Navajo traditions in Farmington, New Mexico. My mom learned from a young age to speak fluent Navajo, make traditional foods, and weave customary skirts. In fact, she later became Shiprock’s Miss Northern Navajo in 1980. How her story would have differed if she had been adopted and raised outside of Navajo culture and community remains an issue to ponder; similarly, how my story would have differed.

Even as the 1970s ushered in the self-determination era, giving Tribes autonomy to administer education and health services, the wounds incised by U.S. history formed deep, tender scars that show today.Every Native family has a story about children who were adopted or placed in foster care. Some children were fortunate to be raised by an extended family and community. Those not so fortunate, however, were likely stripped of their cultural identity—often forcefully. Elders remind us that it only takes two generations of kin disconnected from their language and culture to kill the language and culture.

Tribal Sovereignty

The annihilation of Indigenous identity is deeply rooted in U.S. history. The boarding school era began over 150 years ago, forcibly placing Native children in schools hundreds of miles away from home to “kill the Indian in him, save the man.” Grandma Louise – just a child at the time, told stories of having to hide when federal agents arrived.The 1950s began the termination era, where removal, relocation and family-separation policies were intended to kill Indigenous culture, dismantle tribal sovereignty, and terminate the U.S. government’s trust responsibilities owed to Tribes.

Cultural resilience prevailed, but the wounds were permanent. Even as the 1970s ushered in the self-determination era, giving Tribes autonomy to administer education and health services, the wounds incised by U.S. history formed deep, tender scars that show today.

ICWA

In 1978, Congress enacted the federal Indian Child Welfare Act in response to the unnecessary removal of Native children from their families and tribal communities. ICWA intends to protect the best interests of Native children by ensuring state foster care and adoption proceedings prioritize their placement with extended family and community. Research shows that Native children in the child welfare system do better emotionally, academically, and socially when this outcome is achieved.

However, in 2018, a federal district court in Texas, in a widely criticized decision, held that ICWA violates the U.S. Constitution. That decision was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The American Civil Liberties Union, along with its 13 affiliates (including New Mexico), submitted an amicus brief in support of preserving Native American families, respecting the cultural heritage of Tribes, and advocating for children’s rights and a child’s interest in family integrity

The ominous threat to Indigenous identity and tribal sovereignty seems to be one without end. If ICWA were ruled unconstitutional, not only would there be no way to protect Native children against removal, but the overall domino effect would topple 200 years of Indian law precedent that currently guards the rights of Tribes to exist as sovereign nations on Native lands.   

 

Thankfully, in a huge victory for tribal sovereignty this June, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the attack against ICWA in Brackeen v. Haaland. This landmark ruling reaffirms legal precedent upholding tribal sovereignty, hard-fought rights over tribal land and water, health care, criminal and civil jurisdiction, and tribal self-governance—a win for New Mexico’s 23 federally recognized Tribes, Nations, and Pueblos.

 

Most importantly, it ensures ICWA’s provisions will continue to protect Native families and keep them together.

Photo above right: Rolinda ("Ro") Sanchez. Photo above left: Grandma Louise.