Suzanne Cross gave her American Indian foster children more than just a safe place to live — she provided them one rooted in tradition and culture.

Besides seeing their bruises, burns and pit bull bites heal, Clowes, a Saginaw-Chippewa tribe member, took them to their first pow-wow and taught them how to bead.

But not all American Indian children who grow up in abusive or neglectful homes are placed with American Indian foster parents, even though a 1978 federal act requires it unless no other option is available.

Today, Cross will speak at an MSU College of Law conference about some of the social implications of the Indian Child Welfare Act, which regulates custody cases among American Indian children.

"By children being placed in native homes, they will have more of a connection to who they are and have more of an opportunity to learn their culture and background," said Emily Proctor, a former social worker and tribal child protective services worker for the Little Traverse Bay Band of Odawa Indians.

Some American Indian rights advocates said the act has helped, but oftentimes courts don't look to American Indian homes as a first placement for children.

To implement the act correctly, more training should be required for social workers and judges, they said.

"Many state agencies and state judges are not very aware of this act," said Matthew Fletcher, director of the law school's Indigenous Law and Policy Center. "They don't get that many cases involving (American) Indian children. So when they get one, they don't know what to do with it."

Fletcher said the act is hard to enforce because each state can implement it differently.

One of the main complaints about the act's implementation is that judges don't always take the time to ask tribal courts if they want to become involved, he said.

For the act to be carried out correctly, Fletcher said, courts have to verify the child is a member of an American Indian tribe. If so, the court must send a certified letter to that tribe, giving them the choice to intervene in the case.

"If the tribe decides to intervene, then state court at that point has the option to either abide by the act and transfer the act to tribal court or come up with an excuse to not apply the law," Fletcher said.

Some judges don't understand the way American Indian families are structured, leading to inappropriate removals of children from their homes, he said.

"(American) Indian families are not based on the nuclear family model," Fletcher said. American Indians have strong extended family ties, but states and social service agencies follow the nuclear family model, he said.

"So if you left your kid with your uncle a few days out of the week, that was negligence and that was grounds for removal, and that was just automatic," he said.

A lot of times, there is little to no notice given to the parents or the tribe about child welfare proceedings, and parents can rarely afford an attorney, Fletcher said.

If you look at the legislative history, there are volumes of documentation of American Indian children who were taken out of their homes, said Jake Allen, a second-year MSU law student.

Fletcher said about one-third of American Indian children in the United States were removed from their families before the act was passed.

"There are stories about how some social workers would hire bounty hunters to hang around the reservation," he said. "(If they) saw a kid who wasn't in school, they would pick him up and that would be the last time that kid would see the reservation."

Cross, who has cared for six American Indian foster children, said the act is very supportive of American Indians and their culture.

Being a foster parent has been a rewarding experience, she said, especially "hearing them laugh from a distance with glee, in part because they are in a safe environment."