Rule 5.486.Termination of parental rights

Division 2. Rules Applicable in Family and Juvenile Proceedings · Chapter 2. Indian Child Welfare Act · Last amended 2020 · Last verified September 10, 2026

In one sentenceRule 5.486 sets the two findings required to terminate parental rights to an Indian child, and the compelling reasons that forbid it.

Full Text of Rule 5.486

Text sizeJump to: (a) (b)

(a) Evidentiary burdens

The court may only terminate parental rights to an Indian child or declare an Indian child free of the custody and control of one or both parents if at the hearing terminating parental rights or declaring the child free of the custody and control of one or both parents, the court:

(1) Finds by clear and convincing evidence that active efforts to provide remedial services and rehabilitative programs designed to prevent the breakup of the Indian family were made; and

(2) Makes a determination, supported by evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, including testimony of one or more “qualified expert witnesses” as defined in Welfare and Institutions Code section 224.6 and Family Code section 177(a), that the continued custody of the child by the parent is likely to result in serious emotional or physical damage to the child.

(b) When parental rights may not be terminated

The court may not terminate parental rights to an Indian child or declare a child free from the custody and control of one or both parents if the court finds a compelling reason for determining that termination of parental rights would not be in the child’s best interest. Such a reason may include:

(1) The child is living with a relative who is unable or unwilling to adopt the child because of circumstances that do not include an unwillingness to accept legal or financial responsibility for the child, but who is willing and capable of providing the child with a stable and permanent environment through legal guardianship, and the removal of the child from the custody of his or her relative would be detrimental to the emotional well-being of the child. For purposes of an Indian child, “relative” must include an “extended family member,” as defined in the Indian Child Welfare Act (25 U.S.C. § 1903(2));

(2) Termination of parental rights would substantially interfere with the child’s connection to his or her tribal community or the child’s tribal membership rights; or

(3) The child’s tribe has identified tribal customary adoption, guardianship, long-term foster care with a fit and willing relative, or another planned permanent living arrangement for the child.

End

Plain-English Summary

Two findings, at two different standards, both required. The court must find by clear and convincing evidence that active efforts were made to provide remedial services and rehabilitative programs designed to prevent the breakup of the Indian family. And it must determine, beyond a reasonable doubt and on testimony from one or more qualified expert witnesses, that continued custody by the parent is likely to result in serious emotional or physical damage to the child.

The rule then names circumstances in which rights may not be terminated at all — where the court finds a compelling reason that termination would not be in the child’s best interest. Three examples are given: the child living with a relative unable or unwilling to adopt for reasons other than unwillingness to take responsibility, but willing and able to provide permanence through guardianship, where removal would harm the child emotionally; termination substantially interfering with the child’s connection to their tribal community or membership rights; and the tribe having identified tribal customary adoption, guardianship, long-term foster care with a fit and willing relative, or another planned permanent living arrangement.

"Relative" in the first of those must include an extended family member as ICWA defines the term.

Frequently Asked Questions

What must be proved to terminate parental rights to an Indian child?

Active efforts to prevent the breakup of the Indian family, by clear and convincing evidence; and that continued custody by the parent is likely to result in serious emotional or physical damage, beyond a reasonable doubt and on qualified expert witness testimony.

When can parental rights not be terminated?

Where the court finds a compelling reason that termination would not be in the child’s best interest — including a relative willing to provide permanence through guardianship, substantial interference with the child’s tribal connection or membership rights, or the tribe identifying another permanent arrangement.

Does "relative" include extended family?

For an Indian child, yes — "relative" must include an "extended family member" as defined in the Indian Child Welfare Act.

Amendment History

Rule 5.486 renumbered and amended effective January 1, 2020; adopted as rule 5.485 effective January 1, 2008; previously amended effective January 1, 2013.

(Subd (b) amended effective January 1, 2020.)

Source & verification. Rule text is reproduced verbatim from the Judicial Council of California. Adopted by the Judicial Council of California. Last verified September 10, 2026. · Official source

Also known as: terminate parental rights Indian child Californiabeyond reasonable doubt ICWAcompelling reason not to terminate ICWAtribal customary adoption