In the first appeal of this case, the appellate court reversed a judgment terminating parental rights and remanded the matter to the juvenile court for the limited purpose of complying with ICWA notice requirements, holding that the parents’ failure to object did not constitute a waiver of the ICWA issue. On appeal following the remand, the parents argued the ICWA issue again, raising the question of whether the failure to raise an objection at the remand hearing waived the issue in the second appeal. The court held that forfeiture principles precluded a second appellate review, as further delay harmed the paramount interests of the minors for permanency and stability. Congress did not envision or intend successive or serial appeals on ICWA notice issues when, given a proper objection they could have been resolved at the remand which was for the specific purpose of determining proper notice.