Florida Divorce * Child Custody * Domestic Violence Law Lawyer | Boynton Beach

Foreign parents of children abducted to Japan by their Japanese parent haven’t ever had much to look forward to in terms of getting to see their children again.

That may be about to change though. Japan has announced that it is preparing to enter the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, and it is targeting acting by year’s end.

If so, it will be no minor accomplishment, because the stricken nation will, presumably, first have to overhaul its own domestic child custody laws to make them compatible with the Hague Convention.

Currently, Japanese laws recognize only sole custody awarded to one parent, and make no provision for visitation or timesharing by the parent who is not awarded sole custody.

And the Japanese courts are, by all accounts, biased against foreigners and fathers.

The US and European countries have been exerting increasing pressure on Japan to adopt the Hague Convention and modernize its domestic child custody laws.

Read more in this Australian news article: Japan to sign child abduction convention and this Houston Chronicle news article: Japan moves to join global child custody pact.

North Carolina Husband and Wife have two Children, ages 5 and 11.

Wife is diagnosed with breast cancer.

Husband files for divorce, relocates far away from Children and then files for primary custody of Children.

Now Mother’s cancer has metastacized and she is at Stage 4.

The North Carolina family court modifies child custody of Children, awards primary custody ro Husband and orders that Children relocate to Illinois in mid-June.

Wife asserts that her disease is well-managed and does not interfere with her ability to parent Children. Wife also describes Husband as abusive.

However, based on the testimony of a forensic psychologist, the divorce court concludes that “children who have a parent with cancer need more contact with the non-ill parent”.

There is nothing to suggest that this statement is anything but the personal opinion of that forensic psychologist, unsupported by any scientific studies.

There is no indication that any other factors are considered in modifying custody.

This case has sparked hot debate, petitions and calls for the presiding judge’s dismissal from the bench.

Wife is considering appealing the ruling.

Read more in this Time magazine article: Should a Mother Lose Custody of Her Kids Because She Has Cancer?.

Bermuda Husband and Wife have a five year old Son together.

Husband and Wife divorce.

Bermuda family court awards custody of Son to Husband.

Wife abducts Son and deprives Husband of any contact with Son for nine years. It appears that Wife and Son have been living in various locations in Florida since 2003, along with Son’s younger half-sister.

Mother reportedly has been arrested on more than one occasion for theft.

Son is located in a homeless shelter in western Florida, and authorities arrange for Son to be reunited with Husband.

Husband travels to the US for his first contact with Son in years. They enjoy spending several precious hours together.

But immediately prior to a scheduled mandatory US court appearance, Wife and Son disappear again.

This despite Husband’s application for Son’s return to Bermuda under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Read more in this [Bermuda] BerNews news article: Father’s Heartbreak: Jasai Swan-Burrows and this [Bermuda] Royal Gazette article: Heartbreak as father’s reunion with son ends abruptly.

Mother and Father both enter the US illegally and remain in Arkansas.

Mother remains undocumented for years. Father secures legal status on a temporary but renewing basis.

The government pursues increased child support from Father for their Daughter.

And then Father looks to get custody of Daughter.

To modify custody, Arkansas requires a material change of circumstances since entry of the previous child custody order.

At trial, the family court modifies child custody and awards custody of Daughter to Father. It appears that the trial judge bases his ruling upon his personal political and policy views, rather than Arkansas child custody law.

On appeal, Arkansas’ highest court reverses and restores custody of Daughter to Mother.

It turns out that the circumstances Father complains of, Mother’s undocumented status and lack of a valid driver’s license, are exactly the same as they were at the time of Mother’s and Father’s divorce. They were apparently acceptable to Father then, and the marital settlement agreement was approved by the family court and adopted in its final judgment.

Further, the evidence at trial showed that Father had had little or no contact with Daughter for about two years.

Read more in this Arkansas Times piece: Illegal Immigrant.

Florida Mother has four Children, ages 10, 11, 14 and 16.

Children’s Aunt has custody of Children and has been raising them for several years.

Aunt, who lives in Alabama, brings Children to Florida to visit with Mother.

Aunt reportedly allows Children to go on a drive with Mother.

Mother allegedly crashes the car.

The 14 year old Child is killed in the accident.

It is reported that Mother is legally intoxicated at the time. In fact, her blood alcohol level is said to be 4 times the legal limit.

The Florida court finds that Mother was not allowed unsupervised visitation and timesharing with the Children and again orders that Mother not have unsupervised contact with the Children.

The court modifies custody of Children, stripping it from Aunt, who reportedly allowed Mother to have the Children unsupervised, and awarding it to Childen’s great aunt and uncle.

The court also enters a restraining order of protection against Mother’s Boyfriend, who reportedly beats the Children. Boyfriend is also arrested on charges of domestic violence.

Both Mother and Aunt may face criminal charges.

Read more in this [Orlando] WFTV 9 news article: Alleged Drunk Mom’s Kids To Stay With Aunt, Uncle.

I’ve already posted a couple of times previously on a particularly drawn out and complex family court case that continues to take novel twists and turns, since its beginning in about 2003. See Vermont Holds It Has Exclusive Child Custody Jurisdiction over Child Raised by Lesbians and Interstate Child Custody / Visitation Dispute by Lesbian “Second Mother”.

To recap the lengthy history of this family court case, Birth Mom and Psych Mom are a gay couple living in a civil union in Vermont when they decide to have a child, Daughter, together. They break up when Birth Mom becomes an evangelical Christian and leaves Vermont and the gay lifestyle … and tries to cut Psych Mom out of Daughter’s life.

The dispute works its way through the family courts of Vermont and Virginia (Birth Mom’s new home) on appeals and, ultimately, it is agreed by both states that Vermont retains child custody jurisdiction of Daughter. The Vermont family court awards Birth Mom primary child custody of Daughter, but awards Psych Mom liberal child visitation and timesharing with Daughter.

Birth Mom consistently refuses to comply with the family court’s child timesharing orders … and, for that reason, loses legal custody of Daughter to Psych Mom. At which point Birth Mom allegedly absconds with Daughter to an uncertain location. A warrant for Birth Mom’s arrest issues.

Enter a Tennessee evangelical pastor (Pastor) who reportedly aids Birth Mom in flying Daughter to Nicaragua, where Pastor had been a missionary. Birth Mom and Daughter reportedly live in a beach house in Nicaragua, which is owned by a businessman whose daughter works at an evangelical university law school in Virginia – which represented Birth Mom in her Virginia family court case appeal.

In the latest twist, now Pastor is under arrest in Virginia on federal charges of international parental kidnapping, and is expected to be transported to Vermont to appear in federal court.

Additional arrests may follow.

Read more in this New York Times article: Pastor Is Accused of Helping to Kidnap Girl at Center of Lesbian Custody Fight.

It’s no secret that co-parenting breaks down in too many divorces and separations.

Just how bad is it?

Well, in the UK, it is being proposed that, as soon as a child is born, the parents’ education in proper co-parenting upon divorce and separation begin.

Parents would immediately be given a brochure about good co-parenting in the event of divorce or separation at the time of their child’s birth.

The theory seems to be that, if parents are indoctrinated long enough, it will stick no matter what.

It would be interesting to see whether that would bear out.

Mediation would be mandated in child custody cases. As it is here in Florida.

It is also being proposed there that grandparent visitation rights be legislated.

Other proposals in the UK include expediting the legal process in child welfare cases.

Read more in this UK Telegraph article: New parents should be handed divorce advice for their children.

Father is deceased.

Texas Mother allegedly drives in her car with her five year old Daughter.

Mother is arrested for driving while intoxicated. For the third time, reportedly.

Texas family court awards temporary custody of Daughter to Father’s sister (Aunt) in November of 2009.

Mother, who is on probation, is awarded visitation and timesharing with Daughter.

Eighteen months later, Mother now seeks custody of Daughter, asserting that she is much improved.

Certain issues in the case are on appeal.

The family court may terminate Aunt’s temporary custody.

Read more in this [San Antonio] KENS TV 5 news article: Mother with DWI convictions fights for custody of her child.

California Husband and Wife look forward to the birth of their Triplets.

Wife delivers the Triplets.

And then, allegedly as a result of medical malpractice, Wife is left severely brain damaged. Unable to eat. Speak. Or move.

One year later, Husband divorces Wife.

Husband discontinues bringing her Triplets to visit Wife.

And Husband goes to family court to attempt to terminate Wife’s parental rights to Triplets.

Termination of parental rights is generally reserved for parents who have abused or neglected their children. Or abandoned them … persistently … willfully … or grossly negligently.

Family court denies the termination of Wife’s parental rights to Triplets.

And awards Wife visitation with the Triplets…

A single annual in-person visitation of five days. With Husband present.

And a monthly internet video conference.

Wife is reportedly thrilled by the prospect of her five day timesharing with the Triplets.

Read more in this [Salt Lake City] Deseret News article: Disabled mother’s visitation cut to 5 days per year and this Los Angeles Times article: Abbie Dorn, severely disabled giving birth to triplets, wins the right to spend time with her children.

Greek Husband and Wife meet and, in time, marry.

They have two Children together, Daughter and Son.

The marriage breaks down for many reasons. Among them, Wife alleges that Husband beats Son and shares a bed with Daughter while he is naked.

A Greek family court awards Wife sole custody of Children, with restricted visitation and timesharing to Husband.

During one such visitation, Husband reportedly absconds with the Children and abducts them to the US.

Husband settles with the Children in a Greek community in Florida, in the Tampa area. Money is tight, and Husband is arrested for shoplifting.

Through a Greek reality television crime show show picked up in the Tampa area, Wife learns that Children are in Florida.

Wife initiates an application for the return of the Children to Greece under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Law enforcement authorities become aware that Husband is wanted in Greece.

A federal judge in Florida in time enters a pickup order for the Children and Wife is reunited with the Children.

Wife prevails in the Hague Convention hearing and the US court orders that the Children be returned to Wife’s care in Greece.

Wife and Children return to Greece.

Shortly thereafter, Wife is assaulted and Husband allegedly abducts the Children again. To an undetermined location.

Authorities do not expect that Husband will return to the US this time.

Read more in this St Petersburg Times article: Greek drama plays out in Florida

Husband and Wife are both originally from Nigeria.

Husband and Wife have two Children together and the family has been living in the US.

Wife takes the Children to Nigeria on vacation … and informs Husband that they will not be returning.

Wife takes the Children to the UK for a vacation.

Husband applies for return of the Children from the UK to the US under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, even though the Children are just visiting in the UK.

The UK trial court concludes that the Children are habitual residents of Nigeria … but orders the return of the Children from the UK to the US anyway.

Wife appeals.

The appellate court reverses, holding that the Children should remain in Nigeria.

The court weighed heavily the delay in filing for return of the Children in the UK..

Read more in this [UK] Children & Young People Now article: Legal Report: Child abduction and this Bailii [UK] England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions.

Although things are changing, at least in some states, many gay couples raising children together still face many legal challenges, especially in the event of a breakup or the death of the biological parent.

In Michigan, one lesbian couple, an Attorney and a former Mechanic, have taken pains to create as nearly as possible the equivalent of equal spousal and parental rights, despite Michigan’s prohibition of adoption by a gay person of their partner’s biological or legally adopted child.

In this de facto family, the Attorney has given birth to two children. The Mechanic stays home and serves as the primary caregiver to the children.

Accordingly, the Mechanic earns no salary and is not permitted to save for her retirement on a tax-favored basis.

Nor does the Mechanic have any right to visitation or timesharing with the children in the event the couple breaks up … or the Attorney dies.

In fact, the Mechanic’s parental rights are severely limited even being together with Attorney. The Attorney signs a parental consent form twice a year authorizing her to consent to treatment for the children and related matters. Hardly a reliable solution.

The couple have consulted with experts who concentrate on serving nontraditional families like theirs. They have received some helpful advice … but cannot or choose not to act upon much of it.

As far as the children go, key recommendations include:

1. power of attorney for parental authority, which does not expire automatically

2. parental appointment of guardian

3. domestic partner agreement and

4. co-parenting agreement

From a financial perspective, the breadwinner partner can hire the nurturing partner as a nanny for a nominal salary. That would at least permit the nurturing partner to invest their nominal salary in an IRA.

Read more in this New York Times article: The Extra Hoops Gay Parents Must Jump Through

As recently as the 1970s, rural Iowa boasted a divorce rate out of 1910s America at large.

And there were hardly any paternity cases for child support and/or child custody, between parents who were not married.

Rural Iowans went to church regularly, mothers stayed at home with children and, well, people in their world did not divorce.

But forty years later, things have changed … in a big way.

Except for the fact that most rural Iowans still belong to a church and attend regularly, now, rural Iowa pretty much mirrors the rest of America.

Rural Iowa women today are more likely to be college-educated than in the past … and more likely to be college-educated than rural men.

They are out in the workforce.

Being divorced no longer carries much of a stigma in rural Iowa.

And divorce has multiplied there by a magnitude of seven times.

And rural Iowa now has its share of paternity cases for child support and custody disputes between unmarried parents.

Read more in this New York Times article: Once Rare in Rural America, Divorce Is Changing the Face of Its Families.

Maryland is poised to become what may be the first state to treat pets of divorcing couples as more than mere property.

Under proposed legislation, the family court would be authorized to establish visitation with a pet just as family courts establish timesharing for children.

The one glaring difference is that the family court would not be authorized to order payment of “pet support” or reimbursement of pet-related expenses by one spouse to the other.

If passed, this proposed legislation would represent a significant advance in the status of pets in divorces.

Currently, although spouses may agree to any arrangement they wish regarding their pets, the law views them as merely personal property to be awarded just the same as any other tangible property, based on fair market value.

Read more in this Washington Examiner article: When mom and dad split up, it’s the pets that suffer.

Texas Mother and Father have Daughter together.

Mother and Father split up.

Father picks two year old Daughter up for visitation … and disappears with her – for two years.

A nonprofit association recently located Father and Daughter.

And the police have reunited Mother with Daughter.

Father has not been charged with kidnapping. It is unknown whether he will be charged with custodial interference or similar criminal charges.

Read more in this [San Antonio] KENS 5 TV news article: Local mother holds her daughter again after two-year separation.

Maltese Father and Norwegian Mother meet over the internet.

Mother and Father move to Malta in 2008 and remain there until early 2009.

Then Mother returns to Norway … and there learns that she is pregnant.

Father joins Mother in Norway due to Mother’s pregnancy.

Mother gives birth to Baby in Norway.

While still in Norway, Father finds out that Mother had had another child earlier … who was removed from Mother’s care by Norway’s child welfare agency.

Mother’s and Father’s Baby, upon birth, goes through withdrawal from medications Mother had been taking.

Norway’s child welfare agency becomes aware of Baby’s withdrawal symptoms and the cause.

Both Mother and Father are worried that Baby will be removed from Mother’s care by Norway’s child welfare agency.

And Mother and Father together decide to move back to Malta with Baby, when Baby is only a few days old.

Baby is “registered as a Maltese national” by Mother and Father.

Mother and Father break up in 2010.

A Maltese court then awards Father custody of Baby in early 2010.

Mother later files an application for return of Baby to Norway under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

A Maltese Court concludes that the Hague Convention is not applicable to Baby, because Baby was never abducted. Further, even if the Hague convention did apply, Baby’s “habitual residence” has, in fact, been Malta, not Norway.

Evidence also supports that Mother is mentally ill.

The Maltese Court denies Mother’s application for return of Baby to Norway and leaves custody with Father.

Read more in this Times of Malta article: Maltese father wins child ‘abduction’ case.

Mother, Father and Son live in Australia.

Mother removes Son from Australia, to an unknown location.

In search of Son, Father undertakes an expedition bicycling throughout Europe, wearing a T-Shirt bearing Son’s photograph. Father cycles through the UK, Belgium, Luxembourg, France and Germany, as well as other countries.

Father locates now six year old Son in Amsterdam.

Three years after Son went missing, a Dutch court grants permission for Father to return Son to Australia under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Mother is arrested in the Netherlands, where she is opposing extradition to Australia.

Read more in this 9 MSN News article: Aussie father and son’s happy ending and this New Zealand Herald article: Dad’s quest ends as son returns home.

Mexican Mother and Mexican immigrant Father, living in neighboring Fort Pierce, Florida, have two Children together. The Children, who are eleven and nine, are US citizens.

Mother and Father split up. Mother returns to Mexico, taking Children with her.

Father regularly deposits child support money into a bank account for Mother. The support money accumulates in the account, unspent.

And Father hears worrisome gossip.

Father travels to Mexico to check on Children.

It turns out Mother left the Children with her eighty year old Grandmother … indefinitely. Without visiting them or seeing to their needs.

Children are living in terrible poverty. Daughter is malnourished. Children forage for food in dumpsters.

Grandmother and Father appear before Mexico’s child welfare agency. No one knows how to reach Mother to inform her.

Grandmother gives up custody of Children to Father, who will take them to the US.

Children settle in with Father in the US. Children do not miss Mexico.

Two years go by. Mother files an application for return of the Children to Mexico under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

The US judge hearing the case rules that there was no abduction, because Grandmother agreed to Father taking the Children to the US and the Children are now well-settled. Further, Mother’s action is untimely and barred.

Read more in this Treasure Coast [FL] Palm article: Anthony Westbury: This judge really got it right.

An Australian gay male couple hire a surrogate mother in India to carry twin fetuses to term for them. The twins’ genetic materials comes from one of the two men and an egg donor.

The couple bring a case in family court to establish the parental rights of the partner who is not biologically related to the twins.

And the Australian family court awards the other partner, who did not contribute genetic material, full parental rights over the twins. The court also acknowledges that the children now have “two fathers”.

Use of foreign surrogate mothers is thriving in Australia.

Read more in this Earth Times article: Court rules gay couple can both be fathers and this Advocate article: Australian Couple Wins Parenting Case.

Husband, an attorney, dies of an apparent heart attack.

Wife, who has two young children from another relationship, is arrested on murder charges.

Wife was previously diagnosed with paranoid personality disorder with schizophrenic features, as well as pain medication addiction.

A dead dog, blood and human tissue are found in their home at the time of Wife’s arrest.

Husband had warned child welfare authorities that Wife could not care for her children alone.

Child welfare agency removes Wife’s children from her custody and seeks to terminate Wife’s parental rights to her children.

Authorities seek appointment of a guardian for Wife in the juvenile court proceedings, but the court court denies it.

The Court does appoint a guardian ad litem for the children though.

It is eventually determined that Husband’s death was a complication arising from old injuries unrelated to Wife.

But the child welfare agency persists in its efforts to terminate Wife’s parental rights and ensure that children are placed with their father.

The guardian ad litem takes the position that even supervised visitation with the children by Wife could be psychologically damaging to the children.

Read more in this Detroit News article: Judge won’t name guardian for lawyer’s widow cleared of his murder.

Mother and Father have a long history with child protective services.

Some of their children have been taken into protective custody and placed in foster care a number of times.

But Mother and Father kept having more children.

They now have seven children.

Mother and Father have been charged over the years with substance abuse, domestic violence, educational neglect and medical neglect.

Mother and Father reportedly haven’t always visited regularly with their children while they were in foster care.

Mother and Father have allegedly misused government funds made available to them.

Mother and Father’s children have been in protective custody on and off for ten years.

Their children are stuck in limbo.

Family court judge orders the child welfare agency to petition to terminate Mother and Father’s parental rights, in the hope that the children may achieve permanency with different parents.

Read more in this Albany Examiner article: Judge orders ACS to file termination petition after 10 years of neglect.

Australian Husband and Wife have two Daughters and a younger Son.

Husband and Wife split up.

Australian family court must decide child custody.

Husband places great emphasis on Daughters’ academic performance. Husband pushes Daughters.

Husband assigns Daughters extra school work … more challenging than their teacher-assigned homework.

He also requires them to write daily reports not required by their teachers …

And requires Wife to read the reports to him on the phone every night.

Wife maintains that Husband and she argue constantly over Husband’s pressuring of Daughters.

Parenting experts frown upon parents imposing excessive pressure on children over academic performance.

And Daughters refused to see Husband for a year.

The family court concludes that Husband is too “rigid and obsessive”. And awards sole custody and sole parental responsibility to Wife.

The Australian family court also orders Husband to undergo family counseling with Daughters and Wife to try to foster a better relationship with Daughters.

Read more in this [Melbourne, Australia] Herald Sun article: Dad slammed over homework load.

Father and Mother are both from El Salvador.

Father and Mother have Daughter.

Father and Mother split up.

El Salvador family court awards Mother sole custody of Daughter, reportedly without challenge from Father.

Father asks Mother’s permission to bring Daughter to the US to take her to Disneyland. Mother agrees.

Father allegedly wrongfully retains Daughter in US.

Mother then files for return of Daughter to El Salvador under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

In federal court, Father contends that Mother’s litigation is untimely and that Daughter is settled in the US, that Daughter would be at grave risk of harm if returned to Mother in El Salvador and that Daughter wants to stay in the US.

The Arkansas court rejects each of Father’s positions in turn, finding fault in the legal analysis and/or taking a different view of the facts.

And, nearly two years after Father’s retention of Daughter, a federal judge in Arkansas orders Father to return Daughter to Mother in El Salvador … within fourteen days … at Father’s sole expense.

Read more in this [Fort Smith, AR] Times Record article: Judge Orders Girl, 7, Sent Back To Mom.

A South Dakota Mother and Father reportedly suffer from substance abuse and psychological conditions.

Mother and Father have a four year old Daughter together. They split up.

Grandparents seek custody of Daughter.

A US Supreme Court decision in 2000, Troxel, virtually eradicated grandparent custody and visitation rights previously recognized by many states.

Nonetheless, in the last several years, some states have been testing the boundaries of Troxel, trying to revive grandparents’ rights.

Especially where, as in this case, for whatever reason, the parents are less than model.

At trial in family court, the grandparents’ petition is denied, because the law it is predicated on is held to be unconstitutional. The specific defect cited by the divorce court is that grandparents may be awarded custody without a finding that the parents are unfit.

But the family court is reversed on appeal to the state’s highest court. Redemption is delivered by a requirement that a court favor fit parents and award custody to third parties only in extraordinary circumstances, such as parental unfitness, abandonment or neglect.

The South Dakota Supreme Court rules that Troxel falls short of mandating that parents be found unfit before awarding custody to a third party. According to them, Troxel requires only that fit parents’ wishes be substantial deference.

Read more in this CBS TV news article: S.D. High Court Backs Grandparent Child Custody

Colorado Husband and Wife have two Daughters together, ages two and four.

Wife is from Argentina.

Husband and Wife divorce.

Custody evaluator appointed by the divorce court reportedly believes that Wife poses an abduction risk to Daughters.

Family court awards primary custody of Daughters to Husband.

Wife is awarded liberal timesharing with Daughters in the US. Wife is also granted the right to take Daughters to Argentina in the summer and in the spring.

During her timesharing with Daughters shortly after the divorce is finalized, Wife takes them to Argentina – for good.

Family court orders that Wife return Daughters to the US right away.

Wife pays no attention to divorce court orders.

Argentina is a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Husband files an application for return of Daughters to the US.

Husband is advised that the process could take eighteen months.

Read more in this [Glenwood Springs, CO] Post Independent article: Snowmass man haunted by international abduction.

Husband and Wife’s four year old Child is in foster care, placed with Wife’s ex-boss.

Husband and Wife are now seeking custody of Child.

Child is in foster care because Wife pleaded guilty to statutory rape.

Because Wife became pregant with Child when she was in her thirties … and Husband was fifteen years old.

And that is when Husband and Wife married, despite the twenty-two year difference between their ages, and Husband being a child under the law.

(The marriage was allowed under Georgia law – at that time – due to Wife’s pregnancy. The law has since changed, reportedly.)

Husband and Wife’s efforts to gain custody of Child are denied. But Husband is awarded greater timesharing with Child.

Read more in this UPI article: Judge nixes custody request of teen, wife.

Mother allegedly abuses drugs.

Mother has been investigated by the state’s child welfare agency on at least six occasions. Previous allegations against Mother include taking drugs in front of her children.

Mother allegedly was on so many drugs while she was pregnant recently that her speech was slurred and was unable to walk down stairs.

Mother’s ten day old Baby dies … in a running washing machine.

Mother’s other children have been removed from Mother’s care and placed with relatives.

Ohio law was recently amended … to reduce the number of cases where children are removed from a parent’s care. Last year, Ohio removed more children from a parent’s home than all other states but one.

Under the new law there, a child must face an “imminent safety threat” rather than a mere “risk of danger” to justify removal. And a parent’s drug addiction, by itself, is not deemed to constitute an imminent safety threat.

Read more in this Tulsa World article: DHS laws for child removal defended.

Mother and Canadian Father have pre-school Daughter together.

Mother and Father separate.

Father is awarded primary custody of Daughter.

Mother allegedly abducts Daughter two years ago, to China.

China is not a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Father seeks assistance from the Canadian police. Eventually, Canada’s Department of Foreign Affairs, Interpol and the Missing Children Society of Canada become involved.

And now, two years later, Daughter is back in Canada as a result of lengthy diplomatic negotiations.

Daughter is now of school age.

Mother will be appearing before a judge to answer for her actions.

Read more in this Calgary [Canada] Herald article: Girl, dad reunite 2 years after mom took her to China and this Morningstar MarketWire article: Missing Children Society of Canada: Calgary Girl Reunited With Father, Ending 2 Year Abduction Ordeal.

Mother and Father have twenty-one month old Baby together.

Mother and Father break up.

Baby lives with Mother.

Mother and Father are competing for custody of Baby.

Suspect breaks into Mother’s parents home and kills Mother’s parents and one of Mother’s brothers.

Mother manages to hide and then escape.

Suspect claims Father hired him to murder Mother so that Father could win custody of Baby.

Father is arrested and confined without bail until trial.

Family court judge orders that Father and his family have no contact with Baby.

Father now seeks to modify that order to allow visitation and timesharing with Baby for himself and for his family.

Mother’s family oppose Father’s family having timesharing and visitation with Baby.

Father does not appear to have been present at the scene of the murders.

The family court will hold a hearing on Father’s request for visitation and timesharing.

Read more in this Chicago Tribune article: Grandparents of Darien slaying suspect seek access to baby

Indian Husband and Wife marry in a Hindu wedding ceremony.

Husband and Wife have two Sons together.

Family lives in Malaysia.

Husband unilaterally converts to Islam during marriage.

Husband converts young Sons to Islam without Wife’s agreement – or knowledge.

Husband and Wife separate.

Wife takes Sons to live in Australia.

Wife brings a constitutional case over Husband’s secret conversion of Sons, seeking custody of them.

Malaysian Court enters temporary timesharing order requiring Wife to bring Sons to Malaysia so that Husband may exercise visitation with Sons.

Wife allegedly does not comply with temporary order.

Husband presses Wife’s contempt and objects to her case being heard because of it.

Malaysian Court holds that Wife has no right to put on her case, because she is in violation of the court’s order by withholding Husband’s access to Sons. Wife must return to Malaysia to earn the right to press her case … or her case will be dismissed.

Read more in
this MSN article: Shamala cannot be heard as she breached visitation rights and
this Malaysian Digest article: Federal Court Dismisses Shamala’s Referral Application.