General legal information furnished as a service of Fort Lauderdale / West Palm Beach family law attorney Janet Langjahr
Washington state Mother and Father, both Indian immigrants, marry and have Son.
As part of their divorce, the Court permits Son to travel to India with either parent.
Mother allegedly takes three year old Son to India.
Nearly a year ago.
And Mother and Son reportedly have not returned to the US since.
Father is entitled to court-ordered visitation.
And, since the abduction, Father has been awarded custody of Son.
But both orders are just so much paper, without practical effect.
Because India is not a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.
And India is indifferent to US court orders in family law cases.
Even the custodial interference charges filed against Mother in Washington state have no impact.
Practically speaking, Father has no legal recourse for return of his son.
Read more in this Kent [WA] Reporter article: A Father’s Day he won’t see: International child abduction devastates former Kent man.
The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, which determines which country has jurisdiction in international child custody disputes, appears to be enjoying something of a resurgence.
Two long holdouts against entering the Convention are reportedly … considering signing it.
Carefully …
First, there is Japan - where, even among Japanese couples, the parent awarded primary custody is, in essence, the sole parent and the other parent is shut out of their child’s life and parental kidnapping is a rejected concept.
More and more children of mixed Japanese heritage are being denied any access whatsoever to one of their parents where there is an international child custody dispute.
Then, there is Russia. From which country a Finnish diplomat recently allegedly removed a five year old boy of dual Russian / Finnish citizenship, illegally according to the Russian view.
Read more in
One might not think of a legal dispute over jurisdiction with our neighbor to the north as being an international jurisdiction battle.
But …
Canadian Husband and American Wife live in British Columbia.
Couple divorce.
Husband is awarded sole custody of Daughter by Canadian court.
Wife moves to Nebraska.
Husband and Wife work out timesharing and Wife has Daughter over much of the summer.
Then Wife accuses Husband of abusing Daughter.
Husband denies it, backed by a lie detector test and lack of criminal charges.
Wife retains Daughter and Husband doesn’t see her for two years.
Wife hasn’t been able to transfer jurisdiction from Canada to Nebraska, but neither has Nebraska honored the Canadian custody order and ordered that Daughter be returned to Husband.
Wife does succeed in getting Nebraska to pass legislation to the effect that Nebraska need not honor custody orders from outside the US.
One must speculate that the constitutionality of that statute will be tested soon.
Nebraska may have rejected the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.
Husband is pursuing political intervention by the Canadian government.
Some Canadians are concerned that it isn’t safe to allow visitation in the US anymore.
Read more in this [British Columbia, Canada] Richmond Review article: Richmond educator fights for daughter.
Husband is convicted of sexually assaulting Wife.
Wife is terrified that Husband will kill her.
Husband allegedly threatens to dismember her.
Wife flees to Australia with their two Children.
But the Australian courts rule that England has child custody jurisdiction under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.
Wife returns to England with Children.
Police are summoned to intervene in domestic clashes several times.
Police give Wife a “panic alarm”.
About a year after Wife’s return, Husband allegedly drags her from a car and stabs her to death … in front of her own mother and their Children.
Just a few hours after she begged British police for protection.
While she was in the midst of trying to flee from Husband again.
Husband is convicted of murder.
He will serve at least eighteen years in confinement.
Read more in this Brisbane [Australia] Times article: Young mother fled to Sydney to save her life.
Russian Mother and French Father divorce in France, where they have been living.
French court awards custody of their then 1 year old Child to Father.
Mother returns to former Soviet Union.
Child is reportedly abducted back and forth multiple times over last two years since divorce, most recently allegedly by Mother, to former Soviet Union.
During a previous abduction, Child did not see Father for 10 months and knew Mother’s new partner as her father.
What of the future?
Father opposes sharing joint legal custody with Mother but is not opposed to Mother having two months’ (or even equal) timesharing with Child in the former Soviet Union … as long as the Child’s return to France is guaranteed, he has ongoing video and phone contact with Child while she is in the former Soviet Union and Child attends a French-speaking school.
Meanwhile, Mother is under arrest and being detained in Hungary for up to 40 days pending a request for extradition from France.
But Father does not want to see Mother jailed for kidnapping Child.
Read more in this [Russian] RIA Novosti article: French father dismisses joint custody, in favor of visitation.
Georgia Mother and Father separate.
Mother reports Father for child abuse.
Mother’s allegations are determined to be unfounded.
Father is awarded sole custody of their two Children in divorce.
While she has visitation with the Children, Mother reportedly flees.
First to Texas, where she has relatives.
And again reports Father for child abuse.
Texas authorities decline to take Mother into custody despite knowing of arrest warrant.
Then, allegedly, to Mexico, where she is from.
Authorities are looking for Mother in connection with federal charges of international parental kidnapping and unlawful flight to avoid prosecution and state charges of felony interference with child custody.
If caught and convicted, Mother faces incarceration for up to five years.
Read more in this Jacksonville [FL] Times-Union article: Kids believed hidden in Mexico.
Mexican Mother and Father live in the US for a number of years before Father is deported.
Their daughter (Daughter) is born in Mexico in 1996.
When Mother and Father separate in 2001, Mother returns to the US. Mother alleges that Father committed domestic violence.
Father contends that Mother wrongfully kept Daughter in the US beyond her agreed few months’ stay in 2002.
Although they have both been here for years now, technically, neither Mother nor Daughter are in this country legally.
Over four years after Mother allegedly wrongfully retained Daughter in the US, Father applies for return of Daughter to Mexico under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. It is not clear why Father waited so long to act.
A federal trial court holds that Daughter should be returned to Father in Mexico for a custody determination there.
On appeal, the intermediate level appellate court reverses, based on an exception in the Hague Convention where, due to the lengthy passage of time, the child in question has become well settled in his or her new location, so that return would only cause the child further distress.
By all accounts, Daughter is well-adjusted and doing well in the US.
Some disagree with the appellate court’s ruling because none of the family is a US citizen or legal resident.
As with all decisions under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, this ruling is a not a determination of custody, or in which country Daughter will ultimately live. It just decides which country has jurisdiction to determine custody, and where the child will remain until custody is determined.
It is likely that the appellate Court was heavily influenced by Daughter’s protracted stay in this country before Father ever chose to file an application for her return. There is nothing to suggest that Father’s delay resulted from ignorance of where Daughter was abducted to.
Read more in
It isn’t just non-Americans who are accused of abducting their children across international borders.
The case below suggests a different scenario entirely.
American Mother and Danish Father live with their two year old baby Daughter in Denmark.
Mother and Father previously agreed in writing to joint custody of Daughter.
When Mother’s father was visiting them in Denmark from the US, he allegedly diverted Father and gave Mother opportunity to get away with Daughter and leave the country.
Father has now brought suit in a federal court in Pennsylvania to have Daughter returned to Denmark under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.
A federal judge has enjoined removal of the child from Pennsylvania pending a decision on jurisdiction over Daughter.
Mother’s mother reportedly informed a reporter that Mother was prepared to explain to the judge why she left Denmark as she did.
Read more in this [Northeastern Pennsylvania] Times Leader article: Denmark man: Wife took child.
This case is almost as hard to follow as a sleight of hand trick.
Daughter, an American citizen, is in Mexico, with nonrelatives. That’s been the case for four years of the five year old’s life.
Her Father and Mother are US citizens in the US, although not together.
It all started when Daughter’s Mother married a Mexican man, identified him on Daughter’s birth certificate as Daughter’s father and then moved to Mexico when her new husband was deported.
Father only saw Daughter one time in her life.
But DNA testing confirmed that Father, not Mother’s husband, is Daughter’s biological father.
Mother returned from Mexico to the US for a few days, leaving Daughter behind with her husband.
And there Daughter has stayed ever since.
Mother was arrested and incarcerated.
Father was also incarcerated.
Mother and Father both agreed to give custody of Daughter to Father’s wife.
A Florida court even approved the custody agreement.
And so Father’s wife has been trying ever since to bring Daughter home to Florida.
But she’s gotten nowhere. She can’t even verify that Daughter is alive.
It turns out, Daughter is with Mother’s husband’s sister - who is fighting to keep Daughter there and has identified her as a Mexican citizen.
A hearing was finally held in Mexico.
Mother’s husband’s sister testified that Mexico was all Daughter knows and that her parents are both criminals who shouldn’t have her.
But the Mexican judge has not ruled, either way.
Allegedly because the Court was awaiting papers from the US government.
And Daughter remains in Mexico with nonrelatives.
Read more in this Ft. Myers [FL] News-Press article: Lee couple fight to get little girl back home.
Chinese Father. Israeli Mother. Son appears to be American. And home was United States.
Until Mother takes Son to Israel. And stays there. For three years.
Mother’s version of events:
Father raped her, and Son is the product of that rape. Father authorized passport and was aware of her plan to travel to Israel with Son.
2006 Court order under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction:
Son is to be returned to Father in the US.
Court order is found on Mother. Yet Mother claims not to have known about hearing.
Ironically, Mother is “caught” during a routine check having nothing to do with Son’s “missing” status.
Mother is arrested. Son is taken into protective custody.
Read more in this Israel Haaretz article: Woman stopped in routine check, held for ‘kidnapping’ child from U.S. dad.
International child custody cases can be costly.
But there’s costly and then there’s really costly.
Where does the line get drawn?
Well, one law firm, which has a satellite office here in Palm Beach county, found out the hard way.
After prevailing in an international child custody case, the firm sought to recover attorney’s fees from the losing opposing party.
The total bill it submitted for attorney’s fees weighed in at $163,000.
For what the presiding federal judge in Pennsylvania characterized as a “garden variety” custody case, with few legal or factual disputes.
The Court refused to stick the losing party with the price of the prevailing party’s individual choice to staff the matter with a team of five different attorneys, four of whom attended a three day trial.
The modest finances of the losing party, whom the court apparently felt acted wrongly but in good faith, may have played a role in the Court’s ruling.
Of course, the Court’s decision doesn’t mean that the prevailing party or their attorneys would do anything differently if they had to make their decisions all over again …
Read more in this Philadelphia Legal Intelligencer article: Federal Judge Critical of Firm’s Fee Petition in Custody Case.
Brazilian Wife and New Jersey Husband have a Son in US and raise him in US for four years.
Then Wife takes Son to Brazil for a visit.
And doesn’t return.
Wife remarries in Brazil - without ever divorcing Husband.
More recently, Wife dies while still in Brazil.
Now Son is with his Stepfather.
And Stepfather is refusing to comply with court orders granting Husband access to Son.
It’s been four years since Husband has seen his Son.
Brazil is a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.
Yet, even though Brazilian officials acknowledge that Husband has legal custody of Son, in fact, Husband can’t even see Son.
The State Department has reportedly expressed the opinion that Brazil frequently does not comply with the Hague Convention, despite being a party to it - and favors Brazilians and mothers in custody battles.
Read more in this ABC 7 Eyewitness News article: Dad’s Brazilian custody battle intensifies.
Idaho Mother has custody of her Son. Father lives in Idaho too.
According to Father, Mother has passports for herself and Son, copies of their birth certificates and the proceeds of the sale of a home she owned in Nevada.
And now, about six months after their divorce, for reasons unknown, Mother is suspected to have fled with Son to Mexico, after she failed to drop Son off to Father for visitation on November 30th as scheduled following a trip described as being to California.
But neither Father nor authorities are at all certain where Mother and Son are.
Father brought in the FBI, and Mother is being sought on kidnapping charges.
International abductions from Idaho are reportedly not common.
Mexico is a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, so it’s not the worst place for Mother and Son to be for purposes of securing their return.
But until they are located, it’s difficult to work on their return.
Father says he worries how the kidnapping and separation will affect Son emotionally and psychologically.
Read more in this [Boise, ID] KTVB-TV 7 article: Kidnapped boy believed to be in Mexico with his mom.
Australian Wife and Indian Husband have a Son together. They divorce.
Ex-Husband plans to take couple’s Son to India for a visit. Ex-Wife’s mother plans to accompany Son and Ex-Husband on trip.
Shortly after arriving in Mumbai, Ex-Husband takes Son out and Ex-Wife’s mother is served in an Indian child custody action.
Ex-Wife has only been able to speak to Son once since that incident.
To make matters worse, this all happens when Mumbai is under terrorist attack and foreigners are asked to leave by the government. Son is an Australian citizen.
The Australian government is trying to assist Ex-Wife in returning Son to Australia.
But India is not a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.
Read more in this Sydney Morning Herald article: A mother’s worst nightmare.
Romanian Father and Norwegian Mother marry and have Child together in Norway.
Couple divorce and Mother is awarded primary residential custody of Child. Father doesn’t think she is up to the job though.
So Father allegedly abducts Child to Romania.
Then Mother goes to Romania, gets Child and allegedly brings Child back to Norway. All unbeknownst to Father.
Now Father is in jail in Norway and awaiting trial for the abduction he allegedly perpetrated.
And Mother has just been arrested in Norway for the abduction she allegedly perpetrated.
And since both of the Child’s parents are in trouble with the law, the Child is in child protective custody.
Read more in this [Norway] Aftenbladet article: Child’s father accused of abduction.
Israeli Husband and American Wife marry. Husband and Wife have two Daughters together and live in US.
Husband and Wife divorce. Husband and Wife have shared parenting but Husband is the primary residential parent and Wife has visitation.
Husband absconds with Daughters to Israel - allegedly to evade a criminal trial in the US on charges of drug possession.
Wife sought an emergency modification of custody in the US and was successful in obtaining a modified award of sole custody of the Daughters.
Wife then filed an application for return of Daughters to the US in accordance with the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.
Husband’s response was that returning Daughters to Wife would put them at grave risk because of Wife’s abuse of drugs and alcohol and history of neglect of Daughters.
Husband further stated that Daughters preferred to live with Husband in Israel because they had more stability with him.
The presiding Israeli family court judge appointed a therapist to evaluate Daughters and met with Daughters himself.
The therapist concluded that Daughters would not be at risk with Wife in the US. The judge felt that Daughters had been brainwashed by Husband.
Accordingly, the Israeli Court ordered the return of Daughters to the US.
Read more in this Israel News article: Israeli who abducted daughters from US to return them home.
Indian Mother and Father live in UK with their four and six year old Children.
Children go back to India to live with Father’s parents, Grandparents.
Mother says Father sent them there. Grandparents say Mother brought them there.
Mother files in both India and UK to get the Children back with her. She maintains she has “full rights over them”.
Nonetheless, Children reportedly want to stay in India with Grandparents.
India is not currently a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. But lawyers in India are starting to press for adopting the Convention.
Of course in this case, depending how long the Children have been with the Grandparents and the circumstances of their return to India, the Convention might require that custody be determined in the UK. It appears that, at least as far as habitual residence is concerned, the Children are NRI, nonresident Indian children.
Read more in this IBN article: Punjab’s NRI British kids caught in custody battle.
Mother and Father live in Ireland with Son.
Mother and Father break up.
Mother allegedly abducts Son to Britain.
Father brings an application for Son’s return to Ireland under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.
Father seeks guardianship of Son in an Irish Court.
A British Court orders that Mother’s and Son’s passports be deposited into Court pending further order of the Court at a hearing next month.
A spokesman for the Irish Family Breakdown Support Services notes that Ireland is in need of new laws to strengthen the legal rights of unmarried fathers in Ireland.
In the last year, Ireland has seen a twenty-five percent uptake in parental abduction cases.
Read more in this Irish Independent article: Father fights for return of son (5).
Sons live primarily with Australian Father.
Swedish Mother has two court-ordered visits with Sons per year in accordance with the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.
Sons advise Father that Mother does not intend to return Sons to Father in Australia.
Sons go to Sweden for their most recent visitation.
Sons do not return on schedule.
Now the Australian Family Court has prohibited any further contact between Sons and Mother.
Unfortunately, that is not very helpful at this point.
Australia issues an arrest warrant for Mother and alerts Interpol of the incident.
From January to October, 121 Australian children were abducted from Australia.
Read more in this [Australian] Age article: Missing in Sweden: Melbourne father’s dash to find sons and this [Australian] Age article: Man looks for missing sons in Sweden.
A Chicago area child was recently abducted by her father - who allegedly planned to take her to Jordan. Had the father succeeded, the baby girl would likely not have returned home to the US - or seen her US family members again.
Jordan is not a signatory to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction - and custody laws there favor fathers. But the pair didn’t make it there. And the child was home in about a week.
Almost 800,000 children were reported missing in the US in 1999, the time of the last major survey.
And of them, only a handful, 115, were kidnapped by a stranger, for ransom or murder, the kind of kidnapper that most people think of when they think of a “kidnapper”.
115 … out of 800,000.
In child kidnappings, the reality is that the kidnapper is 4 times more likely to be a family member than a stranger, like this baby girl’s father.
In fact, half of child kidnappers are the children’s biological fathers. One quarter, their biological mothers.
But the fact that the kidnapper is a parent or other close relative does not mean that the child victim is safe, in good hands.
Nearly half of family abductions are foiled within a week. Only one-fifth of such cases remain unsolved after a month.
But where things tend to get more complicated is where the family member abductor whisks the child out of the country, particularly to a country that is not a signatory to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. As the Chicago girl’s father reportedly planned to do.
It can take much longer to retrieve those children … if they can even be retrieved at all.
Read more in this Chicago Southtown Star article: Most parental kidnappings end with child back home.
Brazilian Mother and Chinese Father have Child together in Brazil. They all live in Brazil.
Until Mother dies when Child is about 4 years old. Then Father takes Child with him back to China.
Then Father dies. Child’s Chinese uncle takes him in.
A year or two later, Child’s Grandmother in Brazil sues for custody of Child. Grandmother wins.
Child goes back to Brazil with elderly Grandmother in 2004. And now Grandmother dies.
And now the Brazilian child welfare agency has placed Child into foster care, presumably because he has no other living relatives in Brazil.
But he still has living relatives in China. They are considering seeking custody of Child again.
Read more in this Tapei Times article: Iruan Ergui Wu now in foster care.
Israeli Husband and Australian Wife live with their four boys (Boys) in Israel.
Wife takes Boys to Australia, where her parents live.
Wife claims that Husband abandoned his family financially and emotionally, in favor of a girlfriend. Without Husband, Wife felt she needed family support and, she claims, Husband agreed to her relocation with the Boys.
Husband denies abandonment and denies giving consent to Wife and children moving to Australia. He also maintains that Israeli authorities told him not to pay support.
Husband files an application for return of the Boys to Israel under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.
The jurisdiction dispute has been winding its way through the Australian courts for quite some time.
The trial court finds that the Boys were not wrongfully removed from Israel, because Husband did give his consent - but revoked it shortly afterward.
Accordingly, although Wife had not wrongfully removed the children, she did wrongfully retain them in Australia.
Wife appeals, but the intermediate appellate court upholds the trial court’s ruling and orders the return of the Boys to Israel.
Wife is seeking an appeal to the highest court in Australia and the court has stayed the return of the Boys until the appeal is concluded.
Meanwhile, Husband recently had his first visitation with the Boys in nearly two years.
Read more in this Australian Jewish News article: Israeli father battling Aussie wife for custody.
Massachusetts family court awards visitation to Father. Mother and children move to New Hampshire.
Father picks up kids in New Hampshire for visitation - but doesn’t return them. Massachusetts court says it can do nothing.
Father allegedly absconded with children to Brazil, using bogus birth certificates for the children and a reportedly forged letter from Mother. The Mother learns that the children were sighted there.
What stands out about this case is that the Mother is close friends with a state representative. Unfortunately, the effort to politicize the case does not seem to be speeding up or improving the outcome. Even though the representative is very motivated to get up to speed on the procedures governing international child abductions.
The Mother has filed an application for return of the children to the US with the US State Department. But, despite Mother’s connections, the case is progressing slowly. The Mother blames it on bureaucracy and lack of interest.
The Mother is concerned that the delay will permit removal of the children to yet another country. One that may not be a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.
The Mother has been advised not to head to Brazil to bring the children back herself. Like so many other parents in this situation, in the final analysis, there doesn’t seem to be much she can do, except wait and hope.
Read more in this New Hampshire Seacoast article: Support grows for mother of 2 missing girls.
Young UK Mother has two babies, ages one and two years old, one from a previous relationship and one with her fiance, an Indian national.
Mother and kids move to remote area of India with now-husband. They are pursuing an “alternative lifestyle”.
Mother dies suddenly, apparently due to complications related to her asthma and, possibly, poor medical care. Foul play is not suspected.
Husband’s visa has expired. Husband and both children are stranded in India. Grandmother wishes Mother’s body to be returned to UK for burial.
Grandmother, who is legal guardian to elder baby, is advised not to go to India.
Grandmother fears children are not well either.
Husband is now quoted as saying “I want to stay in the UK but I won’t let my kids go on a plane on their own. I won’t let them leave without me.”
Unusual potential three-way international child custody dispute brewing over two babies now in India?
Hopefully not. India is not a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.
Read more in this UK Mail article: British bride who sought new life in India dies ‘of sore throat’ ten days after her wedding.
Gay male Manhattan couple adopt Baby together, using a surrogate mother.
Couple splits up before very long.
Court awards rotating joint physical custody.
Dad is awarded the weekends. Pop is awarded the weekdays.
Not satisfied, Dad allegedly procures a fake driver’s license - using Pop’s information.
Dad uses it to apply for a passport for Baby.
One visit, Dad asks Pop for a couple of extra days with Baby. Pop agrees.
Comes time for the return, Dad doesn’t show up at the agreed time. Or later.
Dad sends Pop an e-mail informing him that he has taken Baby to Israel - and will not be returning to the US.
New York cops call Dad on his cell phone. Dad freely admits his actions.
What gives? Simple.
Dad has studied the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. In Dad’s legal opinion, under the Hague Convention, Dad may remain with Baby in Israel.
Dad further concludes that Israel will not extradite him for mere custodial interference.
Dad, in effect, acted as his own lawyer - and, at his own peril, misinterpreted the law.
Based on Dad’s conduct, the New York court revokes Dad’s visitation.
And, contrary to Dad’s legal opinion, the Israeli family court rules that it has no jurisdiction, under the Hague Convention or otherwise. It holds that New York has jurisdiction over Baby.
Meanwhile, Dad is charged with custodial interference in New York. Other charges may follow.
Unfortunately for Dad, conviction for custodial interference carries a sentence of up to four years’ imprisonment.
Dad really should have consulted with an attorney.
Read more in this NY Times article: Man Arrested in Abduction Misread Law, Official Says.
Boy lives in Poland with Mother, Grandfather and Grandmother, after Father dies.
Mother moves out of area and leaves Boy with Grandparents, visiting only occasionally.
Court temporarily restricts Mother’s parental rights and awards custody to Grandmother.
Grandmother and Grandfather divorce. Grandfather continues to live in same home with Grandmother and Boy.
Grandmother dies.
Mother removes Boy from Grandfather and disappears.
Court places Boy in Grandfather’s foster care permanently.
Mother fails to return Boy to Grandfather’s care.
It is later found that Mother removed Boy from Poland to Ireland.
Upon locating Boy, Grandfather applies for return of the Boy to his custody in Poland under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.
Mother claimed that she left Poland, among other reasons, because Grandfather had a preferential relationship with the local authorities in Poland. Mother presented no proof of that though.
Mother also denied Grandfather’s custodial rights at the time she removed Boy from Poland, despite Polish court orders restricting her custodial rights and awarding Grandfather custodial rights.
The Court also found that the Mother had done little to maintain a relationship with Boy and had repeatedly, willfully ignored lawful Polish court orders.
Although the Boy expressed the wish to remain with his Mother in Ireland, the Court found that the Boy was immature and subject to Mother’s influence.
The Mother was subject to an arrest warrant for abducting Boy.
The Court also found that the Boy had not really settled in Ireland and that there did not appear to be a risk to the Boy if returned to Poland.
For all of the above reasons, the Irish court ordered return of Boy to Poland, his place of habitual residence before his wrongful abduction.
The Irish court concluded that any further custody proceedings should take place in Poland. The Irish court did not decide who should have custody.
Read more in this Irish Times article: Boy must be returned to his grandfather in Poland.
American Wife and Belgian Husband separate. Wife allows children to travel to Belgium to spend the entire summer of 2006 there with Husband.
Husband keeps children in Belgium beyond date they were supposed to return. Further, Husband, filed for - and won - sole custody of the children in a Belgian court.
This isn’t a case where the Wife was reckless or foolish in handing over the kids for this international jaunt. No, a US Court ordered Wife to send the kids to Belgium to visit Husband for the summer.
The US Court was presumably influenced by the fact that Belgium is a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. But Wife hasn’t seen her kids for two years now - except via webcam, on occasion.
The family did live in Belgium for a time, but it was reportedly agreed to be only on a temporary basis while Husband completed his studies there. Further, when Husband, according to Wife (and her mother), became physically and verbally abusive and threatening toward Wife and the children during a visit to the US in 2004, Wife refused to return with him to Belgium.
Due to the Husband’s defiance of US court orders, the first entered anywhere, the US court refuses to entertain any arguments by the Husband against child custody jurisdiction in the US.
But that doesn’t transport the children back to the US and their mother, Wife.
Read more in this Lake County [IL] News-Sun article: Couple’s custody dispute has a 4,000-mile barrier.
Japan may be a modern country technologically. But not legally, according to reports.
In approximately 80% of divorce and paternity cases in Japan, the father loses all parental rights, excluding the “right” to pay child support. In the remainder of cases, it is the mother who is stripped of her parental rights.
Visitation? That’s not a concept that is part of Japanese family law.
When parents break up, the “other parent” fades out of their children’s lives. Another family member may even adopt their children without their consent.
How does a parent win custody in Japan?
One alleged way to get a leg up on a custody award in Japan is to abscond with the child, even across international boundaries.
Statistics suggest that some 10,000 children in Japan have no access to their foreign parent.
Japan is a not yet a signatory to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.
Although there are rumors that it will adopt the convention in a couple of more years, one has to wonder whether it will really matter.
Japanese family law is in need of a paradigm shift. Without that, change may be a pipe dream.
Japan did sign the Convention of New York, the purpose of which was to assure children access to both parents. It didn’t.
Family law activists in Japan are lobbying for a long overdue overhaul of the Japanese family law.
Read more in this Singapore Straits Times article: Over 160,000 Japanese children split from one parents every year.
Husband and Wife meet right here in Southeast Florida. Wife confides that she is an illegal immigrant.
Husband and Wife marry. Husband sponsors Wife for a green card.
Marriage breaks down.
Husband asks for postnuptial agreement. His apparent intention was that it serve as a divorce settlement.
Proposed agreement reportedly removed custody of any future child of theirs from Wife.
Wife refused to sign agreement. Husband threw Wife out of house.
Then took her back. And so on.
Child was born. Divorce began.
Wife was awarded primary residential custody of Child. Until the day Homeland Security showed up and instructed her to turn Child over to Husband despite the Court’s order.
Husband apparently put Homeland Security onto Wife, claiming to have learned of her illegal status only after the marriage.
Wife was detained for some time and threatened with deportation. Wife was eventually freed, due to Husband’s history of domestic violence.
But when Wife returned to their home, Husband and Child had vanished. Husband claimed to be in Panama with Child.
Wife had never consented to issuance of a passport to Child, so Husband’s story seemed questionable.
Wife obtained court orders requiring Husband to return Child to her custody. To no avail.
About nine months later, Wife got word that Child, now almost 2 years old, had died of pneumonia in Panama.
There were some seeming irregularities in Husband’s and the attending physician’s accounts of how Child died and the circumstances leading up to Child’s death. Wife believes Husband was negligent in caring for Child.
Wife plans to sue Husband over Child’s death. And hopes that he is prosecuted for passport fraud and parental kidnapping.
But none of that will bring Child back …
Read more in this NBC6 TV article: S. Fla. Mother Wants Answers To Baby’s Death In Panama.
Maltese Wife, Turkish Husband and their 6 year old daughter lived in Turkey.
Wife told Husband she wanted to return to Malta.
Husband then blocked Wife’s access to the Child and applied to the Turkish Family Court for temporary custody of the Child.
The Turkish Court then prohibited the Child from leaving Turkey before a custody decision was made.
Wife nonetheless removed Child from Turkey to Malta without Husband’s knowledge.
Then the Turkish Court awarded temporary custody of the Child to Husband.
The Husband filed an application for return of the Child to Turkey under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.
The Maltese Court ruled that Turkey was the habitual residence of the Child.
Under the Hague Convention, that ruling would normally mandate return of the Child to the country of habitual residence for a custody decision to be made there.
But the Maltese Court nonetheless held that the Child should remain in Malta.
The Maltese Court based its ruling on the following:
Read more in this Malta Independent article: Court: Court bars return of child to Turkish father.
| Listen to Janet |
See if the nonprofit Association against Hidden Family Abuse, Inc. can help you or someone you care about.