Florida Divorce * Child Custody * Domestic Violence Law Lawyer | Boca Raton

Washington State Husband and Wife have Son together.

Wife is allegedly threatened and abused by Husband. Husband denies such allegations.

Wife flees with Son to live in Senegal and Thailand.

After Son reaches the age of eighteen, Wife and Son return to Washington.

And Wife is arrested on charges of custodial interference.

Wife enters plea bargain under which prosecutors recommend a sentence of thirty days’ incarceration.

The trial court, however, repudiates the prosecution’s sentence recommendation and instead sentences Wife to one hundred eighty days’ confinement, with credit for time served. Leaving almost three months to go on Wife’s sentence.

Neither Senegal nor Thailand are parties to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Read more in this Seattle Times news article: Chehalis woman sentenced in child custody case.

California Husband and Wife, who is originally from Greece, have a Son together.

When Son is an infant, Wife takes Son to Greece to visit extended family.

And decides not to return to US. And to keep Son in Greece.

Husband promptly obtains a divorce in California. The California family court awards Husband sole custody of Son.

But the Greek family court, even though Greece is a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, does nothing to enforce the US court order.

After a couple of years of that, Husband goes to Greece and simply takes Son back to the US. Husband advises California family court of his actions.

Then Wife, as Husband had done in Greece, files an application under the Hague Convention for Son’s return to Greece.

Inexplicably, the US federal court judge presiding over the Hague Convention case in the US disregards the California family court custody order!

Instead the judge rules that Son return to Wife in Greece at that time, but establishes a rotating timesharing schedule in which Son alternates between Husband and Wife every three months.

Husband appeals the federal trial court’s ruling disregarding the California family court’s custody award.

Eventually, Husband wins his appeal. Son is to return home to California.

But now the US federal court judge rules that Wife should have a final visit with Son in Greece.

Needless to say, Wife once again retains Son in Greece. And cuts off all contact with Husband.

And, despite multiple US court orders requiring Son to be returned to Husband in the US, Son remains in Greece.

The California State Attorney’s office and the US Attorney’s office are both investigating Husband’s case.

Son likely will soon begin kindergarten in Greece.

Even if Wife would permit it, Husband cannot return to Greece to visit Son for fear of being arrested there.

Read more in this Santa Cruz Sentinel article: Watsonville native, Greek citizen embroiled in international custody dispute to get his son back.

California Mother and Father have Son and Daughter (together, Children).

Father is sentenced to jail.

Mother is struggling financially.

Father’s mother (Grandmother) comes from Mexico to visit Mother and Children.

By agreement with Mother, Grandmother takes the Children back to Mexico for about six months.

Grandmother sends Daughter back early.

But, at the end of the six months, refuses to return Son.

Grandmother files in Mexico for legal guardianship of Son, and cuts off contact with Mother.

Mother reports Son as abducted to authorities in California, and files a proceeding for Son’s return to the US under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

California and US government officials meet with their Mexican counterparts.

The Mexican trial courts rule that Son should be returned to Mother in the US.

But Grandmother does not comply … and files appeals and civil rights cases to stall the conclusion of the case.

Seven years after Son’s arrival in Mexico, Mother and Daughter go again to Grandmother’s home. They finally get to see Son after all those years.

Grandmother agrees to allow Son’s return.

Son arrives back in the US on the Fourth of July.

Read more in this Woodland [CA] Record article: Boy reunited with family after prolonged Hague process.

You have to think twice about having a child with someone from Japan. Even if you’re from Japan.

If the parents break up, one gets sole custody of their children and the other gets … absolutely nothing. No custody. No visitation. No contact.

Ever. As though that parent had died.

Unless the custodial parent chooses to allow it.

Who gets custody in Japan?

If one of the parents is not Japanese, the Japanese parent almost always is the one to win custody.

Regardless of what any prior foreign custody determinations may have been.

Making Japan the ideal place for a Japanese parent living abroad to flee with their children.

Other nations have been increasingly vocal in insisting that Japan enter the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

As well as many Japanese family lawyers and parents.

But that would be only the first step necessary to protect the parental rights of foreigners.

Japan’s archaic domestic family law would have to change dramatically as well.

Read more in this Inter Press Service article: Left-Behind Parents Want End to Single Child Custody System and this Conducive Chronicle article: Left Behind Parents.

Central Florida attorney (Stepfather) marries pregnant Mother and raises Son as though Son is his own child from time of Son’s birth here in Florida.

Mother, Son and Stepfather live in Florida.

Mother and Son visit Costa Rica once annually.

In 2004, Mother and Stepfather divorce.

In 2008, Son’s biological father (Father) files a legal case to keep Son in Costa Rica.

The Costa Rican court awards Father temporary custody of Son and orders that Son remain in Costa Rica.

This temporary ruling is upheld in higher Costa Rican courts.

Stepfather files a return application under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, asserting that Son was wrongfully retained in Costa Rica.

Frustrated by the slow progress of that case, Stepfather gets Son back to Florida using private third parties with military backgrounds.

Shortly before the final hearing is supposed to take place in Costa Rica, Stepfather and Mother secure Son’s return to Florida.

Mother and Stepfather are reportedly branded criminals in certain circles.

Father files in a Florida court for Son’s return to Costa Rica under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Father’s Florida case is not about custody of Son, but about the place of Son’s habitual residence prior to Mother’s and Father’s removal of Son from Costa Rica and the proper jurisdiction to determine custody of Son.

Stepfather is litigating this case vigorously, having thus far lost his gambit to have it dismissed entirely.

Stepfather maintains that his legal paternity of Son was legally established in his divorce from Mother (not a Florida stepparent adoption proceeding). Based on that position, in the eyes of the law, Stepfather was already legally determined to be Son’s legal father here in Florida long prior to Father’s filing of any legal case asserting rights to Son.

But, regardless of the legislative intent behind the Hague Convention, it affords a legal remedy to persons with “rights of custody”, and is not strictly limited to biological or legal parents.

Further, Father counterargues that Stepfather and Mother fraudulently amended their divorce paperwork regarding Son after proceedings in Costa Rica were filed … and that Father had no notice of same.

Stepfather counters back that Father more or less abandoned Son for nine years, before filing in Costa Rica.

A sad and complex case …

Read more in this Ocala [FL] Star-Banner article: Battle for boy back in Ocala.

American Mother and British Father live with their Child, a US citizen, in Chile.

A Chilean family court awards Mother custody of Child in divorce.

The Chilean court also enters a ne exeat order barring Mother from removing Child from the nation of Chile without Father’s consent.

Without Father’s permission, Mother leaves with Child for Texas.

Father files in the US for return of Child to Chile under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

The federal trial court denies Father’s application, holding that the travel restriction does not confer custodial rights on Father which would afford him standing to file under the Hague Convention. Same result at the intermediate federal appellate court.

Father files for review by the US Supreme Court.

And the High Court holds that the ne exeat order does in fact confer a right of custody as that term is used in the Hague Convention, and that the ban on removal of the Child from Chile may be enforced under the Hague Convention by an application for return of the Child.

The Court did not rule on Child’s return, however, remanding for further findings of fact with regard to applicability of certain exceptions to return specified under the Hague Convention.

Read more in this UK Family Law Week article: US Supreme Court decides that ne exeat rights are ‘rights of custody’ and this National Law Journal article: International Abduction Treaty Trumps Parental Rights, Says U.S. Supreme Court.

The US Department of State reminds the world that yesterday was National Missing Children’s Day, in recognition of children abducted abroad by a parent or other family member.

Thousands of children are abducted overseas by loved ones each year.

Last year, more than 2,000 children were abducted to or from the US alone. Many of them have not yet been recovered.

The Department of State is uniquely qualified to draw attention to this issue as the Central Authorty for the US designated under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Claims by parents left behind in other countries are directed to them under the Hague Convention. And American residents whose children have been abducted out of the US also turn to them for assistance.

Read more in this US Department of State press release: National Missing Children’s Day.

International child abduction.

It’s in the news more and more … and on the rise.

There were one thousand, six hundred and fifty cases of children abducted from the US just last year.

Of those, two hundred and seventy were from California alone.

California is said to be home to many couples where each partner is from a different country.

Unfortunately, even among signatory nations, the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction is not always interpreted and applied similarly.

As a result, left behind parents can go months and years – and longer – without seeing their abducted children … regardless of what the Hague Convention says.

Read more in this KPIX CBS 5 TV news article: California Leads U.S. In Int’l Child Abductions.

Husband and Wife marry in the UK and have Daughter there, where they live.

After a couple of years, Husband and Wife break up.

Wife is primary residential parent but Husband has substantial visitation and timesharing.

Husband is from Libya.

During Husband’s timesharing almost three years ago, Husband allegedly abducts Daughter and flies with her to Libya.

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

Neither Wife nor the UK could do much about the abduction.

Eventually, Wife moves to Libya to pursue legal action there.

Husband allows her little to no contact with Daughter.

Eventually, a Libyan Court grants her timesharing for two hours a week – until Husband appeals successfully.

More than two years later, Wife prevails and is able to return with Daughter to the UK.

By this time, Daughter remembers little English and they are virtual strangers to one another.

Husband will not be prosecuted for kidnapping, by Wife’s agreement.

About three hundred British children are abducted out of the UK by a parent each year.

Read more in this Fabulous: News of the World Magazine article: My husband stole my baby.

It took Son’s Mother’s death and six years of wrangling in Brazilian courts after Mother abducted Son, for Father to be able to see Son and to bring Son home to the US last December.

Grandparents were right there alongside Stepfather as he maneuvered for years to deny Father any contact with Son and to block Father from regaining custody of Son and returning Son to his native New Jersey.

Since Son’s return just several months ago, Grandparents have repeatedly sought access to Son. Now Grandparents are complaining that Father has denied them access to Son for … a whole month.

It is not clear what the legal basis for their position is, if any.

Father reportedly wants therapists to supervise any contact between Grandparents and Son, at least during Son’s adjustment period.

Not getting their way, Grandparents showed up in New Jersey and filed an emergency proceeding for visitation. The Court would not entertain the matter on an emergency basis, of course, but did set a future hearing.

Read more in this Associated Press article: New dispute over boy brought to NJ from Brazil and this AOL News article: Grandmother Fights for Visitation in Goldman Case.

Husband and Wife, are both natives of India who immigrate to the US and become US citizens.

Husband and Wife have Son, who is also a US citizen.

The family lives in the US, specifically California, for Son’s whole life.

Wife is unhappy and now claims to be a victim of abuse.

While on vacation visiting family in India, Wife decides to stay in India to see how she enjoys the work there and to have Son in India while she is doing so.

Husband arguably consents to the seemingly temporary arrangement.

Two months after arriving in India and after Husband files for divorce and custody of Son in the US, Wife seeks an Indian court order awarding her custody and guardianship of Son.

Husband intervenes in the Indian action, arguing that India does not have jurisdiction over Son.

The Indian trial court nonetheless proceeds and find for the Wife.

But the intermediate level appellate court reverses, concluding that Son is a permanent resident of the US and merely a temporary resident of India and therefore defers to the California court’s jurisdiction over Son.

The case is now on appeal to the Supreme Court of India.

Its forthcoming ruling will impact many families in similar situations.

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

Read more in this [Indian] Daily News & Analysis article: Can Indian judiciary interfere with orders of courts abroad? SC to decide.

French Husband and American Wife divorce in France, where Husband, Wife and Son have been living.

Husband and Wife enter agreement that Son will live with Husband in France.

Wife has timesharing with Son in US for last year’s Christmas holiday. Wife is expected to send Son back to France on January 3rd of this year.

But Wife keeps Son with her.

Husband files for Son’s return to France under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

In a Colorado trial court, Wife alleges that Husband perpetrated domestic violence against her in Son’s presence and that Son appears to be the victim of emotional abuse by Husband.

Wife also contends that Husband had her institutionalized in France to coerce her into divorce and into agreeing to give Husband custody of Son.

Husband does not deny these allegations. Husband’s position appears to be that they are irrelevant.

The trial court disagrees … and appoints a therapist to evaluate Son’s maturity and wishes.

Read more in this Pueblo [CO] Chieftain article: Pueblo woman embroiled in international custody case and this Pueblo [CO] Chieftain article: Mother: Coerced to give up son.

Mother and Father have three year old Daughter. Mother and Father divorce.

Mother is from Ecuador. Divorce judgment permits Mother to take Daughter to visit Ecuador, but only upon prior notice to Father.

Father goes to Mother’s house in Michigan to pick Daughter up. And finds house empty.

Then Mother reportedly calls Father to tell him that they are in Ecuador.

In a letter, Mother notes that she feels “alienated” since their divorce. Mother also alleges that Father abuses drugs and that Daughter suffered burns several times while with Father.

Father maintains that child protective services has already investigated and cleared him.

Mother hires Michigan attorney, who contends that Mother is trying to protect Daughter.

Mother faces charges of parental kidnapping.

Father maintains that Mother is unstable and should not have Daughter.

Ecudador is a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Father is seeking Daughter’s return under the Hague Convention.

Read more in this WZZM ABC 13 news article: Greenville dad says his daughter was taken to Ecuador illegally.

American missionaries travel to Haiti to rescue thirty-three earthquake orphans by taking them, temporarily, to an orphanage in the Dominican Republic, and then back to families in the US prepared to take the children in.

According to their lawyer, the missionaries are said to be in possession of paperwork backing up their authorization to remove the children from Haiti. But it is unclear whether the authorization is proper, or whether the children had passports.

It turns out that twenty of the children may not actually be orphans and may have one or more living parents. And their parents allegedly claim that the missionaries were only supposed to educate the children in the Dominican Republic, not take them to the US.

Now the missionaries are detained, under arrest in Haiti, for kidnapping the children into the Dominican Republic and for criminal conspiracy.

Rumor suggests that the missionaries’ leader may have misled others in their group about their humanitarian mission and/or legal procedure. The leader is under investigation in the US in connection with other possible crimes. But she reportedly maintains that the children’s parents wanted to give their children a better life.

It does not appear that most of the missionaries were aware that it would be illegal to remove the childen from Haiti without proper legal authorization.

The Haitian court has three months to rule on this case. Kidnapping is punishable in Haiti by up to fifteen years’ imprisonment.

Read more in

• this China Central Television article: Missionaries charged with child abduction
• this Salem [OR] News article: Five of Ten Americans on Child Abduction Charges Taken to Port-au-Prince Court
• this UK Times article: US Baptists charged with Haiti child abduction face 15 years in jail
• this New York Times article: Haiti Charges Americans With Child Abduction

Maltese Mother and Scottish Father are divorced.

Mother has custody of their Daughter and they live in Malta.

Father lives in Scotland.

Last November, Mother and Daughter go to Scotland to visit relatives.

While they are there, Father requests a visitation day in Scotland. Mother agrees.

But Father refuses to return Daughter and accuses Mother of keeping Daughter in a dangerous and unsanitary environment.

Because of Father’s allegations, Scottish authorities detain Daughter in Scotland pending a hearing.

Daughter remains in Scotland for almost two months, attending a Scottish school, before any hearing.

In early January, the Scottish court finds that Husband has no rightful claim to custody of Daughter and rules that Daughter should be returned to Malta under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Read more in this Times of Malta article: Girl returned to mother after ‘nightmare’.

The goal of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction is to facilitate return of internationally abducted children to their home states within a brief six weeks.

Unfortunately, this is a far cry from the reality.

According to an article written from the British perspective, one-third of children abducted from the UK to other countries which have signed the Hague Convention are not returned within a year. Several countries typically require well over a year, or even a couple of years, for cases to run the course of their legal system.

Some countries which are parties to the Hague Convention reportedly never return children. Others rarely do so.

According to the article, Hague Convention signatory countries least likely to return children to the UK (and, presumably, anywhere else) are:

• Croatia

• Ecuador

• Honduras

• Mauritius

• Peru

• Serbia

• Sweden

• Zimbabwe

According to the article, even the US refused to return one-third of abducted children.

Of course, some cases of non-return by Hague Convention signatories may be the result of good faith differences in findings of fact or good faith differences in the application of the law of the Convention (particularly the exceptions) to the facts of the cases.

But, if this is the track record of the countries that agreed to the Hague Convention, the even poorer track records of non-party countries shouldn’t be surprising.

Read more in this [UK] Guardian article: Third of abducted children not returned home after a year.

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

Yet it took nearly six years and massive political and legal effort to secure the return to this country from Brazil of a little American boy abducted by his mother … who died over a year ago.

That boy reportedly was far from the only American (or other non-Brazilian) child abducted to Brazil.

On the other hand, India is not a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Yet, in a recent case there, the Indian Supreme Court ruled that an Indian Wife who had been permanently residing in the UK with her Husband and their child, must return to the UK with their child for custody proceedings there.

Ultimately, the adverse impact of Brazil’s conduct on future trade with the US may have propelled Brazil to finally send the boy home.

Now, a Congressman from that boy’s home state, New Jersey, has introduced legislation intended to promote enforcement of the Hague Convention by appointing an official to monitor compliance and to empower the government to impose sanctions for noncompliance.

An international network of judges is also communicating in the hope of facilitating timely returns of abducted children.

Read more in this [India] Daily News and Analysis article: SC asks NRI woman to fight child custody battle in England and this Baltimore Sun article: Justice for stolen kids and this [New Jersey] Hub article: Legislators call for bill on international child abduction.

Few international parental child abductions have received as much media attention as this Boy’s abduction to Brazil by his Mother, but that didn’t help much.

His Father has been fighting to get him back home since 2004.

Even after Mother died in Brazil last year, the Brazilian courts still dragged their heels in returning Boy to his Father in the US – despite Brazil being a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Numerous politicians and celebrities have spoken out in support of Father and reached out to their counterparts and contacts in Brazil in the hopes of freeing the Boy.

But none of that helped either.

The President of this country finally called the President of Brazil … but it isn’t clear that that helped much either.

No, what reportedly finally did the trick was Congress holding up a trade deal worth almost $3 billion to Brazil.

And thanks to their astuteness, Father and Son are finally reunited and their flight touched down here in Florida a short time ago.

Read more in this Associated Press article: Boy, American dad arrive in US from Brazil.

Mexican Mother is awarded custody of Son by a Mexican court.

Wealthy French Father, accompanied by counsel, takes papers that look like official Mexican court papers before a Texas judge, representing that he has legal custody of Son.

The Mexican court papers were reportedly incomplete and misleading.

Apparently, neither Father’s counsel nor the court verified them.

Texas judge enters pick-up order for Son, with a hearing date scheduled for shortly afterwards.

Law enforcement officers pick up Son, who protests vigorously the entire time, to the effect that Father beats him.

Officers ignore Son’s words.

Mother tries to get Son back at airport.

Son refuses to accompany her – out of fear that Father will kill Mother.

Father absconds with Son.

Not for the first time, according to Mother.

Father and Son miss scheduled court date.

Texas court issues warrant for Father’s arrest on perjury and custodial interference.

That was two months ago.

Father allegedly abducted Son to France for two years, reportedly beating him and leaving him unsupervised and denying any contact at all with Mother.

Read more in this Fox News article: Worldwide Manhunt Under Way for Fugitive Father, Missing Son and this San Antonio Express News article: Dad accused of perjury, kidnapping.

Allegedly abusive American Husband goes to China in 2007 to teach English, leaving behind in New York his undocumented Mexican immigrant Wife and their Baby.

Later, Husband contacts Wife and invites her and two year old Baby to China to reconcile.

Within a day of Wife’s and Baby’s arrival, Husband reportedly disappears with Baby. Husband takes up with Chinese Girlfriend.

Husband leaves Baby with a babysitter and fails to pick her up. Baby ends up in a Chinese orphanage. After Husband allegedly abducts her.

Wife and Mexican Embassy official show up where Husband is staying. Husband goes after them both with knives, but is not prosecuted in China.

Wife obtains a New York State court order, awarding her sole custody of Baby.

China is not a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction and does not recognize foreign child custody orders.

Wife obtains a US visa by virtue of being a victim of domestic violence. Husband is deported from China.

Warrant is issued in US and Husband is arrested by US federal authorities for international parental kidnapping.

A combination of US nonprofit agency attorneys, private attorneys, Chinese private investigators, the Mexican consulate in China, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the US State Department, and Wife’s resourcefulness, initiative and determination culminated in Wife finding Baby, abandoned in the Chinese orphanage.

Read more in this New York Times article: Family Fights Odds, Retrieving Kidnapped Girl.

UK Grandmother is legal guardian of her two granddaughters (Girls).

Girls’ Mother abducts the Girls to Morocco.

Unlike the UK, Morocco is not a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Abduction.

Now Mother won’t return Girls to the UK and Grandmother.

The matter is in legal limbo in Morocco.

Grandmother would like to fly there to expedite things, but can’t afford the flight.

UK officials are negotating through the Moroccan Ambassador to the UK.

The Moroccan Ministry for Foreign Affairs has requested a document explaining the circumstances in both Engllish and Arabic.

That will be the basis of the decision by a Moroccan judge.

Mother is charged with child abduction.

Read more in this Blackpool [UK] Gazette article: Help us fly out to get our girls.

Husband and Wife separate after an alleged incident of domestic violence to keep the peace between them. Neither wants anything to threaten Wife obtaining legal residency status in the US.

While Husband and Wife are separated, Wife and 5 year old Son live in Mexico, where both Wife and Husband are from. Unlike Wife though, Husband and Son are US citizens.

After two years of this separation, Husband allegedly abducts Son back to the US. Husband insists that he just wants Son to have access to better medical care for his tonsillitis.

Communications with Husband and Son having tapered off, Wife makes an application for return of Son to Mexico under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Because Son has lived in Mexico for two years prior to his abduction, a US court rules that Son must return to Mexico for the custody case there.

This case stands out in that most cases concerning Mexico and the US involve an abduction from the US to Mexico, rather than the reverse as here.

It is not clear that Husband will pursue his custody case in Mexico, since it reportedly tends to favor mothers.

Read more in this Orange County [CA] Register article: 5-year-old boy returned to mother in Mexico.

Turkish Husband and British Wife and baby Daughter live in Turkey … and UK.

Couple are divorcing.

Wife flees with Daughter from Turkey to UK via Greece.

Wife obtains an order of protection in the UK upon learning that Husband is in London.

Husband makes application for return of Daughter to Turkey under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Wife contends in a UK Court that Husband abuses her and that Husband and his family abducted Daughter last year.

UK Court finds that Husband and Wife evenly divided their time between the UK and Turkey (meaning that either country could be viewed as the child’s “habitual residence” under the Hague Convention), but that Daughter was born in Turkey.

Expressing its opinion that the Turkish courts are “much admired” in the UK and that the Turkish Court has shown no bias in Husband’s and Wife’s case, the UK Court orders Wife to return to Turkey with Daughter for the custody case.

Wife is devastated by the ruling.

Read more in this Ilford [suburban London, England] Recorder article: Mum told to return to Turkey for child custody battle.

US-resident Mother refuses to allow Son to visit Israel-resident Father and attend school there for a year.

Both Israel and the US are parties to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Mother opposes, ironically citing a provision of the Hague Convention intended primarily for the benefit of fleeing victims of domestic violence.

The provision allows a court to refuse an otherwise-required return of a child if there is a serious risk that the child will be harmed, physically or psychologically, by return.

In this context, Mother, like others before her, argues that terrorism strikes in Israel make it too dangerous to order her child there.

Ohio judge partially accepts Mother’s argument. Court rules that child should go to Israel … but is barred from Haifa, Israel.

Other US judges have been in full sympathy with Mother’s argument in denying returns.

An Ohio attorney takes exception to the characterization of Israel as a “war zone” and believes that rulings refusing to return children to Israel aid terrorists at Israel’s expense.

That attorney has established a nonprofit association in Israel to assist parents pursuing return of their children to Israel.

It is reported that ten percent of divorced couples in Israel are new immigrants.

Read more in this Israel Haaretz article: Lawyer from U.S. sets up body to repatriate abducted Israeli kids

Tennessee Husband and Japanese immigrant Wife have two children. Couple divorce.

Wife is unhappy in Tennessee. She writes to Husband of her concerns that their children are “losing Japanese identity”.

Over the course of a year, Husband repreatedly asks Tennessee court to prohibit Wife from removing children from the US. These are not idle requests.

In Japan, the noncustodial parent more or less fades out of a child’s life after divorce. Mothers almost always get custody. Foreign parents almost never get custody – or timesharing (or visitation).

The Tennesee court does not really share Husband’s concerns that Wife may abscond with the children. After all, Wife testifies that she will stay in Tennessee; she just wants a vacation with relatives in Japan.

So, passports are released to Wife. Wife and children vacation in Japan.

And return to Tennessee. Wife retains passports.

Then, two weeks later, in August, the children’s school calls Husband to report their absence from school. News to Husband.

Wife is on her way to Japan with their children.

Now Tennessee court awards Husband full custody of the children.

So what is an American father to do?

In this case, Husband goes to Japan, grabs his abducted kids while they are walkling to school, and walks toward the US Consulate.

But before Husband can reach the safe haven of the US Consulate, he is arrested while still on Japanese soil … for kidnapping his own children, of whom he has sole custody under US law.

Husband is now in a Japanese jail, waiting to learn his fate. Wondering: will he be prosecuted for kidnapping his own children, of whom he has sole custody under US law?

Since 1980, Japan has refused to enter the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

The US, Canada, Britain and France have all called upon Japan to sign. And resolve numerous cases where abducted children have foreign parents totally cut out of their lives, as though they had never been.

Read more in this Associated Press article via Google: Dad jailed in Japan warned ex-wife would take kids and this CNN article: Group calls for release of American dad jailed in Japan

Unmarried British Mother and Spanish Father have Daughter together.

Daughter is born in UK.

The family lives in Tenerife Island, Spain for over a year.

Daughter has serious heart condition.

Mother and Daughter return to the UK.

According to Mother, Father encouraged them to return to the UK for family support.

Both Spain and the UK are parties to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Further, Tenerife law, apparently requires formal government permission to remove a child who has lived there for more than a year and who is the biological child of a Spaniard.

Father concedes that he does not take advantage of easy opportunities to visit Daughter and, according to Mother, Father never calls to find out about Daughter.

Nonetheless, some eight months of silence after Mother’s and Daughter’s return to the UK, police appear at Mother’s home and seize her passport.

Mother learns that she is required to return with ill Daughter to Tenerife, to appear in court there for the purpose of determining custody of Daughter.

Father reportedly now wishes to seek custody of Daughter.

Father comments that he does not want to go to court in England … because “it’s not my country”.

So much better to drag his sick child back to court in Tenerife.

Read more in this UK Daily Mail article: Tug of love mother must fly to court in Tenerife to fight for daughter, 5, after being accused of abducting her.

A British college instructor (Father) hasn’t seen his Daughter in fourteen years.

Her Mother allegedly abducted her from the UK to Brazil at that time.

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

But Brazil sometimes seems to follow the Convention only at its pleasure.

Brazilian authorities have reportedly told Father he is not welcome in Brazil.

Father is now appealing to the UK government to intervene with Brazil, but probably too late to do any good even under the Hague Convention. Daughter is now 17 years old.

Mother reportedly changed Daughter’s name as part of an improper adoption.

Read more in this Kent Online article: Lecturer vows to battle on over estranged Brazilian daughter.

New York Father and Italian immigrant Mother battle for custody of Son.

Mother accuses Father of child abuse.

But police and psychologists see things differently.

Mother is diagnosed with various psychological disorders and is found to have alienated Son from Father.

Father is awarded sole custody of Son and Court prohibits Son’s removal from US.

Nonetheless, Mother gets Son at school and abducts him to her native Italy.

Where she continues to accuse Father of abuse.

In time, child welfare authorities in Italy discredit Mother’s allegations and remove Son from Mother’s custody …

And place Son in an orphanage. Two years ago.

While Father is denied any contact with Son at all.

Father has finally been allowed supervised visitation.

But the Italian courts won’t allow him to take Son home.

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

Read more in this West Palm Beach Examiner article: American father Michael McCarty fights to rescue his son from an Italian orphanage.

Abductions of children across international borders continue to increase.

In the UK, the number of such cases (and some cases involve more than one child) has risen from 488 in 2006 to 554 in 2008. It is likely that not all abductions are properly reported.

Most such abductions are by one of the parents of the child.

The most common places that children are abducted to from the UK are:

1. Pakistan
2. USA
3. Spain
4. Ireland
5. France

A Canadian man searching for his missing daughter in the UK has been searching for … sixteen (16) years.

Even with the existence of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction and similar bilateral treaties.

Not the typical case perhaps but …

A British jurist acknowledges that some parents willfully disobey the law, but others don’t even realize that what they are doing is illegal.

Law enforcement tends not to want to get involved in family abduction cases, referring people to family court attorneys.

Unfortunately, the resulting delay can make all the difference in whether an abduction can be stopped or the perpetrator caught.

Potential abduction scenarios are increasing in part because so many people work abroad in this day and age, and form relationships with people in the country where they are working. But they aren’t necessarily educated about the law and the dangers inherent in such situations.

The misled children are the victims in these scenarios. Eventually, they find out the truth and are robbed of their trust.

Most abductors are mothers. Some are fleeing domestic violence. Others just want out.

Read more in this BBC News article: ‘I’ll never end hunt for my girl’.

Two hundred thousand American children are abducted from the US each year, most often by a parent or extended family member.

Such abductions are federal crimes.

But in too many of those cases, the child ends up being raised in a country foreign to them by the abducting family member.

Even when the country the child is abducted to is a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

An international lawyer traveled to his wife’s native Switzerland with her and their one year old son. Switzerland is a party to the Hague Convention.

At the airport for their return trip, his wife refused to give permission for their son to board a plane to the US. The authorities there would not help.

The lawyer later obtained a US judgment awarding him sole custody of his son, and filed an application for return of the boy to the US under the Hague Convention.

Four years later, the man has spent a total of five hours with his son – all in Switzerland – since the abduction and he is no closer to bringing him home.

That is one many such cases, some receiving considerable media atttention, others barely any.

Read more in this Voice of America News article: Where in the World Are America’s Missing Children?