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.