27 Feb The Problem of International Parental Child Abduction
Last month I posted a story about a decision coming out of Indiana that required the non-custodial parent to be subject to supervision during parental visitations. The reason the court issued the order was due to fears that the American-Egyptian father would flee with the child to Egypt and never return.
The comments generated by the post were some of the more engaging and difficult comments I have read on this blog. Story after story of parents struggling with a child who was abducted. Here are a few of the comments:
My Sister was abducted almost fourteen yrs ago, she still has not been recovered. If the court system had protected my sister as they are with this child, I would have gotten to know my sister instead of wondering is she alright, is she even alive. (link)
I still live in fear each day, but as my son gets older, little by little it gets better. But the past 4 years have been a nightmare – wondering each week if something would happen. My son’s mother is dual American-Russian citizen and she has had a long term relationship with a man from another country. Mine is a case of the non-custodial parent (me) worried that the custodial mother will abduct. I received not a thread of sympathy in my local court. I tried protecting my son’s passport, but the court gave it to the mother. Soon after, it expired, and I will not sign for another. But I was notified by the State Department a month ago, that she has fraudulently applied for one for him by lying saying she has sole custody. (link)
Read more … about Adam Haseeb—in his memory…. He is my son who is now deceased. I blame the abduction—and how the State Department handled this case on his death…. Back in the year 2000 I was not notified that his father had obtained a passport on Adam and then while we were still fighting for custody he abducted four year old Adam to Syria. Hakeem Haseeb (Was a U.S. citizen—converted to ISLAM) and had no relatives in Syria…. Adam Haseeb, R.I.P. (November 9, 1995 – March 10, 2004) (link)
My ex-wife obtained passports for my sons Adam and Jason from Dept.of State in 2001. She had no legal custody, and was already on court-ordered supervised visitations because of child abuse. She received a single week ‘unsupervised’ in August 2001, and we have not seen my sons since that day. American born, but with a father born in Egypt her mother assisted her to flee there as she had duel citizenship through him. (link)
My child was abducted to Saudi Arabia in 1997 and remains there to this day. Neither the FBI, the State Department, the US Congress, not the Saudi Government have done anything to repatriate my daughter. The abductor, her non-custodial father, had several of the risk factors mentioned in the ABA Manual. Despite the fact that the judge in my case was well aware of the risk factors, he imposed no supervision on my ex-husband. The result has been 10 years of heartache for my family and me, as well as my kidnapped daughter…. Shame on the judicial system that allows this to happen again and again to the most innocen among us! (link)
My ex-wife abducted my children, Takara (then 10) and Manami (then 7), from Vancouver, B.C. to Japan in November 2004. I had sole custody and guardianship of the children by Order of the Supreme Court of British Columbia but, in keeping with Mr. Alford’s concerns about children being able to maintain strong relationships with both parents (and their extended families), I decided that it was in Takara and Manami’s best interest to visit their grandparents in Japan with their mother. I was wrong. Despite having exhausted all legal avenues within Japan, I have not seen my children for over 2 years…. (link)
Clearly for these individuals the law has failed them. With only 55 signatories, the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction has offered no relief to these and other families. And as for a federal response, to the best of my knowledge, there is no federal law to address the problem of international parental child abductions except for the Hague Convention and the rules regulating the issuance of passports. One of the commenters suggested a possible solution: passing a federal law that would require both parents to be with the child at the port of departure, or alternatively one parent providing notarized documentation of permission from the other parent. I think that is an interesting idea. The State Department also strongly suggests obtaining either a state court decree of sole custody or a decree that prohibits the travel of a child without both parents’ permission or that of the court.
I would be curious if any of our readers are knowledgeable about these issues and have other ideas. I am particularly interested in whether a federal response is appropriate rather than a patchwork of state laws and ad hoc state court decrees.
One of the commenters suggested a possible solution: passing a federal law that would require both parents to be with the child at the port of departure, or alternatively one parent providing notarized documentation of permission from the other parent. I think that is an interesting idea. The State Department also strongly suggests obtaining either a state court decree of sole custody or a decree that prohibits the travel of a child without both parents’ permission or that of the court. While these are good suggestions, they are mere bandaids on the bigger issue of countries (Japan, Germany and Saudi Arabia among the worst offenders) who are essentially kidnapping our citizens by their complicity. The Wall Street Journal has championed the victims on a several occasions in past years, without so much as a shrug from our government. The State Deparment has a long history of being willing to sacrifice individual citizens for continued good relations with our allied countries. It’s long past time that we threatened severe repercussions if our citizens are not immediately returned. We should demand them back, politely but firmly. I doubt many countries would enjoy the spectacle of being held up for international scrutiny for… Read more »
Dear Roger, There actually is Federal legislation relating to this issue. See Title 18, Section 1204. This legislation was passed in 1993 if memory serves correctly. Unfortunately, the U.S. Attorney offices are not well-versed on the issues involved. Also, for some time, the legislation at the state level defining joint custodial rights was less than ideal. However, with the widespread adoption of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, this situation has changed. In fairness to the U.S. Department of Justice, they produced a very informative and specific publication in 2001, which was designed to educate prosecutors on the unique issues involved in child abduction/kidnapping, which can be downloaded from the USDOJ website. That said, from my own personal experience (my wife kidnapped my infant son in 2005 in Switzerland), the U.S. Attorney offices are almost wholly unfamiliar with the latest developments in the law. Moreover, the literature on this issue adequately demonstrates that in most U.S. jurisdictions that the victimized parent will be dismissed summarily–frequently, with comments such as, “We don’t get involved in domestic disputes.” If you explore this further with FBI agents, you will find that there is a substantial level of frustration within their ranks… Read more »
Dear Roger: I’m not surprised at your reprise with this subject – we are all aware that child/family law issues are extremely emotive and add to the mix the international dimension and you have a recipe for tragedy. I concur whole heartedly with the comments regarding the US Department of State, but as a non-American who has received the sharp end of their Hague stick, I believe that “sub-optimal” is far too soft an adjective. The Office of Children’s Issues is staffed by individuals who operate their own agendas outside of official US government policy – Georgina DeBroer, Anne, MacGahuey and Barbara Greig to name a few. While the US is the only Hague signatory that has a Central Authority resident in it’s foreign service rather han justice department children, US and foreign, are going to continue to receive short shrift from being sacrificed in the name of diplomatic expediency or xenophobic/mysandry that also makes repeaed appearances. I research international child abduction issues extensively, and I am confronted by the emotional pleadings of so many parents for their missing children – the Hague Convention is nothing more than oil on very troubled waters – but with each country the focus… Read more »
I received this thoughtful email from a reader and I forward it to you without attribution (but with permission): Hi Roger: Noted your post on Opinio Juris and I have these suggestions in response to how to further prevent international abductions: Prevention i.e. before a child is removed 1. Rigorous enforcement of the two parent signature law (Nance/Donovan etc) for passport issuance to minors within and without the US (removal of passport issuance function from the Department of State); 2. Cessation of domestic violence exception in 8 CFR 51 for issuance of passports to minors 3. Exit controls at point of departure from locations within the US (currently there are none – have passport will travel); 4. Federal level legislation and control – (at the State level it is worthless as it is so easily by-passed and if a child is removed from the US, federal level intervention alone will carry weight with a non-US jurisdiction, State warrants are practically useless) cf Synclair-Cannon Law, California (Larry Synclair and Josef Cannon – put either name in google and you’ll find the legislation) – further unilateral state legislation eg Nebraskan LB 341 sponsor Senator Schimek, can compromise international cooperation between the whole… Read more »