U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention December 2001 Issues in Resolving A Message From OJJDP Cases of International Child The criminal abduction of one’s child is painful enough to any parent, but Abduction by Parents that anguish is compounded when the missing child has been removed from the country by an abducting parent. Janet Chiancone, Linda Girdner, and Patricia Hoff The fact that many kidnapped chil- Many children who are abducted to other intensified their sense of alienation. Some dren who are taken to other coun- countries by parents are never returned are fleeing domestic violence, whereas tries are never returned to their to the United States. A parent who is left others are controlling and abusive families only intensifies the trauma behind when a child is abducted to anoth- themselves. suffered by parents who are victim- er country faces daunting obstacles to ized by such abductions and adds Many abducting parents go home after to their anxiety for the recovery and finding and recovering the child. At first, their marriages break up. For most return of their children. To understand the left-behind parent does not know who international abductors, home is in an- more clearly the challenges that can or will help. The parent’s emotional other country with a different legal sys- these cases present, OJJDP has and financial resources soon are stretched tem, social structure, culture, and lan- funded a study designed to identify to the limit. When years pass without the guage. These differences—plus physical barriers encountered by those seek- return of the child, the parent is left with distance—make locating, recovering, and ing to resolve cases of international unresolved grief. As one parent has stat- returning internationally abducted chil- child abduction by parents. ed, “It’s worse than if your child died, be- dren especially complex and problematic. cause you cannot say the child is at peace This Bulletin features key findings now. You live every day wondering if your from that research, which was con- child is OK, if she is being abused or ne- Background on ducted for OJJDP by the American glected. You never get over it.” Often, the Bar Association Center on Children and the Law. The Bulletin also pro- parents whose children are returned do International Parental vides an overview of international not want to let their children out of their Abduction parental abductions and describes sight. They live constantly looking over Parental abduction is defined as the “tak- the legal framework impacting such their shoulders—believing that it could ing, retention, or concealment of a child cases. happen again. or children by a parent, other family mem- ber, or their agent, in derogation of the It is our hope that the critical infor- Parents who abduct their children to other mation offered herein from a variety custody rights, including visitation rights, countries are not that different from par- of knowledgeable sources—public of another parent or family member” ents who abduct their children to other and private—will promote under- States.1 They often have young children. (Girdner, 1994a:1–11). Although abductors standing of the obstacles faced by They usually have support from family or may be other family members or their those seeking to reunite children other individuals for what they are doing. agents (e.g., a girlfriend, boyfriend, grand- unlawfully removed from this country They generally do not value the other par- parent, or even a private investigator), with their families and thus contribute ent’s relationship with the child. Some are in most cases the abductor is the child’s to overcoming these barriers to convinced that their actions are justified parent (Girdner, 1994a). recovery. because they believe they rescued their In 1988, a nationwide telephone house- child from the hands of an abusive parent. hold survey helped researchers estimate Many feel disenfranchised from American the number of family abductions (to both society, and separation and divorce have domestic and international destinations) (Finkelhor, Hotaling, and Sedlak, 1990). Hague Convention Countries and Effective Dates* This study, known as the National Inci- Argentina 6/1/91 Luxembourg 7/1/88 dence Study on Missing, Abducted, Run- Australia 7/1/88 Former Yugoslav away, and Thrownaway Children in Amer- Austria 10/1/88 Republic of Macedonia 12/1/91 ica (NISMART),2 categorized cases as Bahamas 1/1/94 Mauritius 10/1/93 follows: Belgium 5/1/99 Mexico 10/1/91 Belize 11/1/89 Monaco 6/1/93 ◆ “Broad scope” cases are those in which Bosnia-Herzegovina 12/1/91 Netherlands 9/1/90 a family member either took a child in Burkina Faso 11/1/92 New Zealand 10/1/91 violation of a custody agreement or Canada 7/1/88 Norway 4/1/89 decree or failed to return or release a Chile 7/1/94 Panama 6/1/94 child at the end of a legal or agreed- China: Poland 11/1/92 upon visit (in violation of a custody Hong Kong Admin. Region 9/1/97 Portugal 7/1/88 agreement or decree) and kept the Macau 3/1/99 Romania 6/1/93 child away at least overnight. In 1988, Colombia 6/1/96 St. Kitts/Nevis 6/1/95 an estimated 354,100 children were Croatia 12/1/91 Slovak Republic 2/1/2001 abducted under this definition. Cyprus 3/1/95 Slovenia 4/1/95 Czech Republic 3/1/98 ◆ “Policy focal” cases fit the broad scope South Africa 11/1/97 Denmark 7/1/91 Spain 7/1/88 definition but also have at least one of Ecuador 4/1/92 Sweden 6/1/89 the following characteristics: (1) the Finland 8/1/94 Switzerland 7/1/88 abductor attempted to conceal the France 7/1/88 Turkey 8/1/2000 taking or whereabouts of the child Germany 12/1/90 United Kingdom 7/1/88 and prevent contact between the Greece 6/1/93 Bermuda 3/1/99 other parent and the child, (2) the Honduras 6/1/94 Cayman Islands 8/1/98 child was transported out of State, or Hungary 7/1/88 Falkland Islands 6/1/98 (3) evidence existed that the abductor Iceland 12/1/96 Isle of Man 9/1/91 intended to keep the child indefinitely Ireland 10/1/91 Monserrat 3/1/99 or affect custodial privileges perma- Israel 12/1/91 Venezuela 1/1/97 nently. About 46 percent (163,200) of Italy 5/1/95 Zimbabwe 8/1/95 the broad scope cases in 1988 fell into this narrower definition (Finkelhor, Hotaling, and Sedlak, 1991). All inter- *Date each country’s treaty with the United States took effect. This list is current as of publication. The most up-to-date list is available on the Web at travel.state.gov/hague_list.html. national parental abductions are cate- gorized as policy focal. International abduction destinations vary, Child Abduction Remedies Act (ICARA), United States currently does not. If a child often depending on whether a country is 42 U.S.C. §§ 11601–11610. is abducted to a country that is not a party easily reached by airline, whether a coun- to the Hague Convention or if the child try’s courts are unwilling to enforce for- A Hague Convention proceeding is a civil was abducted before the country became eign custody orders, and whether family proceeding brought in the party country a party, then the Hague Convention does support is available for foreign-born ab- to which the child was abducted or in not apply. In such instances, the left-behind ductors fleeing to their home country which the child is retained. If the Hague parent has very few options. The courts (Hegar, 1990). Previous research has found proceeding is commenced within 1 year in the other country do not have to honor that countries with the greatest volume of of the abduction or retention, the judge a custody order issued by a U.S. court. both incoming and outgoing applications must order the child returned, usually to Sometimes, the parent’s only option is to under a multilateral international treaty the country of habitual residence. Return pursue the custody case in the courts of (i.e., the Hague Convention, as discussed is discretionary if more than 1 year has the other country, where the laws, the court below) are the United States, the United passed and the child is settled in the new system, and often the language are unfamil- Kingdom, Canada, Germany, France, and environment. The abducting parent can iar. Pursuing cases in this way has worked Mexico (Agopian, 1987; Markey, 1993). raise defenses, but the defenses are pur- in some countries but not in others. posely limited. A Hague Convention case The Legal Framework is not about the “best interests of the When a child of a custodial parent in an- child” but rather is about returning the other country is abducted to the United Civil law. The Hague Convention on the child to the jurisdiction that should hear States, the parent has the option of asking Civil Aspects of International Child Abduc- the custody matter. A petition for the the court in the jurisdiction in which the tion (Hague Convention) is an internation- return of a child can be brought by a par- child is found to enforce the foreign cus- al treaty currently in force between the ent with a sole or joint custody order or tody decree. This remedy is provided United States and 50 other countries. The by a parent who does not yet have a cus- under section 23 of the Uniform Child treaty only applies between countries that tody order.