Early Identification of Risk Factors for Parental Abduction

Home , Child abduction, Supervised visitation

U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

March 2001

Early Identification of Risk A Message From OJJDP Factors for Parental While State custody laws vary, the laws of every State establish that Abduction abducting one’s own child is a crime. OJJDP has funded four research projects on preventing family abduc- Janet R. Johnston, Inger Sagatun-Edwards, tions: a documentary study, a cri- Martha-Elin Blomquist, and Linda K. Girdner minal sanctions study, an interview study, and an intervention study. The “You’ll never see your child again!” When ◆ What type of parent abducts his or design and findings of these research are these words an idle threat spoken in her child? projects are described in this Bulletin. anger and frustration and when are they ◆ What role does family violence play in The findings provide information a warning that a parent intends to abduct increasing the likelihood of abduction? regarding the risk factors associated his or her child, depriving the child and with parental kidnaping and strate- the other parent of future contact? ◆ How can one identify which child is at risk of being abducted by a parent or gies that can be used to intervene Although custody laws vary from State to other family members? with families at greatest risk. They State, abducting one’s own child is a address such critical factors as the ◆ What can be done to prevent family crime in every State. If a parent or other characteristics of parents who abduct abductions and protect the child? family member takes, hides, or keeps a their own children, the role family child away from a parent with custody or This Bulletin describes the multiple dis- violence plays in increasing the like- visitation rights, then he or she may have crete research projects that made up the lihood of parental abduction, ways of committed a crime.1 More important, a research study and highlights the find- identifying children at risk of being child often is harmed by life on the run ings. The authors also recommend steps abducted by a parent or other family and by being deprived of his or her other that communities can take to help protect member, and steps that can be taken parent. Prior to abduction, many of these children from family abduction. to protect children from family children have been exposed to neglectful abduction. and abusive behaviors in their homes and Recommendations to increase pa- have witnessed high levels of conflict be- Research Design rental access to legal resources, tween their parents. These children are at The four discrete research projects that develop responses to reported family risk for psychological harm. made up the study were designed to violence, provide services to families The U.S. Department of Justice, Office of involved in custody disputes, protect children’s interests, and create uni- Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Preven- 2 The research study was a collaboration between the tion, funded a research study (Johnston et Judith S. Wallerstein Center for the Family in Transition fied family courts are also included. al., 1998) on prevention of family abduc- and the American Bar Association Center on Children OJJDP believes that the information tion through early identification of risk and the Law. The authors encourage readers to study this Bulletin provides will enhance factors to answer the following questions:2 the full report, Prevention of Parent or Family Abduction Through Early Identification of Risk Factors (Johnston et efforts to identify risk factors for pa- al., 1998), which brings together several years of re- rental abduction and help protect search and provides much greater detail regarding who 1 children from harm. In some States, these actions are a crime if a custody abducts their child, what interventions are effective, order is in place, while in other States, these actions and how to protect the child from family abduction. To are a crime if the parent has a right to custody. order a copy of this report (NCJ 182791), call 800–638– 8736 or send an e-mail to [email protected]. Profiles of Parents At Risk for Abducting Their Children

Profile 1: When There Has Been a Prior In a large number of cases, the child has been previously Threat of or Actual Abduction exposed to neglectful, endangering, or violent environ- When a parent has made credible threats to abduct a child ments (e.g., domestic violence or substance abuse). In or has a history of hiding the child, withholding visitation, or these cases, the courts and child protective services may snatching the child from the other parent, there is great dis- have failed to protect the child and the concerned parent or trust between the parents and a heightened risk of further family member. They may have trivialized the allegations, custody violation. This risk profile is usually combined with dismissing them as invalid or the product of a contentious one or more of the other profiles. In these cases, the under- divorce. Often, however, the allegation of sexual abuse by a lying psychological and social dynamics that motivate the father or stepfather that motivates a mother to abduct her abduction need to be understood and addressed. When other child is unsubstantiated. In these cases, the abduction can risk factors are present, one or more of the following are gen- psychologically harm the child and the other parent, possi- eral indicators of an imminent threat of flight with the child: bly leaving their relationship in serious need of repair. ◆ The parent is unemployed, homeless, and without emo- Profile 3: When a Parent Is Paranoid Delusional tional or financial ties to the area. Although only a small percentage of parents fit this profile, ◆ The parent has divulged plans to abduct the child and has these parents present the greatest risk of physical harm or the resources or the support of extended family and/or death to the child, regardless of whether an abduction oc- friends and underground dissident networks needed to curs. Parents who fit the paranoid profile hold markedly irra- survive in hiding. tional or psychotic delusions that the other parent will defi- ◆ The parent has liquidated assets, made maximum with- nitely harm them and/or the child. Believing themselves to drawals of funds against credit cards, or borrowed money be betrayed and exploited by their former partner, these from other sources. parents urgently take what they consider to be necessary measures to protect themselves and the child. Profile 2: When a Parent Suspects or Believes Psychotic parents do not perceive the child as a separ- Abuse Has Occurred and Friends and Family ate person. Rather, they perceive the child as part of Members Support These Concerns themselves—that is, as a victim (in which case they take Many parents abduct their child because they believe that the unilateral measures to rescue the child)—or they perceive other parent is abusing, molesting, or neglecting the child. the child as part of the hated other parent (in which case These abducting parents feel that the authorities have not they may precipitously abandon or even kill the child). Mari- taken them seriously or properly investigated the allega- tal separation and/or the instigation of the custody dispute tions. Repeated allegations increase the hostility and dis- generally triggers an acute phase of danger for these psy- trust between the parents. Parents who have the fixed belief chotic individuals. The result can be not only parental ab- that abuse has occurred—and will continue to occur—then duction, but also murder and suicide. “rescue” the child, often with the help of supporters who con- cur with their beliefs, justify their actions, and often help with Profile 4: When a Parent Is Severely Sociopathic the abduction and concealment. Supporters might include family members, friends, or underground networks (usually Sociopathic parents are characterized by a long history of women) that help “protective” parents (usually women) ob- flagrant violations of the law and contempt for any authority— tain new identities and find safe locations. including that of the legal system. Their relationships with

identify the characteristics of abductors ◆ Abduction by a parent with rights of files on a range of parental abductions.3 and their families and examine the effec- custody who has a custody order from Third, California is a large State with a tiveness of interventions used to prevent the court (postcustodial abduction). diverse population, and fourth, compara- or respond to child abductions. Research ◆ Abductions by persons with no rights tive data on litigated custody already was conducted in the San Francisco Bay of custody. exist in California. Finally, California pro- Area of California. This location was cho- vides an affirmative defense for victims sen for several reasons. First, California’s Unwed, married, separated, or divorced criminal statute broadly defines parental parents and parents who have sole or abduction (also known as criminal custo- joint custody or visitation or no custody 3 When this study was conducted, California was the dial interference or child stealing) to in- rights can commit parental abduction by only State in which the district attorneys acted as the clude the following offenses: violating the rights of the other parent. enforcement arm of the family court. The Uniform Child-Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act— ◆ Abduction by a parent with rights of A second reason for choosing California is promulgated in 1997 by the National Conference of custody and visitation who has no cus- that, because they are mandated to use Commissioners on Uniform State Laws and approved both civil and criminal remedies to locate by the American Bar Association in 1998—includes tody order from the court (precustodial enforcement provisions similar to California’s. To ob- abduction). and recover abducted children, district tain more information on this Act, visit www.nccusl.org attorneys in California have extensive on the World Wide Web.

2 other people are self-serving, exploitive, and highly ma- Subgroup 1. Parents who are indigent and poorly educated nipulative. These people are also likely to hold exagger- lack knowledge about custody and abduction laws and cannot ated beliefs about their own superiority and entitlement afford the legal representation or psychological counseling that and are highly gratified by their ability to exert power and would help them resolve their disputes. Those parents who control over others. As with paranoid and delusional par- have extended family or other social, emotional, and economic ents, sociopathic parents are unable to perceive their chil- support in another geographical community may be at risk for dren as having separate needs or rights. Consequently, abducting their children. they often use their children as instruments of revenge or Subgroup 2. Many parents cannot afford and are unaware of punishment or as trophies in their fight with the former the need to access the court system. In addition, those who partner. Sociopathic parents have no qualms about con- have had prior negative experiences with civil or criminal tinuing coercive, controlling, and abusive behavior or ab- courts do not expect family courts to be responsive to their ducting their child, nor do they believe that they should be values or their plight. punished for their actions. Like paranoia, a diagnosis of severe sociopathy is rare. Subgroup 3. Parents who belong to certain ethnic, religious, or cultural groups may hold views about childrearing that Profile 5: When a Parent Who Is a Citizen of are contrary to the prevailing custody laws that emphasize Another Country Ends a Mixed-Culture Marriage gender neutrality and the rights of both parents. These parents instead turn to their own social networks for support Parents who are citizens of another country (or who have and use informal self-help measures rather than the courts dual citizenship with the United States) and have strong in disputes over the children. ties to their extended family in their country of origin have long been recognized as potential abductors. The risk of Subgroup 4. A mother who has a transient, unmarried rela- abduction is especially acute at the time of parental sepa- tionship with her child’s father often views the child as her ration and divorce, when these parents may feel cast adrift property, and her extended family supports this belief. Many from their mixed-culture marriage and may need to return of the women in this subgroup assume they have sole cus- to their ethnic or religious roots to find emotional support tody of their child and are genuinely surprised when they are and reconstitute a shaken self-identity. Often in reaction to informed that the father—by law in California and most other being rendered helpless or feeling rejected and discarded States—has joint rights to the child. by the former spouse, such parents may try to take unilateral action by returning with the child to their family of ori- Subgroup 5. Parents who are victims of domestic violence gin. This is a way of insisting that the abducting parent’s are at risk of abducting their child, especially when the courts cultural identity be given preeminent status in the child’s and community have failed to take the necessary steps to pro- upbringing. tect them from abuse or to hold the abuser accountable. Joint custody, mediated agreements, and visitation orders often leave victims vulnerable to ongoing violence, despite separa- Profile 6: When Parents Feel Alienated From the tion from the abuser. When such victims abduct their child, the Legal System and Have Family/Social Support violent partners may successfully obscure the facts about the in Another Community abuse and activate the abduction laws to regain control of their Many subgroups of potential abductors feel alienated from victims. the judicial system. Listed below are five such subgroups.

who are fleeing domestic violence situa- child stealing. Based on these records, A subset of those arrested for multiple tions, thus providing researchers with an researchers developed a general descrip- abductions was also examined. opportunity to assess to what extent and tion of abductors and a summary of the when these kinds of cases are identified legal system’s response to abductions. In the third research study, the “Interview and excluded from charges of parental Study,” Janet Johnston (1998c) conducted child stealing. In the second study, the “Statewide Crimi- indepth interviews with a random sample nal Sanctions Study” (Statewide Study), of 70 parents from 50 abducting families In the first of the four research studies, Martha-Elin Blomquist (1998) examined drawn from the district attorneys’ records the “Documentary Study,” Inger Sagatun- data from statewide criminal history used in the Documentary Study. The par- Edwards (1998) studied 634 parental records for all 950 persons who were ar- ticipants in this study—35 men and 35 child-stealing cases from files opened by rested for violating one of three sections women, half of whom were abductors and the district attorneys in two California of the California criminal code for paren- half of whom were left-behind parents— counties between 1987 and 1990. From tal abduction between 1984 and 1989. also completed psychological question- these documents, information was gleaned Blomquist used various statistical analy- naires. The researchers systematically about each family’s sociodemographic sta- ses to describe the characteristics of of- compared the demographic, legal, psycho- tus, legal situation, abduction circum- fenders, offenses, case dispositions, and logical, and family dynamic characteristics stances, and dispute characteristics and subsequent conduct, including that of of these abducting families with similar the legal system’s response to parental repeat offenders and serial abductions. data from 114 members of 57 high-conflict

3 nonabducting families who were litigating were postcustodial offenses; that is, were the largest group of abductors, custody. the abduction occurred after the issu- followed by Hispanics. In cases re- ance of a court order dictating the cus- ported to the justice system, African Six descriptive profiles of parents at risk tody of the child. In the Statewide Americans who abduct were overrepre- for abducting their children emerged from Study, however, abductions were more sented and Asians who abduct were the findings of the Interview Study (see evenly divided between pre- and underrepresented relative to their the sidebar on pages 2–3). In the fourth postcustodial offenses. percentage in the population. With study, referred to as the “Intervention the exception of the Caucasian group, Study,” Johnston (1998a, 1998b) provided ◆ The Statewide and Documentary Stud- fathers were more likely than mothers instruction to Family Court Services per- ies found that mothers were more likely to abduct. sonnel (who are mandated to mediate all to abduct when a custody order ex- custody disputes in California) on how to isted, whereas fathers were more likely ◆ According to the Documentary and In- identify individuals who fit one or more of to abduct when no custody order ex- terview Studies, abductors were dispro- the descriptive profiles and encouraged isted. The Statewide Study found that portionately unwed, low-income par- the personnel to refer these individuals fathers were twice as likely as mothers ents. Specifically, the Interview Study to the Intervention Study for special inter- to abduct in the absence of a custody found that many of these young parents ventions developed for the profiles. Fifty order. had brief relationships with one an- families identified as fitting one or more ◆ The Statewide and Documentary Stud- other and never developed a pattern of of the risk profiles for abduction were ran- ies discovered that fathers were much working together as parents. The moth- domly assigned to one of two counseling more likely to use force to abduct their ers and their extended family felt that interventions: a brief 10-hour intervention children or to retain them by not re- the child belonged to them and that the that primarily involved diagnostic and turning them from a visitation, where- fathers had few, if any, custodial or visi- referral services or a longer, 40-hour in- as mothers rarely used force to abduct tation rights. Rather than looking to tervention that included more extensive their children. Instead, mothers were the legal system to assign physical counseling and mediation of the family’s more likely to flee with the children or impasse. Other services, such as legal to deny the fathers visitation. These representation and abuse investigations, patterns of behavior reflect that moth- were sought for both intervention groups ers usually have physical possession of An Overview of the as needed. Researchers evaluated the their children. Research Projects parents after 9 months to analyze and ◆ ◆ compare the outcomes of the two types of According to the Documentary and In- Documentary Study. Based on intervention models. The findings of the terview Studies, divorced parents were information gleaned from files four component studies are summarized the largest category of abductors, fol- opened by the district attorneys in the following two sections. lowed by unwed and separated parents. in two California counties, re- When compared with custody-litigating searchers developed a general parents in the Interview Study, abduct- description of abductors and a Findings of the First ing parents were far more likely to be summary of the legal system’s unwed. This group of unwed abducting response to abductions. Three Studies parents also included a subgroup of ◆ The combined findings of the Documen- unwed parents who had cohabited or Statewide Criminal Sanctions tary, Statewide, and Interview Studies had brief transitory relationships. Study. Researchers examined data from California’s criminal that identified the characteristics of fami- ◆ lies in which abduction occurred are sum- Both the Documentary and Interview history records and used various marized below. In most cases, the charac- Studies found that more than one-half statistical analyses to describe teristics were found by two or more of of the abducting parents were poor, un- offenders, offenses, case disposi- these studies, but in some cases, only one employed, unskilled or semiskilled, and tions, and subsequent conduct. of the studies obtained relevant data. poorly educated. Consequently, the poor were overrepresented in the popu- ◆ Interview Study. Researchers ◆ According to the Documentary and lation of abductors and their families. conducted indepth interviews with Interview Studies, children abducted Compared with custody-litigating moth- a random sample of parents from by their parents or other family mem- ers in the Interview Study, mothers in abducting families and, based bers were usually preschoolers. In abducting families were more likely to on their findings, developed six the majority of cases, one child was be unemployed, depend on public assis- descriptive profiles of parents at abducted. tance, and receive no child support risk for abducting their children. from the fathers. Many mothers had ◆ According to the Documentary and ◆ Intervention Study. Researchers few, if any, economic incentives to re- Interview Studies, mothers and fathers provided instruction to Family main in the geographical area. were equally likely to abduct. The ab- Court Services personnel on how ducted child’s parent, usually in his or ◆ According to all three studies, rates of to identify individuals who fit one her midtwenties or midthirties, almost reported abductions and abduction or more of the descriptive profiles. always carried out the abduction, al- arrests varied by race and ethnic back- Personnel were then encouraged though the child’s grandparent or step- ground. The proportions of Caucasian to refer these individuals to the parent occasionally was the abductor. and Hispanic abductors were similar to study for special interventions ◆ The Documentary Study showed that the percentages of these racial groups developed for the profiles. almost two-thirds of the abductions in the general population: Caucasians

4 possession and visitation rights to abuse were similar in abducting and and divorce, were not sufficient in specific individuals, the mothers relied custody-litigating families. themselves to motivate abduction. on their extended family and friends to ◆ According to the Documentary and ◆ About one-half of the abductors and help raise the child and make informal Interview Studies, family violence and/ two-fifths of the left-behind parents in custody decisions. These parents did or child abuse was a dynamic in many the Documentary and Interview Studies not use family courts to resolve cus- abducting families. Mothers—whether had criminal arrest records. The State- tody disputes because they could not they were abductors or left-behind wide Study revealed that more than afford legal representation and be- parents—more often claimed that one-half of those who were arrested for cause the legal system was largely for- child and/or spousal abuse had oc- criminal custodial interference had a eign to them. Instead, they abducted curred. Women abductors were more previous arrest record. Of these, one- their children without regard to legal likely to see the abduction as an at- third had been incarcerated. Far more ramifications. tempt to protect their children from men than women had arrest records ◆ Records from the Documentary Study abusive fathers or spouses, whereas prior to the abduction, and ethnic and showed that about one-fourth of the male abductors were more likely to racial minorities were more likely than abductors did not operate alone in the claim that they were attempting to nonminorities to have been arrested act of abducting. Many abductors re- protect their children from neglectful for more serious offenses. Those with lied on a network of family and social mothers. Men—whether they were left- criminal arrest records were more likely support to carry out and maintain the behind or abducting parents—were to have been arrested for precustodial abduction. The Interview Study found more likely to be accused of domestic offenses, indicating that most had not that a significant proportion of abduc- violence and sexual abuse. The State- attempted to resolve the custody dis- tors (almost three-fifths of women and wide Study, however, showed little evi- pute through the court system. The In- two-fifths of men) received moral sup- dence that formal criminal charges of terview Study found that abductors had port for their actions and practical domestic violence offenses had oc- high levels of narcissistic and socio- help in planning the abduction. The curred either prior to or around the pathic character disorders. People with network of supporters provided money, time of the abduction. these character disorders often have food, and lodging and was willing to ◆ Both the custody-litigating parents contempt for the law and feel that laws conceal the whereabouts of the child. and the sample of abductors and left- do not apply to them and, therefore, This widespread support for their ac- behind parents in the Interview Study they can easily run afoul of the criminal tions may be one reason why many reported similarly high incident rates justice system. abductors do not recognize that their of domestic violence, including severe ◆ The Statewide Study showed that only actions are illegal. physical aggression. Despite California’s about 10 percent of those arrested for ◆ According to the Interview Study, par- affirmative defense for parents who criminal custodial interference were ents in abducting families—especially take their children to flee violence, not rearrested for a subsequent abduction. mothers—were significantly less likely all cases involving domestic violence The Interview Study showed higher than parents in high-conflict, custody- were identified and provided protection recidivism rates, with self-reports of litigating families to have legal repre- under this defense. For a small number reabductions at 30 percent. This differ- sentation. The custody-litigating fami- of parents in the Interview Study, at- ence is likely due to the fact that par- lies were somewhat more likely than tempts to escape the violence by flee- ents do not always report abductions— the abducting families to have detailed ing with the children backfired. For ex- particularly short-term snatchings—to custody and visitation orders, to in- ample, some women with few resources law enforcement or the district attor- clude provisions for therapy, and to who were caught abducting their chil- ney. Also, the district attorneys’ criteria have been granted restraining (stay- dren had no place to stay after recovery for defining a complaint as an abduc- away) orders. While abducting families and therefore resorted to returning to tion case may differ from the parents’ were significantly less likely than their abusive partners. Other mothers criteria. For example, a district attorney custody-litigating families to go to fitting this profile remained separated is more likely to perceive a violation as family court (on custody, visitation, but were subject to court-ordered visi- an abduction when a noncustodial par- child support, spousal support, prop- tation arrangements that put them and ent does not return the child and is less erty, or restraining orders), they were their children at ongoing risk of being likely to perceive a violation as an ab- more likely to have come into contact physically harmed and terrorized by duction when a custodial parent chroni- with the juvenile court. their violent and controlling ex-partner. cally withholds visitation. ◆ The numbers of substantiated allega- ◆ Compared with the general adult popu- Together, these findings suggest a number tions of neglect and unsubstantiated lation, the high-conflict, litigating fami- of interrelated family risk factors that pre- allegations of sexual abuse were higher lies and abducting families in the Inter- dict child abduction by a parent, espe- among abducting families than among view Study demonstrated similarly cially when children are very young. Par- custody-litigating families. In the Inter- higher levels of anger, lower levels of ents and family members at risk are those view Study, abducting parents fre- cooperation, a pervasive distrust of who make persistent allegations of child quently alleged that child protective the ex-partner’s parenting, greater abuse/neglect and family violence, have services and family courts did not take emotional distress, and behaviors in- narcissistic/sociopathic personality traits, their complaints seriously or failed to dicative of character disorders. This and have a history of trouble with the law. conduct a thorough investigation. Rates signaled that anger and spite, which Others who are at risk include those who of allegations of parental substance are more often attributed to separation are unmarried, less educated, poor, and of

5 Risk Factors and Preventive Interventions for Custody Violation and Parental Abduction

Risk Profile Behavioral Indicators* Interventions† When there has been a • Threatens to take child, has a history of • Obtain certified copy of custody/visitation prior threat of or actual hiding child, refuses visits, or snatches order specifying access and jurisdiction. abduction child. • Obtain restraining order that prohibits • Has no financial or emotional ties to area. leaving area without permission. • Has resources to survive in hiding or help • Flag passports or school, medical, and from others to do so; has liquidated assets birth records so that both parents need or has made maximum withdrawals of to approve the release of or at least be funds against credit cards. advised of the other parent’s request to see these materials. • Supervise visits or use electronic surveillance. • Require that potential abducting parent post bonds. • Provide family counseling and mediation of impasse. When a parent suspects or • Has a fixed belief that the child is abused, • Undertake a timely, thorough investigation believes abuse has occurred molested, or neglected and that authorities of allegations. and friends and family mem- will not take charges seriously and will • Inform concerned social network. bers support these concerns dismiss them as unsubstantiated. • Coordinate all professionals involved to • Has the support of friends and family. share perspectives and conclusions. • Makes repetitive allegations and is • Implement temporary supervised visits increasingly hostile; distrust between to protect abused child or falsely ac- parents exists. cused parent. If investigation is incon- clusive, appoint coparenting counselor- arbitrator to provide counseling, rebuild trust, and monitor situation. • Provide the child with therapy. When a parent is paranoid • Is flagrantly paranoid and irrational and • Assess lethality! delusional makes allegations. • Conduct emergency ex parte hearing • Has a history of hospitalizations for for psychiatric screening; appoint legal mental illness and has delusions of mind representation for child and deluded control. parent. • Engages in bizarre forms of domestic • Suspend visits or supervise with high violence; boundary confusion observable security. between parent and child. • Award temporary custody to other • Makes threats of murder/suicide. parent or to third party. • Provide adult psychiatric treatment and child therapy. ethnic minority status (especially those criteria for more than one profile, the risk found that, compared with baseline whose extended family live in another for abduction is probably increased. The (precounseling) measures, all parents in geographical area or another country). table also lists suggested interventions the study were more cooperative, less All of these factors make parents less that authorities and parents can take to violent, and more likely to resolve dis- likely to resolve custody disputes by us- help reduce the likelihood of abductions. putes over custody issues than before the ing the formal, legal system. Instead they intervention. In addition, custody viola- turn to their own families and social net- tions and parental abductions also de- works for emotional support and practi- Findings of the creased. The brief 10-hour intervention cal help, which may include abduction. Intervention Study was as effective as the extended 40-hour Six profiles of separating/divorced par- In the Intervention Study, Family Court intervention in achieving these results. ents at risk for abducting their children Services personnel used the six profiles The success of both interventions was are proposed on the basis of these find- to identify individuals at risk for abduct- attributed to the increased attention the ings and are shown in the table on pages ing and then referred these individuals family courts gave the at-risk families, 6–7. To the extent that families meet the to one of two interventions. This study which led to early imposition of constraints by the court, increased use of

6 Risk Factors and Preventive Interventions for Custody Violation and Parental Abduction—Continued

Risk Profile Behavioral Indicators* Interventions† When a parent is severely • Has multiple arrests and convictions and • Have the parent obtain appropriate sociopathic a blatant contempt for court orders. restraining orders. • Stalks, makes threats of domestic violence, • Engage decisive use of court authority; manipulates and controls, or initiates obtain explicit court orders and rapid vexatious litigation. sanctions for contempt; fine or jail. • Has self-serving, exploitive, and self- • Suspend or supervise access and resume aggrandizing relationships. unsupervised visits contingent on conforming behavior. When a parent who is a citizen • See “When there has been a prior threat • See “When there has been a prior threat of another country ends a of or actual abduction” (above). of or actual abduction” (above). mixed-culture marriage • Idealizes own family, homeland, and • Require that parent departing with child culture after dissolution of mixed-cultural post bonds to ensure return from visiting marriage and depreciates American culture; homeland; hold passport and monitor rejects or dismisses child’s mixed airlines. heritage. • Obtain mirror custody orders with country • Feels separation and divorce are severe of origin; inform families of consequences loss/humiliation. of aiding custody violation. • Feels homeland offers more emotional/ • Provide culturally sensitive divorce financial support. counseling, including child’s need for • Is a high risk if from a non-Hague both parents and both cultural identities. country.‡ • Provide emotional/financial support. When parents feel alienated • Is undergoing severe economic hardship, • Provide access to legal services, pro se from the legal system and is poorly educated, and never married. clinics, and translation assistance. have family/social support in • Is a member of an ethnic minority group, • Advocate community services. another community has language barriers, and has cultural • Provide culturally sensitive divorce and beliefs regarding custody contrary to U.S. custody counseling/mediation. legal norms. • Educate parent and social network • Is a victim of domestic violence and is regarding abduction laws. alienated from major social institutions. • Has family/social support in another geographic area.

* Common to all profiles: (1) Parent dismisses value of other parent for child, (2) child is very young or vulnerable to influence, and (3) abductor has family and social support.

† General principle: More restrictive measures that curtail parents’ freedoms are warranted when (1) the risks for abduction are greater, (2) the obstacles to the recovery of the child are more substantial, and (3) the potential harm to the child is more extensive.

‡ The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, ratified in 1986, is an international treaty that establishes adminis- trative and judicial mechanisms to bring about the prompt return of an abducted or wrongfully retained child, usually to his or her country of habitual residence, and to facilitate the exercise of visitation across international borders. The Convention took effect in 1988, following enactment of the International Child Abduction Remedies Act, a Federal implementing statute. investigation and evaluation, and moni- status, gender, occupation, race, criminal The threat of prosecution was sufficient toring of resolved custody issues. history, and family violence/child abuse to bring most abductors back with the allegations of the parents, the Documen- child. In about 90 percent of the cases in tary Study found that the greater the in- which the child was recovered, the case Effectiveness of tervention by the district attorney’s was resolved informally by the district the Legal System’s office, the more rapid the recovery of the attorney’s office, often after the abducting Response to Family child. The intervention ranged from filing parent had been informed that abduction a complaint to issuance of a criminal is a crime under State law. Once abduct- Abduction charge, prosecution, conviction, and, fi- ing parents realized that criminal action The Documentary and Statewide Studies nally, incarceration. Almost one-half of could be taken against them, they often yielded data on the California legal sys- the children were returned within about returned the child voluntarily and at- tem’s response in cases of family abduc- 2 months of the filing of a complaint, and tempted to resolve the matter in family tion and on the relative effectiveness of two-thirds were returned within 3 years court. If the abductor attempted to obtain its response. In a multivariate analysis of the abduction. a custody order or modification of an or- that controlled for custodial and marital der in the court with proper jurisdiction,

7 then the district attorney’s office did not, offense that is more difficult to prove to What Children At in general, pursue the criminal offense. be a knowing violation. In addition, violating an existing custody order constitutes Risk for Abduction The district attorney formally prosecuted contempt of court, which judges are less Deserve From Their only 10 percent of the abductors. Of likely to tolerate. This apparent lack of these, one-fourth were convicted with Communities tolerance is more prevalent when the of- no incarceration, one-fourth were con- fender is a Caucasian woman, possibly What can be done to help parents at risk victed and incarcerated, and the remain- because the court expects her to be more for abducting their children make better ing half were released because charges law-abiding than nonwhite women or choices? What can the courts, public were dismissed. The Statewide Study male offenders. The court, therefore, may agencies, and private and nonprofit orga- found similar rates of conviction and in- treat her more harshly than female of- nizations do to help families resolve their carceration, with repeat offenders more fenders of other races or male offenders, disputes amicably while addressing their likely to be convicted. because her behavior is contrary to soci- legitimate concerns about protecting their children to reduce the risk of abduc- The Statewide Study included an examina- etal expectations. tion and the possibility of the children tion of parents who were charged for ab- The Documentary Study found no differ- being harmed? ducting more than once. It found that the ences in the district attorneys’ treatment greater the sanctions employed by the of abduction cases with regard to the ab- court at the initial abduction, the more Increased Parental Access ductor’s gender, race, or ethnic back- likely the abductor was to reabduct, con- to Legal Information and ground. The Statewide Study, however, trolling for other factors. That is, those Representation found that the criminal courts treated convicted of abduction were more likely Caucasians more harshly than ethnic and Problem 1: Parents generally lack than those not convicted to subsequently racial minorities in case dispositions. This knowledge of or access to legal infor- reabduct their children. Not enough is may have been because the Caucasians mation. Most parents are not familiar with known about the psychological character- more often had child custody orders and, custody and visitation laws. Many of them istics of those who were convicted to therefore, violated the section of the code do not know that moving to a new location understand why they were more likely to that was easiest to prove. Another expla- without going to court to obtain a custody reabduct. This group, however, represents nation for the disparity in treatment is order or to modify an existing order can be a very small and extreme subset of all fam- that the court expects Caucasians to be a crime when it violates the rights of the ily abductions (about 2–3 percent). Within more law-abiding—that is, the courts other parent. Unwed parents often do not this group, conviction of criminal custodial more severely sanctioned Caucasians know they should have a custody order. interference is not a successful deterrent to who violated the law because this group Grandparents, stepparents, and others further abductions, a fact that left-behind had fallen out of role expectations. An- who support parents in abducting their parents greatly fear. other interpretation is that Caucasian left- children generally do not know that they Both the Documentary and Statewide Stud- behind parents pressed the justice sys- may be committing a felony by aiding and ies found that the criminal justice system tem to pay more attention to their cases abetting the abductor. was more likely to pursue postcustodial and, in turn, obtained it. Recommendation: Develop public educa- offenders. When a parent violates an exist- The Documentary Study found that the tion programs that discuss relevant laws ing written custody order issued by the left-behind parents with higher occupa- for parents. Communities or organiza- court, it is easier for prosecutors to prove tional status were more likely to obtain tions should develop public education the offense was a knowing violation. When severe sanctions against the abductor. campaigns, including public service an- no such document exists, as in precustodial One explanation for this is that more of nouncements, to educate the public abductions, it is harder to prove in court these parents have skills that enable them about custody and visitation laws and the that the abducting parent knew he or she to deal effectively with a government crime of parental abduction. These cam- was violating the law. agency. Examples of such skills include paigns should provide information—via The Statewide Study found a divergence persistence and organization and the radio, television, the Internet, and printed in the criminal justice system’s treatment ability to provide information in a busi- materials—that will increase public of men and women. Men were more likely nesslike fashion, to gain cooperation, to awareness. For example, programs or or- than women to be arrested for abduction, expect action, to keep track of conver- ganizations that target at-risk populations but the women who were arrested for ab- sations, and to take the initiative to can provide informational brochures to duction were more likely than men to be follow up. parents in these programs. Examples of convicted and incarcerated. This differ- such programs or organizations include Both the Documentary and Statewide Stud- ence appears to relate to the specific public welfare offices, child support en- ies found that the criminal justice system criminal codes that men and women usu- forcement offices, programs for unwed acted more harshly when responding to ally violate. Women were more likely to parents, organizations serving immigrant abduction cases that included allegations abduct after a custody order existed, a and ethnic communities, mental health of child abuse or family violence by the criminal offense that is easier to prove agencies, the courts, and missing child- abductor toward the child or other parent. to be a knowing violation. On the other ren’s organizations and clearinghouses. Prior criminal history, however, did not hand, men were more likely to abduct in influence the district attorneys’ or the Problem 2: Parents and children are the absence of a custody order, a criminal criminal courts’ intervention. unable to obtain affordable legal representation. Educating parents about the need for custody orders and ways to

8 prevent abductions does little good if they are unable to access the legal system. Most low-income parents are unable to find affordable representation in custody and visitation cases. Many middle- class parents in the midst of a divorce cannot afford to hire attorneys for the period of time needed to resolve con- tested custody cases. Legal services offices often do not represent parents in custody cases, unless the case fits under a separate priority set by the office, such as the prevention of domestic violence.4 Unwed mothers who seek public assistance are required to cooperate with welfare agencies in determining paternity and child support, yet neither the mothers nor the fathers receive help in obtaining a court order that specifies their custody and visitation rights. obtained, the left-behind parent often Development of Prompt Recommendation: Develop community- questions the usefulness of the custody and Effective Responses based programs that increase the par- order. The left-behind parent faces the to Allegations and Acts of ents’ access to legal representation. prospect of hiring two attorneys (one at- Family Violence The courts should appoint custody eval- torney in each State if the abducting par- uators, guardians ad litem (legal represen- ent traveled to another State), filing en- Problem 1: Parents feel that child pro- tatives), or attorneys who represent forcement proceedings with the court, tective services and the courts do not children to provide the parents with in- and waiting for a court date. Meanwhile, treat child abuse and neglect allegations formation and recommendations. More the abducting parent may flee again with seriously or address them promptly. programs that provide legal representation the child. Many left-behind parents know Whether or not they lead to abductions, on a pro bono or sliding scale basis should where their child is, but they are unable allegations of child abuse and neglect fuel be developed. Parents who do not have to recover him or her. many custody battles. When child protec- legal representation should still be able to tive services and the courts do not treat obtain legal information and advice. Barri- Recommendation: Pass State laws that these concerns seriously or address them ers that prevent attorneys from offering mandate district attorneys to enforce promptly, they exacerbate an already con- partial services should be removed to en- custody orders. California is the only tentious environment. Some forms of able parents to get the help they most State that currently has an expedited en- abuse, such as emotional abuse or allow- need from attorneys. Courts should also forcement measure for child custody or- ing a child to witness domestic violence, be more user-friendly by allowing the of- ders. The measure mandates that the dis- do not meet child protective services’ fices of the clerks of the court to assist the trict attorney take whatever civil and criteria of direct harm to the child. None- expanding population of pro se parents criminal remedies are necessary to locate theless, the child is at considerable risk (i.e., parents who do not retain a lawyer and recover children abducted by family of continued abuse or the psychological and represent themselves in court). members and to enforce child custody damage caused by unfounded allegations. orders. In July 1997, the National Council In addition, jurisdictions should stream- of Commissioners of Uniform State Laws Recommendation: Conduct thorough line procedures for obtaining custody and approved the Uniform Child-Custody Ju- and prompt child abuse and neglect visitation orders to make them available risdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA), investigations. Child protective services to low-income, unwed parents. Programs which contains a similar provision. As of and the courts need sufficient funding to for parents, starting with the birth of the February 2001, 21 States and the District hire and train staff to conduct thorough child, should clarify custody rights and of Columbia had enacted the UCCJEA, and and prompt child abuse and neglect in- responsibilities. Parents should be able to it had been introduced in the legislatures vestigations. If these concerns are ad- obtain readily enforceable custody orders of 10 other States.5 dressed quickly, it is less likely that the and acquire legal assistance to obtain child child will be harmed and that the parents custody and visitation orders when courts will continue to make allegations against determine paternity and child support. 5 The States that have enacted the UCCJEA are as fol- each other. It is critical that professionals lows: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, coordinate their efforts to arrive at a Problem 3: Enforcing custody orders is Colorado, Connecticut, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, sound conclusion. time-consuming and costly. When a child Minnesota, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, is abducted after a custody order is Oklahoma, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia and the District of Columbia. The UCCJEA has been introduced in the legislatures of Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, 4 Custody cases are ineligible to receive free legal aid Rhode Island, Virginia, and Washington. For any up- because it is too costly. This type of aid is available dates, visit www.nccusl.org/uniformact_factsheets. only if a parent can prove that his or her case includes domestic violence.

9 Problem 2: Many victims of domestic health professionals working collabor- parents attempted to snatch or actually violence find that separation and di- atively can modify existing approaches snatched the child? Does the order need vorce do not provide them with the and develop new procedures and services to change to reflect the parent’s new safety they sought by leaving the to better suit these families (Johnston, work hours or the child’s summer sched- abuser.6 Abusive husbands are more 2000). For example, parent education ule? Programs that monitor visitation likely to seriously harm or kill their wives programs—a popular innovation in many arrangements are one type of innovative during marital separation (Wilson and jurisdictions—need to be adapted to meet approach. Daley, 1993; Feld and Straus, 1990). Even the needs of multicultural families from after divorce, custody and visitation different economic strata and highly Some jurisdictions use a coparenting arbi- orders that do not address safety for the conflictual and violent families. Most par- trator or coordinator, as stipulated by an survivor of domestic violence and her ent education programs target the middle- agreement between the parents or by children provide the abuser with contin- class divorcing population, but they do court order, to decide on various issues ued opportunities to harm them. not address the situations that unwed, relating to the children. In one model, the low-income parents face. This population coparenting arbitrator is involved only Recommendation: Provide community- cannot afford the services of mental when parents are unable to agree, usually based responses that protect victims health professionals or attorneys; there- despite the involvement of other profes- and make abusers accountable for their fore, parent education may be the only sionals. In another model, the coparent- actions. Domestic violence survivors who context in which they will learn about the ing arbitrator acts as the parenting coun- have left their abuser should be able to impact of their conflict on the children selor, mediator, or child therapist on an live in safety with their children with- and about the laws pertaining to custody ongoing basis and exercises his or her out having to leave their communities. and visitation. If seminars portray life- right to arbitrate only when parents fail to Judges, lawyers, mediators, and custody styles and circumstances that are not agree on a specific matter. In both mod- evaluators need to know how to identify reflective of their own, parents can be els, the arbitrator seeks to develop trust domestic violence and understand its further alienated as a result of the experi- with family members and a depth of un- impact on the victim and her children. ence. Similarly, custody mediation and derstanding of the family dynamics. Courts must consider custody and visita- custody evaluations should demonstrate tion orders that protect the victim and In other jurisdictions, a family court judge cultural sensitivity, particularly in mixed- the children from physical and psycho- is responsible for managing the high- culture marriages where there may be a logical abuse. Communities should estab- conflict custody cases. The judge can risk of international child abduction. lish supervised visitation centers so that, order periodic review of the case and can when necessary, parents can safely drop Innovative adaptations of custody media- monitor adherence to the custody and off and pick up their children and visitation have been developed for use with high- visitation orders. Although the discretion tions can be properly supervised. conflict and high-risk families. Impasse- to undertake greater case management directed therapeutic mediation or a briefer responsibilities has always been available to the courts, few have taken advantage Services for High-Risk and diagnostic and referral intervention for groups or for individual families, as uti- of this power on a systematic basis with High-Conflict Families high-conflict families. Disputing Custody lized in the Intervention Study, is an effective means of reducing conflicts and Problem 1: The traditional processes for the possibility of abduction, particularly Protection of Children’s determining custody are not sufficient when paired with legal constraints (e.g., Interests and Needs or appropriate for many high-conflict restraining orders) and needed services Problem 1: Under current Federal and families—especially those who are also (e.g., legal advice or substance abuse State law, abduction is not a crime at risk for abduction. Custody mediation treatment). Counselors who have con- against the child. Under current law, the as usually practiced is not effective with ducted impasse-directed mediation with parent whose custody or visitation rights highly contentious families. They often groups have found that this intervention have been interfered with by the abduc- return to court to relitigate custody and has reduced conflict and relitigation and tion of his or her child is the victim of visitation issues—not to resolve parental is less costly than the individual family family abduction. The law casts abducted conflicts. Adjudication can result in a model (Johnston and Campbell, 1988; children as possessions that parents have well-crafted order, but high-conflict par- Johnston and Roseby, 1997). rights in, not as victims of a crime. ents often do not carry out the terms of the order (e.g., accessing services Many high-risk and high-conflict families Recommendation: Modify laws so that ordered to help them with various prob- need ongoing oversight and monitoring. family abductions are crimes against the lems). Consequently, the children con- For the children’s sake, there needs to be child. In lieu of, or in addition to, criminal tinue to be exposed to harmful and a means of checking whether parents are custodial interference laws that recognize conflictual situations. honoring the terms of the custody and visi- the rights of the left-behind parent, laws tation orders. Are parents going to court- should recognize that family abduction is Recommendation: Offer high-risk and ordered counseling or drug treatment? a type of abuse against the child. Child high-conflict families innovative ap- Have parents attended to the child’s spe- victims of abduction should be eligible for proaches that address custody conflicts. cial medical needs? Have court-ordered services under the Victims of Crime Act, Courts, family attorneys, and mental parental visitations been carried out with- 42 U.S.C. § 10601.7 out incident? Have there been further allegations of abuse? Has supervised visita- 6 Although men can be victims of domestic violence, tion been properly supervised? Have the the majority of these victims are women.

10 Problem 2: Children can be harmed by there was no full hearing on the best inter- Johnston, J. 1998a. Descriptive study of pre- recoveries, postabduction placements, ests of the child. In these cases, a hearing ventive interventions in families at-risk for and custody orders that abruptly disrupt should be scheduled promptly after the abduction. In Prevention of Parent or Family their relationship with their primary child is recovered to determine custody Abduction Through Early Identification of Risk parent. Although society increasingly and visitation, as ex parte orders are meant Factors, edited by J.R. Johnston, I. Sagatun- Edwards, M. Blomquist, and L.K. Girdner. recognizes that the child is harmed when to be temporary. As appropriate, judges Washington, DC: American Bar Association, his or her relationship with a caring left- should consider alternatives to abrupt Center on Children and the Law. behind parent is disrupted, society may not shifts in the child’s caretaking arrange- fully understand the problems that arise ments, so that the child can gradually enter Johnston, J. 1998b. Empirical study of two when the bond between the child and his into new arrangements, building the parent- counseling interventions in families at-risk for or her abducting parent is disrupted. The child relationship over time. abduction. In Prevention of Parent or Family Abduction Through Early Identification of Risk child should not inadvertently be punished Factors, edited by J.R. Johnston, I. Sagatun- for the parent’s actions, particularly if the Creation of Unified Edwards, M. Blomquist, and L.K. Girdner. child’s primary bond is with that parent. In Family Courts Washington, DC: American Bar Association, some instances, the child is more trauma- Center on Children and the Law. tized by these disruptions than by the ac- Problem 1: Currently, judges often lack tual abduction. In cases of long-term abduc- access to information about other legal Johnston, J. 1998c. Interview study of risk factors for family abduction. In Prevention of Par- tion, the child may be returned to a parent proceedings affecting the child or the parents. Spousal abuse and child abuse and ent or Family Abduction Through Early Identifi- who is virtually a stranger and be cut off cation of Risk Factors, edited by J.R. Johnston, from the only known parent. neglect are factors in many abducting families or those at risk for abducting, yet there I. Sagatun-Edwards, M. Blomquist, and L.K. Girdner. Washington, DC: American Bar Asso- Recommendation: Involve social services is little or no coordination among the ciation, Center on Children and the Law. at each phase of decisionmaking that courts that handle child custody, child affects the child and minimize the disrup- abuse and neglect, spousal abuse, sub- Johnston, J. 2000. Building multidisciplinary tion to the child’s relationship with a pri- stance abuse, and criminal custodial inter- professional partnerships with the court on mary parent. Law enforcement officers and ference cases. Lack of information from the behalf of high conflict divorcing families and social services should coordinate their ef- juvenile, other civil, or criminal courts can their children: Who needs what kind of help. University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Re- forts when the officers plan to recover the lead to inappropriate and unsafe custody view 22(3):453–479. child or arrest the abductor. These two arrangements that may increase risks for groups should know enough about the case children, including abduction risk. Johnston, J., and Campbell, L. 1988. Impasses to assess whether the child would experi- of Divorce: The Dynamics and Resolution of ence harm if unaccompanied by the abduct- Recommendation: Establish unified family Family Conflict. New York, NY: Free Press. ing parent during the recovery and return courts that have an integrated approach to cases involving the same family. Unified Johnston, J., and Roseby, V. 1997. In the Name or to determine whether the abducting of the Child: A Developmental Approach to Un- parent presents a potential physical or family courts allow for systematic case derstanding and Helping Children of Conflicted flight risk to the child. A mental health or management, integration of evaluation and and Violent Divorce. New York, NY: Free Press. social services professional should also be treatment services, and coordinated decisionmaking in cases involving the same Johnston, J.R., Sagatun-Edwards, I., Blomquist, present when the child is reunited with the M., and Girdner, L.K. 1998. Prevention of Parent left-behind parent or soon after. This profes- family. This system produces better decisions, reduces the confusion of parties, and or Family Abduction Through Early Identifica- sional can help facilitate the child’s transition of Risk Factors. Final Report. Washington, tion and ease the feelings of anger, guilt, uses resources more efficiently than cur- DC: American Bar Association, Center on Chil- and fear that often accompany it. rent systems. Both the American Bar Asso- dren and the Law. ciation and the National Council of Juvenile If the left-behind parent obtained an ex and Family Court Judges have long been Sagatun-Edwards, I. 1998. Documentary study parte (without notice to the other party) committed to the unified children and of risk factors for family abduction. In Preven- custody order after the abduction, then family courts concept. A unified family tion of Parent or Family Abduction Through Early Identification of Risk Factors, edited by court would reduce many of the problems J.R. Johnston, I. Sagatun-Edwards, M. Blom- already described. quist, and L.K. Girdner. Washington, DC: Ameri- 7 In 1990, the Crime Control Act, Pub. L. No. 101–647, can Bar Association, Center on Children and tit. V, §§ 502–503, 104 Stat. 4820 (codified at 42 U.S.C. §§ the Law. 10606–10607 (1990)), established a new framework for References victims’ rights by creating the first Federal bill of rights Wilson, M., and Daley, M. 1993. Spousal homi- Blomquist, M. 1998. Studying risk factors for for victims of crime. This legislation, referred to as the cide risk and estrangement. Violence and Vic- family abduction. In Prevention of Parent or Victims’ Rights Act (or the Victims’ Rights and Restitu- tims 8(1):3–16. tion Act of 1990), requires Federal law enforcement Family Abduction Through Early Identification officers, prosecutors, and corrections officers to use of Risk Factors, edited by J.R. Johnston, I. their “best efforts” to ensure that victims receive basic Sagatun-Edwards, M. Blomquist, and L.K. rights and services. In 1994, the Violent Crime Control Girdner. Washington, DC: American Bar Asso- Supplemental Reading and Law Enforcement Act, Pub. L. No. 103–322, tit. IV, ciation, Center on Children and the Law. The following sources provide additional §§ 40113, 40221, 40503, tit. XXV, § 25002(a), tit. XXIII, information on parental abduction: § 230101(g), 108 Stat. 1904–2078 (codified at 42 U.S.C. Feld, S.L., and Straus, M.A. 1990. Escalation and § 10607(c)7, 14011(g); 18 U.S.C. §§ 2263–2264, 2248, resistance from wife assault in marriage. In Johnston, J.R., and Girdner, L.K. 1998. Early iden- 2259; and at Fed. R. Crim. P. 32 (1994)), created addi- Physical Violence in American Families: Risk tification of parents at risk for custody violations tional new rights for victims of sexual assault, domes- Factors and Adaptations to Violence in 8,145 and prevention of child abductions. Family and tic violence, and child abuse. Families, edited by M.A. Straus and R. Gelles. Conciliation Courts Review 36(3):392–409. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction, pp. 489–505.

11 U.S. Department of Justice PRESORTED STANDARD Office of Justice Programs POSTAGE & FEES PAID DOJ/OJJDP Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention PERMIT NO. G–91

Washington, DC 20531 Official Business Penalty for Private Use $300

Bulletin NCJ 185026

Johnston, J.R., Girdner, L.K., and Sagatun- Edwards, I. 1999. Developing profiles of risk for Acknowledgments parental abduction of children from a compari- son of families victimized by abduction with Janet R. Johnston, Ph.D., is Associate Professor in the Administration of Justice families litigating custody. Behavioral Sciences Department, San Jose State University, and Executive Director of the Judith & the Law 17:305–322. Wallerstein Center for the Family in Transition. Inger Sagatun-Edwards, Ph.D., is Professor in and Chair of the Administration of Justice Department, San Jose This Bulletin was prepared under grant State University. Martha-Elin Blomquist, Ph.D., is Assistant Professor in the School number 92–MC–CX–0007 from the Office of of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Florida State University, Panama City. Linda Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, K. Girdner, Ph.D., was Director of Research at the American Bar Association U.S. Department of Justice. Center on Children and the Law during the time of the grant project. Points of view or opinions in this document are Photograph page 9 copyright © 2001 PhotoDisc, Inc. those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of OJJDP or the U.S. Department of Justice, nor Share With Your Colleagues have they been approved by the House of Delegates or the Board of Governors of the Unless otherwise noted, OJJDP publications are not copyright protected. We American Bar Association (ABA). The views, encourage you to reproduce this document, share it with your colleagues, and accordingly, should not be construed as reprint it in your newsletter or journal. However, if you reprint, please cite OJJDP representing the official position or policies and the authors of this Bulletin. We are also interested in your feedback, such as of the ABA. how you received a copy, how you intend to use the information, and how OJJDP materials meet your individual or agency needs. Please direct your comments and The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delin- questions to: quency Prevention is a component of the Of- Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse fice of Justice Programs, which also includes Publication Reprint/Feedback the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Bureau P.O. Box 6000 of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Rockville, MD 20849–6000 Justice, and the Office for Victims of Crime. 800–638–8736 301–519–5600 (fax) E-mail: [email protected]