Issues in Resolving Cases of International Child Abduction by Parents

20 Pages·2002·0.2 MB·English

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
December 2001
Issues in Resolving
Cases of International Child A Message From OJJDP
The criminal abduction of one’s child
Abduction by Parents is painful enough to any parent, but
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 triesare never returned to their
to the United States. A parent who is left others are controlling and abusive families only intensifies the trauma
suffered by parents who are victim-
behind when a child is abducted to anoth- themselves.
ized by such abductions and adds
er country faces daunting obstacles to
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- child abduction by parents.
returning internationally abducted chil-
ed, “It’s worse than if your child died, be-
cause you cannot say the child is at peace dren especially complex and problematic. This Bulletin features key findings
now. You live every day wondering if your from that research, which was con-
ducted for OJJDP by the American
child is OK, if she is being abused or ne- Background on
Bar Association Center on Children
glected. You never get over it.” Often, the
International Parental and the Law.The Bulletin also pro-
parents whose children are returned do
Abduction vides an overview of international
not want to let their children out of their
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-
It is our hope that the critical infor-
ber, or their agent, in derogation of the
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.1They 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 arejustified 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),2categorized 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
u “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
u “Policy focal” cases fit the broad scope Czech Republic 3/1/98 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
takingor whereabouts of the child
Germany 12/1/90 United Kingdom 7/1/88
andprevent contact between the
Greece 6/1/93 Bermuda 3/1/99
otherparent and the child, (2) the Honduras 6/1/94 Cayman Islands 8/1/98
child wastransported 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,
*Date each country’s treaty with the United States took effect.This list is current as of publication.
Hotaling, and Sedlak, 1991). All inter-
Themost 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
42U.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
wasabducted before the country became
eign custody orders, and whether family proceeding brought in the party country
aparty, then the Hague Convention does
support is available for foreign-born ab- to which the child was abducted or in
notapply. 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
inthe other country do not have to honor
that countries with the greatest volume of ofthe abduction or retention, the judge
acustody 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. Custody Jurisdiction Act, which creates
are both parties to the Convention. The
the duty of the court to recognize and
implementing legislation in the United Although some countries have other inter-
enforce foreign custody orders as long as
States, enacted in 1988, is the International country agreements concerning abduction
reasonable notice and opportunity to be
in addition to the Hague Convention, the
2
the Hague Convention in participating
Article 7 of the Hague Convention countries.
Central Authorities shall co-operate with each other and promote co-operation amongst u Documentation of “good practices”
the competent authorities in their respective States to secure the prompt return of in dealing with international child
children and to achieve the other objects of this Convention.In particular, either abduction, which were collected from
directlyor through any intermediary, they shall take all appropriate measures— leading agencies, organizations, and
a. To discover the whereabouts of a child with a view to obtaining the return practitioners.
who has been wrongfully removed or ofthe child and, in a proper case, to Little social science research has been
retained. make arrangements for organizing conducted on international parental child
orsecuring the effective exercise of
b. To prevent further harm to the child or abduction. This study is one of the first
rights of access.
prejudice to interested parties by tak- attempts to learn extensively about expe-
ing or causing to be taken provisional g. Where the circumstances so re- riences of left-behind parents, practices of
measures. quire,toprovide or facilitate the pro- Hague Convention Central Authorities, and
c. To secure the voluntary return of the vision of legal aid and advice, in- strategies that can be used by attorneys,
child or to bring about an amicable cluding the participation of legal judges, law enforcement personnel, and
resolution of the issues. counsel and advisors. other professionals to assist in recovering
h. To provide such administrative ar- abducted children quickly and safely. The
d. To exchange, where desirable, infor-
rangements as may be necessary study was completed in 1998 (with data
mation relating to the social back-
and appropriate to secure the safe collected during 1995–97). The findings
ground of the child.
return of the child. are not new, but they still have relevance
e. To provide information of a general
for practitioners and policymakers.
i. To keep each other informed with
character as to the law of their State
respect to the operation of this
inconnection with the application of The full report on the study (Chiancone
Convention and, as far as possible,
the Convention. and Girdner, 1998)3presents study findings
to eliminate any obstacles to its
and suggests effective ways to reduce bar-
f. To initiate or facilitate the institution of application.
riers and resolve cases of international
judicial or administrative proceedings
child abduction. It also includes detailed
information on the project’s research
The full text of the Convention is available on the Web at travel.state.gov/hague_childabduction.html or at hcch.net. design and methodology. This Bulletin
provides an overview of major survey
findings, selected good practices, and
recommendations.
heard were given to all affected persons. a child to another country or the retention
Section 105 of the Uniform Child Custody of achild in another country a Federal
Jurisdiction Act also requires recognition felony. The Act specifies that, where appli- Survey of Left-Behind
and enforcement of foreign custody orders cable, the Hague Convention should take
Parents
made under factual circumstances in sub- priority as a remedy for returning the child.
stantial conformity with the Act. The ABA Center on Children and the Law
Barriers to extradition make these crimi-
worked with three national missing chil-
Criminal law.All States in the United nal remedies less effective than they may
dren’s organizations—the National Cen-
States have laws that make parental ab- seem. Some States do not wish to bear
terfor Missing and Exploited Children
duction, often called criminal custodial the costs of extradition. Often, parental
(NCMEC), in Alexandria, VA; Child Find
interference, a crime. These laws vary abduction is not an extraditable offense
of America, Inc., in New Paltz, NY; and
from State to State as to whether they inthe country to which the child was
Vanished Children’s Alliance, in San Jose,
cover abductions that occur before a cus- abducted. In other cases, the country
CA—to survey parents whose children
tody order has been issued and abduc- may have a policy not to extradite its
had been taken to or retained in another
tions involving joint custodial parents. In owncitizens.
country by the other parent. The objec-
some States, an abduction is a felony only
tive of the survey was to document the
if the child is taken across State lines. OJJDP-Funded Research problems these left-behind parents en-
If a State felony warrant has been issued Under a grant from the Office of Juve- countered in attempting to recover their
ina case of parental abduction and the ab- nileJustice and Delinquency Prevention children. With this objective in mind, the
ductor has fled the State, then it is possible (OJJDP), researchers at the American Bar researchers designed the survey to ac-
to obtain a warrant for unlawful flight to Association (ABA) Center on Children and complish the following:
avoid prosecution (UFAP) under the Federal the Law carried out a study to identify u Identify circumstances surrounding the
Fugitive Felon Act.Obtaining aUFAP war- barriers to resolving cases of internation-
abductions.
rant is an important step toward possibly al parental child abduction. The project
gaining greater law enforcement assistance included the following major components: u Identify basic demographic and other
with the case, such as involvement ofthe social/cultural characteristics of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). u A survey of parents in the United families and abductors.
States whose children were abducted
u Identify legal and administrative proce-
In 1993, the U.S. Congress enacted the In- to or retained in other countries.
dures that were available as preventive
ternational Parental Kidnapping Crime Act u A survey of Central Authorities, the measures.
(18U.S.C. § 1204), making the abduction of
entities responsible for implementing
3
u Understand left-behind parents’ percep-
tions of how various governmental and
nongovernmental agencies responded.
u Assess social and financial costs to left-
behind parents.
u Increase knowledge about the role of
missing children’s organizations and
other entities with regard to interna-
tional abductions.
The survey drew responses from 97 par-
ents (a 63-percent response rate), who
described their experiences and offered
insight into the obstacles they faced when
trying to locate and recover their chil-
dren. The following sections summarize
and discuss major survey findings.
Destinations
Abductions occurred to locations through-
full-time, and nearly twice as many abduc- Abducted children tended to be young.
out the world. Surveyed parents listed 46
tors were unemployed. The youngest was about 5 months old, the
countries as abduction destinations. Latin
oldest was 121⁄2years old. The mean age
American countries were the destinations Mothers and fathers were equally likely to
of abducted children was 5 years. These
of nearly one-third of reported abductions; be abductors, although their patterns of
findings are similar to those of other stud-
European countries of about one-fifth. destination differed. Mothers were more
ies (Finkelhor, Hotaling, and Sedlak, 1990;
About one-fourth of abductions were to likely to take their children to Latin Ameri-
Forehand et al., 1989; Agopian, 1981). Per-
Muslim countries. One-third of abductions ca, and fathers were more likely to take
haps abductors perceive that younger
were to countries that were parties to the their children to the Middle East. Europe
children will be more controllable and
Hague Convention. was a common destination of both moth-
offer less resistance during the abduction.
ers and fathers. These destination patterns
However, taking a very young child (e.g.,
Parents reflected patternsof intermarriage between an infant) may present a separate set of
men and women from the United States
Abductors and left-behind parents often problems for the abductor in terms of
and other countries.
differed in terms of background, citizen- meeting the child’s physical needs (e.g.,
ship, and education. Most were of differ- Most left-behind parents reported that ab- changing diapers, bottle-feeding) and
ent nationality (83 percent), ethnicity (69 ductors had connections to the country to attracting attention (e.g., from fellow
percent), and religion (58 percent). Sixty- which the child was abducted, by speak- travelers, airport officials).
two percent of abductors were citizens of ing the country’s language (83 percent),
another country only, 23 percent held U.S. having family there (76 percent), living Recovery
citizenship only, and about 15 percent there as a child (69 percent), and/or grow-
About two-fifths of the surveyed parents
held dual citizenship. One-half of abduc- ing up primarily there (68 percent). The
(41 percent) reported that the abducted
tors had a high school degree, its equiva- greatest number of abductors had family
child had been recovered by the time of
lency, or some college credits. Left-behind in the destination country and grew up
the survey. In all, about 70 percent of
parents generally had more education there, and more than one-half had close
responding parents reported that the
than abductors. friends living there. About one-third had
child had been located, and 25 percent
employment or business interests in the
The survey also revealed economic differ- said they had always known the child’s
destination country. It is likely that these
ences between abductors and left-behind location.
abducting parents perceived the abduc-
parents. Economic status at the time of the
tion as a return “home,” where they would Perhaps not surprisingly, recovery and
abduction was generally better forleft-
receive positive emotional support and length of separation appear to be linked.
behind parents than for abductors. Almost
perhaps have greater economic and Separation was significantly shorter in
three-fourths of abductors earned less
employment opportunities. In addition, cases that resulted in recovery than in
than $25,000 per year, approximately 35
they would have help in caring for the those that did not. In one-half of cases in
percent earned less than $15,000, and
abducted child. which the child was recovered, the sepa-
20percent had no income. Left-behind
ration lasted less than 1 year, whereas in
parents, on the other hand, were distrib-
Abducted Children nearly one-half of cases in which the child
uted relatively evenly across the income
was not recovered, the child had been
range,although most had incomes under The number of children taken in a single
gone for more than 5 years. In most cases
$35,000. Nearly three times as many left- incident of abduction ranged from one to
of recovered children (nearly 88 percent),
behind parents as abductors had incomes three; in most cases (70 percent), only one
the separation was at least 6 months.
of $55,000 or more. Far fewer abductors child was taken. Gender did not appear to
More than one-half of abducted children
than left-behind parents were employed be a factor in the abduction, asnearly equal
who were located by left-behind parents
numbers of boys (61) and girls (65) were
were gone at least 4 months before they
abducted.
4
Effects of Abduction on Children: A Summary of Research
Existing research on the trauma suf- children could not easily remember the and nightmares (Hatcher, Barton, and
feredby children who have experienced left-behind parent, and this had serious Brooks, 1992).
parental abduction clearly shows that a repercussions when they were reunited.
Senior, Gladstone, and Nurcombe
long period of separation from the left- Older children felt angry and confused by
(1982) reported that recovered children
behind parent is particularly damaging. the behavior of both parents—the abduc-
often suffered from uncontrollable cry-
Agopian’s study (1984) found that the tors for keeping them away and the left-
ingand mood swings, loss of bladder/
length of separation from the left- behind parents for failing to rescue them.
bowel control, eating and sleep disturb-
behindparent greatly influenced the
Terr’s study (1983) reported on a sample ances, aggressive behavior, and fearful-
emotional impact of the abduction ex-
of 18 children who received psychiatric ness.Other reports have documented
perience on the abducted child.Gener-
evaluations after being recovered from abduction trauma such as difficulty
ally, children held for shorter periods
abduction (or after being threatened with trusting other people, withdrawal, poor
(less than a few weeks) did not give up
abduction and/or experiencing an unsuc- peer relations, regression, thumb suck-
the hope of being reunited with the
cessful abduction attempt).Nearly all (16) ing, and clinging behavior (Schetky and
otherparent and consequently did not
of the children suffered emotionally from Haller, 1983);distrust of authority fig-
develop an intense loyalty to the ab-
the experience.Their symptoms included uresand relatives and fear of personal
ducting parent.In some ways, they
grief and rage toward the left-behind par- attachments (Agopian, 1984);and
wereable to view the experience as a
ent in addition to suffering caused by nightmares, anger and resentment,
type of “adventure.”
“mental indoctrination”perpetrated by the guilt,and relationship problems in
Victims of long-term abductions, how- abducting parent.Similarly, a study of a adulthood (Noble and Palmer, 1984).
ever, fared much worse.They were often sample of 104 parental abductions drawn
It is likely that children who are victims
deceived by the abducting parent and from National Center for Missing and
of international abduction may suffer
moved frequently to avoid being located. Exploited Children cases revealed that,
effects beyond those mentioned above.
This nomadic, unstable lifestyle made it asa result of the abduction, more than
This would especially be the case if
difficult for the children to make friends 50percent of the recovered children
they are required to adapt to different
and settle into school (if they attended experienced symptoms of emotional dis-
norms and values and even learn a dif-
school at all).Over time, younger tress, including anxiety, eating problems,
ferent language.
were found. In general, separation was sig- directly (usually secretly) contacted the abduction or making it successful. One-
nificantly shorter in abductions to Hague left-behind parent. fifth reported that the child was moved by
Convention countries than in those to the abductor from country to country.
The findings of this study differ from
non-Hague countries.
those of NISMART (Finkelhor, Hotaling, Some respondents were able to identify
In cases that resulted in recovery, nearly and Sedlak, 1990) and other studies in ways in which the abductor planned for
all respondents reported traveling to that far fewer children in this study were the abduction (see table 1). Most of this
another country to pick up the child, recovered than were located. NISMART, planning activity indicates that abductions
although most faced barriers to accom- which looked at a nationally representa- were premeditated rather than spur-of-
plishing this task. In many cases, once the tive sample that included both domestic the-moment acts.Abductors prepared eco-
child had been located and recovered by and international abductions, found that nomically bysaving money, waiting for tax
law enforcement or other officials, parents the average duration of abduction was refunds, liquidating assets, and quitting or
who wished to travel to pick up the child about 11 days. About 70 percent of the changing jobs. They also prepared for
had to do so immediately. Some parents NISMART abductions were resolved in 1 longer range needs (e.g., the child’s school-
found it difficult to obtain an affordable week (Plass, Finkelhor, and Hotaling, ing)by gathering legal documents and
plane ticket with little notice or to get a 1995). Forehand et al. (1989) found that papers such as birth certificates and
passport issued quickly. In addition, some most of the children in the 17 cases they school records. One-third of the parents
parents reported being fearful of making reviewed were gone between 3 and 7 who reported planning actions said the
the trip, either because of difficulties in months. The duration of abductions de- abductor received visits from friends or
traveling or communicating in the other scribed in other literature ranges from family members from another country
country or because of concerns about several days (Schetky and Haller, 1983) prior to the abduction. One-third said the
the safety of their other children who to 3 years (Terr, 1983). abductor made a preparatory visit to the
remained in the United States. country to which the child was later ab-
Abduction Plans and Threats ducted. Left-behind parents’ reports of
Recovery of abducted children took many
such visits, combined with their common
different paths. Courts (in both Hague Nearly one-half of the abductions reported
belief that abductors had help (mainly
Convention countries and non-Hague by left-behind parents occurred during a
from family or friends) in carrying out the
countries) were involved in some cases, court-ordered visitation between the
abduction, indicate that most abductors
law enforcement agencies in others. Mer- abducting parent and abducted child.
did not act alone. Nearly one-fourth of left-
cenaries were involved in a few cases. In Eighty percent of parents said they be-
behind parents reported that the abductor
some cases, the abductor voluntarily lieve the abductor received assistance
kept the child late after a visit prior tothe
returned the child; in others, the child from family members in carrying out the
actual abduction, perhaps to prevent the
5
Table 1:Abductor Planning Actions Table 2:Threats Made Prior
to Abduction
Percent of Cases
Specific Action (N=97) Number and
Prior to the Percent
Saved money or waited for expected cash payment 58
abduction, did Responding
Gathered, destroyed, or hid legal documents and records the abductor “Yes”
(birth certificates, school records) 54 ever threaten . . . (N=84)*
Liquidated assets (sold business, investments, etc.) 53
your life? 50 (60%)
Quit or changed jobs 45 the life of your child? 18 (21%)
Applied for a visa or passport for the child from the anyone else’s life? 35 (42%)
U.S. Department of State 39
* Thirteen parents (13 percent of all respond-
Moved residence 36
ents) reported that no threats were made.
Received visits from friends or family members from another
country to assist with the abduction 34
Costs of Search and
Made preparatory visit to country to which child
Recovery
was later abducted 32
Left-behind parents pay a high price in
Applied for a visa or passport for the child from embassy or
cases of international abduction. Approx-
consulate of another country 31
imately one-half of the parents surveyed
Kept the child late after a visit prior to actual abduction 24 reported on the amount of money they
spent in searching for and/or recovering
Note:Twenty left-behind parents (21%) also reported that they believed the abductor had secretly
abducted children (see table 4). These par-
involved the child in planning the abduction.
ents spent an average of $33,500 for search
and recovery efforts. About one-fourth of
left-behind parent from immediately hours of the abduction. Two-thirds said these parents spent $75,000 or more. Al-
becoming concerned when the actual they received little or no assistance from though parents with higher incomes gen-
abduction occurred. One-fifth of parents the first law enforcement official they erally spent more money than those with
said they believe the abductor secretly spoke with. Examples of unsatisfactory lower incomes, more than one-half of
involved the child in planning the abduc- response included being told that the parents across all income levels reported
tion; such cases are particularly disturb- child had to be missing for a prescribed spending as much as or more than their
ing and suggest a high level of planning. period of time before police could take annual income.
action or that police could not do any-
In many cases, abductors made serious thing unless there was evidence that the Left-behind parents also pay a high price
threats prior to the actual abduction (see child had left the State. in terms of their own emotional health.
table 2). Eighty percent of left-behind par- Eighty-five percent of parents turned to
ents reported that these previous threats The study found that, unfortunately, pa- family and friends for emotional support.
included telling them they would never see rental abduction is still widely regarded Slightly fewer than one-half relied on
their child again.Sixty percent reported asa private family matter. More than two- professional counselors or therapists for
that abductors threatened their lives, and thirds of left-behind parents encountered assistance in handling emotional prob-
more than 20 percent reported that the individuals and organizations who seemed lems. One-fifth said they used prescription
abductor threatened the life of the abduct- to regard parental abduction as a family drugs to cope with stress while their child
ed child. Such threats would only have problem that did not require legal inter- was gone. Many parents reported a desire
increased the left-behind parents’ fears vention. One-third of parents reported to establish stronger support systems and
once the abduction had taken place. that law enforcement officials would not networking opportunities for parents who
take information about their cases be- are victims of family abduction.
Fifty-one percent of left-behind parents
cause the officials saw the abduction as
took measures to prevent the abduction.
adomestic situation.
These measures included seeking super- Obstacles to Search and
vised visitation, custody orders prohibit- Recovery
Private Sources of
ing removal of the child from the jurisdic- Researchers sought to identify the primary
Assistance
tion, and passport denial or restrictions. challenges parents faced in trying to locate
In addition to contacting law enforcement and recover children abducted to foreign
Level of Satisfaction With agencies, parents relied on many other pro- countries. A majority of respondents con-
Law Enforcement’s Initial fessionalsfor assistance in locating and/or sistently named the following obstacles as
Response recovering their children (see table 3). presenting the greatest difficulties:
Most (87 percent) hired an attorney in
The survey revealed high levels of dis- theUnited States. More than one-half also u Lack of sufficient funds.
satisfaction with law enforcement’s initial
hired an attorney from the destination u Difficulties with foreign laws and
response to parents’ reports of abduc-
country and/or a private investigator. officials.
tions. More than 80 percent of parents
One-fifth hired a rescuer or mercenary to
contacted law enforcement within 24 u Difficulties with U.S. laws.
attempt to recover the abducted child.
6
Table 3:Professionals Used by Table 4:Expenditures by Parents To Search For and Recover
Parents To Search For and Abducted Children
Recover Abducted Children
Category Mean Median Range
Number and
Attorney hired in the United States $25,724 $12,000 $50–200,000
Percent of Cases
Attorney hired in other country 4,508 3,000 100–30,000
(N=97)
Court costs (U.S. and other country) 3,388 2,000 200–10,000
Attorney in the Other legal costs 2,397 1,250 100–10,000
United States 84 (87%) Private investigator 3,987 2,000 200–40,000
Rescuer/mercenary 33,111 10,000 3,000–117,000
Attorney in
Travel costs 4,463 3,250 600–20,000
destination country 53 (55%)
Communication costs 11,436 8,500 100–100,000
Private investigator 54 (56%) Therapy or counseling 5,660 3,000 100–15,000
Rescuer/mercenary 21 (22%) Other costs* 34,784 7,000 500–300,000
Estimated total spent 61,238 33,500 10,000–270,000
Note:Not all respondents answered the question about expenditures.Some only reported the total
u Judges’ inexperience in handling inter- amount spent and did not break down the cost into categories.
national abduction cases.
* “Other costs”included costs associated with psychological testing, expert testimony, lost time or loss
u Inadequate response by law enforce- of job (employment income), authentication of documents, fees for psychics, and bribes.
ment agencies.
These and other obstacles reported by
felt powerless in attempting to deal long- difficulty working with foreign officials
parents are discussed below.
distance with a foreign country’s officials (64percent of parents) and laws of other
Lack of sufficient funds.A lack of suffi- and/or laws may have thought they would countries (74 percent)—may be inter-
cient funds was the obstacle that respond- have been taken more seriously if they related. Although government officials
ing parents most frequently identified. This could have traveled to the country, which andagencies in another country may
is not surprising, considering the large in some cases would have been very seemto be uncooperative, they actually
sums of money that parents reported costly. Even the costs of long-distance may simply be following that country’s
spending. This perceived lack offunding, telephone calls added up very quickly for laws; in this case, the obstacle is the laws,
however, is related to other obstacles that these parents. Parents who were dissatis- not the officials or agencies. Among the
respondents reported.Many parents who fied with their attorneys (in the United difficulties some parents encountered in
were frustrated by aninadequate investi- States and/or in a foreign country) may dealing with foreign government agencies
gative effort by law enforcement agencies have believed that they could have hired were language barriers and a lack of con-
hired a private investigator, and others better legal representation had more cern on the part of agency personnel and
hired a rescuer/mercenary. Hiring such funds been available. officials. One parent reported that work-
professionals was in most cases very ing with the foreign government was im-
Difficulties with foreign laws and officials.
expensive. In addition, respondents who possible because the “abductor married
Two obstacles listed frequently by parents—
[a] prominent citizen” in the country.
Difficulties with U.S. laws.More than
Prosecution of Parental Abduction Cases: three-fourths of respondents identified
“American laws” as an obstacle, and about
A Summary of Research
one-half considered them an obstacle that
Inadequate law enforcement response to parental abduction may be related posed a high level of difficulty. This ob-
tothefact that few jurisdictions have had much experience in prosecuting such stacle could be related to another report-
cases.A nationwide survey of 74prosecutor’s offices, conducted by the American ed obstacle—“ease of exiting the United
Prosecutors Research Institute (Klain, 1995), found that 78 percent of respond- States” with an abducted child. Eleven
entshandle only 1 to5 parental abduction cases per year, 90.3 percent handle parents specifically mentioned as a major
between 1 and 20 such cases per year, and only 4.2 percent handle more than obstacle the fact that parents crossing
100cases per year.The same survey found that just 1in 25 prosecutor’s offices international borders with a child do not
hasa specialized parental abduction unit.Most parental abduction cases (57.5 need to verify custody and/or permission
percent) are handled by nonspecialists or by designated attorneys, and the rest
from the other parent to do so.
arehandled by various designated units (domestic violence, family crimes, special
assault, or child abuse). Judges’ inexperience.Nearly two-thirds of
responding parents reported that a judge’s
The American Prosecutors Research Institute survey findings are supported by a
inexperience in dealing with international
study (Grasso, Ryan, and Wells, 1996) that examined 6 “promising”sites where 15
parental abduction cases was a major ob-
ormore cases of parental abduction are prosecuted each year.With the exception
stacle in the search for and recovery of
oftwo specialized agencies devoted to parental abduction cases,all criminal jus-
their child. This finding reinforces earlier
ticeagencies at these sites indicated that parental abduction cases make up only
research, which indicated that three-fifths
5percent or less of their total caseload.Even in jurisdictions with special expertise
inhandling parental abduction cases, these cases are often given“low priority.” of U.S. judges had handled either no inter-
national parental abduction cases or just
7
one case (Girdner, 1994b). In some cases,
parents may also have been referring to Factors Influencing Recovery: A Summary of Research
aforeign judge’s refusal to enforce Hague
In cases of parental abduction, the left- (1990) found that eight of the recovered
Convention procedures. Other parents
behind parent’s vigilance in searching children in their study were located by
indicated frustration with foreign judges’
for the abducted child can be one of the the police or other legal authorities, five
refusal to honor existing U.S. court orders
most significant factors in locating by missing children’s organizations, and
regarding custody (which the judge would andrecovering the child.Police involve- three by the left-behind parent;one
not be required to do) or with a U.S. ment in locating the child can also be a childwas voluntarily returned by the
judge’s unwillingness to issue protective critical factor. abducting parent.
measures that the respondent thought
In interviews conducted by Hatcher and Another study indicates that immediate
could have prevented the abduction (e.g.,
Brooks (1994), about one-quarter (26.9 reporting to a law enforcement agency
supervised visitation).
percent) of left-behind parents whose is related to a greater likelihood of re-
Inadequate response by law enforcement children had been recovered attributed covery.Agopian (1981) studied the re-
agencies.Left-behind parents gave law the recovery to a lead they themselves lationship between reporting and recov-
enforcement agenciesmixed reviews. established.Parents also said that re- ery and found that most parents whose
Many law enforcement agencies clearly covery was aided by leads from the children were recovered had notified
were uninformed regarding the National FBI(9.6 percent), a law enforcement authorities within 1 week of the child’s
Child Search Assistance Act, which man- officer (7.7 percent), an attorney (5.8 disappearance, whereas only 2 percent
percent), a private citizen (5.8 percent), of children were recovered in cases in
dates that law enforcement must enter
and missing children’s organizations which parents had notified police more
thedescription of a missing child in the
(3.8 percent).Janvier and colleagues than 1 month after the abduction.
National Crime Information Center (NCIC)
Missing Person File without a waiting
period. Of great concern is the fact that hired in other countries. The reason for and institutions (law enforcement, judges,
two-thirds of parents reported an inade- this difference may be that the U.S. at- and foreign government agencies and offi-
quate initial response from law enforce- torneys were not necessarily hired for cials). In all likelihood, this belief in-
ment agencies. Delayed response by law their previous experience in handling creased the perceived level of difficulty
enforcement may have contributed to the cases of international parental abduction. associated with a particular obstacle.
success of abductions. In addition, many In fact, 39 percent of respondents said
law enforcement officials seemed unaware they used an attorney in the United States
Survey of Central
of their obligation to investigate the where- whom they had retained prior to the ab-
abouts of the abductor and child.At the duction, and many used the attorney who Authorities of the
other end of the spectrum arethose law had handled their divorce or custody Hague Convention on
enforcement officials who responded im- proceedings.
the Civil Aspects of
mediately, offering support and referring
parents to additional resources. Although Rescuers/mercenaries received the highest International Child
knowledgeability ratings of all private pro-
present inonly a minority of cases, this Abduction
fessionals, with 77 percent of respondents
quick response clearly made a difference
in how parents viewed the investigation reporting that the rescuer/mercenary they Under the Hague Convention, each party
and gave them confidence in the overall contacted had moderate to great knowl- country is required to establish a Central
law enforcement effort. edge about international parental abduc- Authority. Most of the duties of the Cen-
tion. However, only 21 parents in the sam- tralAuthority are enumerated in Article 7
Private professionals’ lack of knowledge. ple even contacted arescuer/mercenary. of the Convention (see page 3).
Nearly all surveyed parents hired a pri-
vate attorney in the United States to pur- Lack of information about government Central Authorities are mentioned in law
sue the return of the abducted child (or responsibilities.Parents’ responses clear- review articles about the Hague Conven-
used the services of an attorney they had ly reveal a high level of frustration with tion, but they have received little focused
retained prior to the abduction), and one- the U.S. Department of State’s actions, in attention in the literature. The major
half hired an attorney in another country. terms of the parents’ expectations versus exception is an article by law professor
More than one-half hired a private in- their actual experiences. Some comments Carol Bruch (1994), based on her inter-
vestigator, and nearly one-fifth hired a indicate that many parents, even after views of Central Authority personnel in
rescuer/mercenary. As with law enforce- going through the entire process of search- 10countries (8 European countries, Israel,
ment officials, the knowledge and skills of ing for and attempting to recovera child, and the United States) in 1990 and1992
these professionals regarding internation- do not fully understand the respective and her observations of two intergovern-
al parental abduction varied widely. procedures and responsibilities of State, mental meetings on the Convention at the
Federal, and foreign governments. It ap- Hague in 1989 and 1993. Bruch describes
Parents gave attorneys hired in the Unit- pears to be very difficult for left-behind the responsibilities of the Central Author-
edStates the lowest knowledgeability parents to obtain information about ity under the Convention and relates
ratingsof all private professionals. where responsibilities in these cases lie some of the variations she found among
Onlyone-fourth of attorneys hired in the and how to communicate with the agen- the 10 Central Authorities she studied.
United States were rated as having mod- cies involved.
erate to very great knowledge regarding Variation in the operation of Central Au-
international parental abduction, com- Perceived bias.A number of parents also thorities and the implementation of the
pared with nearly one-half of attorneys believed they had encountered various bia- Hague Convention across countries is an
ses when dealing with certainindividuals
8
important consideration in examining the Caseloads.Caseloads vary greatly across and almost three-fourths reported a suc-
effectiveness of the treaty. The Hague Central Authorities. In 1994, outgoing cess rate of 25 percent or lower.
Convention has frequently been heralded applications ranged from 1 case to 380
Hague proceeding.The majority of
as the means for prompt resolution of cases, with a mean of 45 and median of
Central Authorities responding to the sur-
these difficult international abduction 13. Central Authorities most often iden-
vey question about the Hague proceeding
cases, but many experts in the field have tifiedthe United States as one of the three
(26, or 90 percent) reported that the pro-
become increasingly aware that both countries most frequently dealt with, for
ceeding for incoming cases in their coun-
promptness and resolution in Hague all categories of cases (incoming and out-
try is a hearing before a judge; the rest
cases depend a great deal on which going, return and access).4The United
reported that it is an administrative pro-
countries are involved. Kingdom was next in all categories except
ceeding. Ten Central Authorities reported
outgoing access cases.
The ABA Center on Children and the Law that the Central Authority office will rep-
surveyed Central Authorities regarding Hague application process.More than resent the parent in the Hague proceed-
their experiences in handling cases of 80percent of responding countries accept ing, and 17 reported referring applicant
international parental abduction under Hagueapplications in English; about 40 parents to attorneys. Seventeen Central
the Hague Convention. The survey was percent accept applications in French. Al- Authorities reported that Hague appli-
conducted during late 1995 and early though French and English are the official cants may be eligible for free legal as-
1996, with a followup in early 1997. The languages of the Hague Convention, four sistance and representation.
objective of the survey was to identify Central Authorities indicated that they do
similarities and differences in the struc- not accept applications ineither language Variations in Procedures
ture and operation of Central Authorities (contrary to the Convention). More than 70 and Outcomes
and to assess the degree to which the percent of responding Central Authorities
The findings from this survey clearly
Hague Convention is working across open five or fewer incoming return cases
demonstrate that implementation and
countries. The questionnaire included and five or fewer outgoing return cases per
operation of the Hague Convention vary
items about infrastructure (e.g., staffing), month.The number of unresolved cases
greatly across countries. Some variation
number of cases, countries most often ranges greatly, from none to more than 800.
is understandable, because the Central
dealt with, the Hague application process, The median number of unresolved cases is
Authorities were established within each
and Hague proceedings and decisions. 10, for both incoming and outgoing cases.
country’s existing bureaucracy and the
Respondents had the option to complete The exact location of the child is unknown
Hague proceedings occur within each
the questionnaire in English, French, or in more than one-half of incoming cases.
country’s existing judicial system. How-
Spanish. Participation was voluntary.
Criminal charges.Depending on the ever, the wide range in case outcomes5
The questionnaire was sent to all 57 country, pending criminal charges against is perhaps the most troubling finding of
Central Authorities existing at the time the abductor in the country from which the survey, as it reflects a lack of unifor-
ofthe survey (1996–97). Included were the child was taken may help or hurt mity in application of the Hague Conven-
Central Authorities in 44 countries, plus efforts to recover the child. More than tion that goes beyond these structural
10 provincial or territorial Central Au- two-thirds of Central Authorities report- explanations.
thorities in Canada and 3 Central Author- edthat criminal charges are sometimes
Several findings raise concerns about the
ities in the United Kingdom (England/ helpful in their efforts to locate a child
appropriateness or efficacy of actions
Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland). abducted to their country, and one-third
taken by a minority of Central Authorities.
The survey drew responses from 44 Cen- reported that criminal charges are some-
Forexample, French and English are offi-
tral Authorities within 32 countries, repre- times helpful in proceeding with a Hague
cial languages of the Hague Convention,
senting aresponse rate of 73 percent of case. On the other hand, four Central
and Article 24 of theConvention requires
the countries surveyed. The following sec- Authorities reported that in their country,
that Central Authorities accept applica-
tions note major surveyfindings, discuss some judges will not order a return if
tions and other documents in either lan-
variations in procedures and outcomes criminal charges are outstanding in the
guage, although “a Contracting State may,
revealed by the survey, and summarize country from which the child was taken;
by making a reservation in accordance
implications of survey findings. one Central Authority indicated that any
with Article 42,object to the use of either
criminal charges must be dropped before
French or English, but not both, in any
Major Survey Findings it can proceed with a case.
application communication or other doc-
Background and infrastructure.In more Handling of cases.More than one-fourth ument sent to its Central Authority.” In
than two-thirds of the 32 responding coun- of the countries with responding Cen- the survey, Central Authorities in four
tries, Central Authorities are located in tralAuthorities have other intercountry countries indicated that they would not
justice departments or ministries. (The agreements or laws that may be used accept applications in English or French,
U.S. Central Authority is the Office of Chil- inlieu of the Hague Convention. Some although this is expressly prohibited
dren’s Issues in the U.S. Department of respondents reported that these other under Article 24.
State.) Central Authority staffs are small agreements or laws have simpler proce-
The survey findings also reveal significant
(about three persons) and generally dures than the Hague Convention or are
variations in caseloads, with heavy con-
spend less than one-half of their time on more effective in resolving access cases.
centrations of cases in relatively few
Hague cases. In about two-thirds of re- Eighteen Central Authorities reported try-
countries. At the time the survey was
sponding countries, Central Authorities ing to secure voluntary returns; of these,
conducted, the majority of Central Au-
have attorneys on staff. about one-fourth reported no success,
thorities reported opening an average
9
of five or fewer cases of each type (in- more than three-fourths of the parents are posted and accessible to anyone
coming and outgoing, return and access) had attorneys with no previous experi- around the world with access to the
per month. Only 3 countries—the United ence in international abduction cases. Internet.
States, the United Kingdom, and France—
NCMEC handles incoming Hague Conven-
averaged more than 10 new cases per
Selected Good tion child abduction cases on behalf of
month in both the incoming and outgoing
return categories. Asked to list the top Practices the U.S. Central Authority in the Depart-
ment of State. Two of the mostpressing
three countries to which they send and
The following sections present selected tasks associated with thisresponsibility
from which they receive return cases,
“good practices” in dealing with interna- are locating children abducted to the
Central Authorities most frequently listed
tional parental child abduction. Several United States or wrongfully retained in
the United States in both categories. The
different perspectives are represented: the United States and finding lawyers
next most frequently listed country, the
government agencies (at the Federal, torepresent the foreign parent in court
United Kingdom, was mentioned about
State, and local levels) and private sec- proceedings brought in the United
one-half as often as the United States for
tororganizations in the United States; Statesunder the Convention. NCMEC’s
incoming return cases and about one-
theUnited Kingdom’s Hague Central International Division carries out the
third as often for outgoing return cases.
Authority; and Canada’s Missing Children Central Authority’s responsibilities in
The next most frequently listed countries
Registry. Each section includes a quote incoming international abduction cases.
for both incoming and outgoing return
reflecting the organization’s philosophy,
cases were Germany, Canada, Australia, background information, and a list of NCMEC, in cooperation with the Office of
and France. The most frequently listed good practices. Children’s Issues in the U.S. Department
countries for incoming access cases were of State, has assumed a greater role in
the United States, the United Kingdom, outgoing Hague Convention cases than it
National Center for Missing
Canada, and France. For outgoing access previously had. NCMEC provides parents
and Exploited Children
cases, the most frequently listed coun- seeking to invoke the Convention with
tries were the United States, France, the After parents have done all they can to instructions on how to do so and helps
United Kingdom, and Germany. work within the parameters of the law, parents prepare Hague applications and
both domestic and foreign, and still they obtain supporting documents.
Implications can’t get their children back, they often
become desperate. We understand how NCMEC notes the following good prac-
Clearly, the United States represents the frustrating it can be, and work with par- tices aspects of its operations:
largest share of the Hague caseload, fol- entsto exhaust every opportunity, every
lowed by the United Kingdom. The United option. u NCMEC’s state-of-the-art technology—
States is only 1 of 32 Hague countries including its Web site and an extensive
responding to the survey, yet the case- —Ernie Allen, computer network that makes possible
President, NationalCenter for
load of children taken from or to the worldwide transmission of images of
Missing and Exploited Children
United States accounted for a substantial abducted children and information
portion (more than 50 percent) of the The National Center for Missing and about them—is revolutionizing the
combined caseloads of all 32 responding Exploited Children (NCMEC) was estab- search for missing children.
countries. Therefore, the performance of lished in 1984 as a private, nonprofit u Incoming Hague petitions get imme-
organization to serve as a clearinghouse
American attorneys and judges in han- diate response. Efforts are begun
for information on missing and exploited
dling incoming Hague cases and the per- promptly to locate the child, find an
children. Funding for NCMEC comes from
formance of the U.S. Central Authority in affordable attorney, and educate the
the U.S. Department of Justice and many
processing applications for and monitor- judges and lawyers involved about the
private corporate donors that contribute
ing progress of both incoming and outgo- Hague Convention.
time, money, and technology. NCMEC pro-
ing cases are critical to the overall suc-
vides technical assistance to individuals u Criminal warrants can be very effec-
cess of the Hague Convention worldwide.
and law enforcement agencies in cases tive in Hague and non-Hague cases.
Earlier research calls into question the involving parental abduction, stranger u As part of a transborder task force,
performance of American judges and abduction, runaway children, and child NCMEC is working with Canadian
attorneys in handling Hague cases. In a exploitation. counterparts to develop an intercept
nationwide survey of American judges
program for Canadian children transit-
Locating abducted and missing children
and attorneys (Girdner, 1994b), 60 per-
ing through the United States who are
is one of NCMEC’s critical roles. In carry-
cent of judges reported that counsel
at risk of further abduction.
ing out this role, NCMEC coordinates with
before them rarely or never adequately
informed them about the applicable pro- law enforcement agencies at the local, u Educating parents, lawyers, and judges
visions of the Hague Convention, almost State, Federal, and international levels. It on abduction prevention measures is a
70 percent of attorneys reported that has direct access to the NCIC missing priority.
opposing counsel was not familiar with children’s database. It also disseminates u NCMEC’s institutional philosophy—to
photographs and descriptions of missing
the Convention, and more than 60 per- go the extra mile to recover a missing
children. The advent of the Internet has
cent of attorneys reported that judges child—is reflected in the staff’s cooper-
made it possible for NCMEC to expand
they appeared before in Hague cases ative approach to cases.
globally its nationwide photo distribution
were not familiar with the Convention.
network. NCMEC now maintains a Web u Effective interaction between NCMEC
Another survey of left-behind parents
site on which photos of missing children and local, State, Federal, and
(Hatcher and Brooks, 1994) found that
10