On a Thursday afternoon
in October 1999 the State Department
Children's Issues country officer
for the United Kingdom participated
in a conference call with the Office
of International Affairs at the Department
of Justice, Interpol's Washington
liaison officer and an investigator
from a California district attorney's
office. The call concerned a nine-year-old
child whose mother had abducted him
to the United Kingdom. Of particular
concern in this case was the mother's
mental stability.
The California
investigator had just learned that
although the mother and child were
in the United Kingdom, they planned
to leave the following day. It was
imperative to confirm their actual
location, file a Hague Abduction Convention
application immediately, and take
steps to protect the child. Quickly,
each agency determined what role it
would play to bring about the return
of the child. Interpol worked with
the law enforcement authorities in
the United Kingdom to determine the
exact location of the mother and child
and obtain details of their travel
plans. The Department of Justice set
in motion an extradition request for
the mother (who had no claim to any
citizenship other than U.S.) based
on parental kidnapping criminal charges.
The Office of Children's Issues alerted
British officials to the incoming
Hague application, and the California
investigator worked with the left-behind
parent to submit the application and
supporting documents by fax.
Early Friday morning,
the Hague application and supporting
documents arrived in Children's Issues
and were immediately forwarded to
the U.K. central authority. A solicitor
in the United Kingdom had already
been appointed to represent the left-behind
parent. He immediately obtained a
court order prohibiting the mother
and child from leaving the United
Kingdom until the Hague application
could be adjudicated. A "port
stop" was put into effect. Law
enforcement and social services organizations
in the United Kingdom took the mother
and child into custody. The left-behind
father flew to Britain over the weekend
and the child was released into his
temporary custody pending the results
of the hearings. In less than three
weeks, the Hague hearings were held
with both parents represented by legal
counsel. The United Kingdom court
issued an order for the return of
the child under the Hague. The California
investigator reported to Children's
Issues that the father and child were
back in California where custody of
the child would be resolved by the
California courts.
Does this story
sound like a made-for-television drama?
It's not -- it's simply one example
of the type of work performed every
day by the Bureau of Consular Affairs'
Office of Children's Issues.
Since the late 1970s,
the Bureau of Consular Affairs has
taken action in over 8,000 cases of
international parental child abduction.
CI has provided information in response
to thousands of additional inquiries
pertaining to international child
abduction, enforcement of visitation
rights and abduction prevention techniques.
Unrealistic Expectations
It is difficult to
say if parental child abduction is
increasing or if the public simply
has become more aware of the problem.
Probably, a combination of the two
is at work. Certainly the media have
focused more attention on parental
child abduction during the past few
years.
Many left-behind
parents and members of the press have
unrealistic expectations of what kind
of assistance the government can provide.
They often assume that U.S. government
representatives abroad will advocate
on behalf of left-behind American
citizen parents in domestic custody
disputes. Another commonly-held belief
is that a U.S. consular officer can
simply take custody of an American
citizen child who has been abducted
to another country and put him or
her on a plane for home. The basic
premise of many news articles is that
if an internationally abducted child
has not been returned to the United
States, then the U.S. government has
not fulfilled its responsibilities.
People travel more
now than ever for purposes of tourism,
work and immigration, making international
relationships more common. It is estimated
that somewhere between 80 and 90 percent
of international child custody disputes
involve a parent with ties to another
country. Child custody laws vary widely
from country to country. Countries
may have a gender or nationalistic
bias in favor of one parent over the
other. Child custody battles can often
go on for years, ceasing only when
the child reaches the age of majority.
There is no doubt
that the actual workload of parental
child abduction cases is increasing.
In 1996, the Office of Children's
Issues opened 67 new cases of children
abducted from the United States to
other countries. The corresponding
figures for 1997, 1998 and 1999 were
338, 401 and 410, respectively. As
of Aug. 31, 2000, 848 cases remained
open. Further, many parental child
abduction cases never even come to
CI's attention, since left-behind
parents may not realize that government
assistance is available.
Most outgoing Hague
applications involve abductions from
the United States to Mexico, the United
Kingdom, Germany, Israel and Canada.
Of countries not party to the Hague
Abduction Convention, cases most often
involved children abducted to the
Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon,
Jordan and Japan.
Since March 1997,
1,842 cases have been closed. A case
may be closed when (1) a child is
returned to the United States, (2)
a resolution has been reached and
a left-behind parent requests that
the case be withdrawn, (3) the child
reaches his or her 18th birthday (or
16th birthday in a Hague case), or
(4) there has been no contact from
the left-behind parent for a long
time and the contact information is
no longer valid.
For many years child
abduction and child custody issues
were handled by individual country
officers in the Office of Overseas
Citizen Services. In 1994, as incidents
of parental child abduction increased
and the department became aware of
the need for additional resources
to deal with the issue, the Bureau
of Consular Affairs created the Office
of Children's Issues in Overseas Citizens
Services to handle all parental child
abduction matters. Seven officers
were tasked with dealing with child
custody, abduction and the American
Citizen Service side of international
adoption matters. In the fall of 1999,
CI divided into an Abductions Branch
and an Adoptions Branch and added
administrative staff. The office now
totals 27 employees, but the workload
continues to increase.
Many children are
abducted because a taking parent with
a claim to citizenship in another
country feels he or she has a better
opportunity to gain custody of a child
in his or her country of origin. An
abductor may fear losing custody of
a child in an upcoming divorce case.
Depending on court-ordered custody
and visitation arrangements, an upcoming
remarriage or job transfer involving
one of the parents can lead to an
abduction. Sometimes a taking parent
may be joining a person they first
encountered on the Internet. A parent
may be fleeing a domestic violence
situation. CI finds that in many of
our cases, parents who abduct their
children have a proprietary attitude
("this is my child") or
may be using the child as a weapon
against the other parent.
How the Hague Convention
Works
The most important
remedy for parental child abduction
is the Hague Convention on the Civil
Aspects of International Child Abduction.
The basic premise of the convention
is that child custody issues should
be resolved in the country where the
child was "habitually resident."
In other words, the convention does
not involve custody per se, but determines
the country where custodial issues
should be adjudicated. Unless a voluntary
return can be arranged, the case is
presented to the appropriate civil
court in the country where the child
is located.
The Hague Convention
was signed in 1980 and is now in force
between the United States and 49 other
nations. Following the 1988 passage
of the International Child Abduction
Remedies Act, which implemented the
convention in the U.S., the president
designated the Department of State
to fulfill the responsibilities of
the "central authority."
Article 3 of the
convention defines the conditions
under which a left-behind parent may
file an application for the return
of a child. These include that (1)
the convention must be in force between
the two countries at the time the
child is abducted; (2) the child must
be under the age of 16; (3) the child
must have been "habitually resident"
in the country from which taken and
to which the return is sought prior
to the wrongful removal or retention;
(4) the petitioner must have had some
form of custodial rights to the child
at the time of the removal or retention;
and (5) the petitioner must have been
actually exercising those rights.
The convention also provides for access,
or visitation, to children when for
some reason the child is not returned.
There are a few special
circumstances in which, under the
convention, the child is not returned.
For example, if the court determines
that the return of the child will
cause grave physical or psychological
harm, a return can be denied. If more
than a year has elapsed, a court can
find the child is "resettled"
in the new environment. A return can
also be denied if the child strongly
objects and is "of sufficient
age and maturity" to have his
or her wishes taken into consideration
by the court.
In one case, a
12-year-old child was ordered returned,
but en route to the airport, he jumped
out of the car at a stoplight and
ran away. In that case, the left-behind
parent wisely considered how insisting
on a return would affect his relationship
with his child and withdrew his application.
He was awarded liberal access and
visits his child on a regular basis
in the other country.
Because of its outstanding
capability to locate missing children
in the United States, the National
Center for Missing and Exploited Children,
a private non-profit group, has been
designated to process incoming Hague
applications for children who are
abducted to the United States.
The Hague Convention
is certainly not a cure-all. During
the past 10 years, many problems with
its implementation have come to light.
A number of party nations have never
enacted laws that would make the convention
take precedence over local laws and
customs. The courts of some countries
have a definite gender or national
bias; in others, the judiciary may
be subject to political or financial
pressure. Some countries have failed
to enforce civil judgments issued
by their own courts. Some countries,
including the United States, have
taken exception to the provision of
the convention that provides for free
legal assistance, and left-behind
parents find they do not have sufficient
financial resources to pursue an application
for return. The central authorities
of some nations do not have adequate
resources to locate taking parents
and children.
Taking it to the
Top
The U.S. government,
including its most senior officials,
takes this issue very seriously. In
May 2000 Secretary of State Madeleine
Albright met with German Foreign Minister
Joschka Fischer to discuss the resolution
of U.S.-German cases. Soon thereafter,
in a meeting with German Chancellor
Gerhard Schršder, President Clinton
raised concerns about German compliance
with the convention. Both leaders
agreed to establish a bi-national
working group to address Hague implementation
issues and specific cases. To date,
there have been three meetings of
the working group.
In addition, high-level
State Department officials have met
with Australian and Japanese officials
to discuss the abduction problem.
Each year, top embassy officials are
asked to raise with the governments
of prospective member nations the
advantages of implementing the convention.
CI also works closely
with various law enforcement agencies,
to make sure we're using government
resources efficiently. In many cases,
CI requests the assistance of International
Social Services, a network of social
services agencies in approximately
180 countries. The U.S. branch is
a private, nonprofit organization
that coordinates services in social
work cases that cross international
boundaries. In one case where a 14-year-old
child alleged he had been abused by
the left-behind parent, the foreign
court issued a conditional order for
return. The court required evidence
that arrangements had been made for
the child to stay with a grandparent
while a local social service agency
investigated the allegations of abuse
by the left-behind parent. The final
report from the child protection agency
stated that the actual "abuse"
turned out to be nothing more than
a denial of TV privileges until the
child's grades reached an acceptable
level.
The convention
is not available to parents whose
children are abducted to non-Hague
nations. In those cases, left-behind
parents need to pursue custody through
the courts of the particular country.
CI can provide information on retaining
foreign attorneys and also furnish
lists of attorneys who practice in
the country involved. CI also has
public resource flyers for a number
of countries containing general reports
on child custody issues and precedents.
However, we try to
make clear to left-behind parents
in all cases that U.S. government
employees abroad cannot reabduct a
child or assist a parent in violating
host country laws. No refuge can be
provided to anyone involved in a reabduction
attempt; nor can a government employee
take physical custody of a child.
The U.S. government cannot pay legal
expenses or court fees and cannot
act as an attorney or represent a
left-behind parent in court, but judicial
or administrative proceedings overseas
can be monitored. The government can
alert foreign authorities to any evidence
of child abuse or neglect.
All of our embassies
and consulates now have a designated
CI post officer. More attention is
being focused on training consular
officers to deal with child custody
and child abduction issues. The Advanced
Consular Courses held during the summer
of 2000 featured a panel of actual
left-behind parents. One parent described
how her child was recovered; another
talked about the efforts she made
to stay in contact with her child
until he reached adulthood and re-established
a relationship; and the third told
about the anguish he faced as the
parent of a still-missing child. The
question-and-answer period following
the presentation was an eye-opener
to parents and consular officers.
These efforts to breach the communication
gap will continue.
In the field, consular
officers are often asked to arrange
welfare visits with abducted children
and furnish a report for the left-behind
parent. One left-behind parent recently
told CI that those reports were his
lifeline, since he had been denied
any contact with his child for almost
two years. This is particularly true
in non-Hague countries where realistically
there may be little hope of a left-behind
parent's ever regaining custody or
even having access to the abducted
child. During a welfare visit in one
Middle East case, a consular officer
succeeded in obtaining photographs
of the children for a left-behind
mother -- the first time in seven
years she had seen what her children
looked like!
Preventing Abduction
The prevention of
abduction is of utmost importance,
and CI has a wealth of materials available
to potential left-behind parents,
their attorneys, government officials,
and educators. Speakers from CI are
available to participate in conferences,
seminars and continuing education
workshops.
In the spring of
2000, CI assumed responsibility for
the Children's Passport Issuance Alert
Program, a database of over 28,000
names. While an already-issued passport
for a child cannot be revoked, a parent
can be told if a passport has been
issued to a child or if an application
is pending. A parent can also be notified
if an application is made by the other
parent, and passport issuance delayed
long enough for a concerned parent
to bring the application to the attention
of the appropriate court. If there
is either a sole custody order, or
an order on file prohibiting the removal
of a child, passport issuance may
be denied. This lookout is available
to any parent regardless of nationality.
Unfortunately,
many parents do not understand the
concept of dual nationality and that
a child may have more than one passport.
Similarly, many parents expect that
CI has some magical means by which
we can prevent a child who is the
subject of a custody dispute from
leaving the United States. The U.S.,
however, has no exit controls.
The Reid Amendment,
a 1999 law requiring the signature
of both parents on a passport application
for a child under the age of 14, will
go into effect within the next six
months. It remains to be seen if this
remedy will have a significant effect
in preventing the removal of American
citizen children from the United States.
Many of CI's abduction
materials are on its Web site, http://www.travel.state.gov/children's_issues.cfm
. These days, CI officers observe
that many interested parties have
already researched the Internet for
information about child abduction
and custody before they contact our
office. CI officers receive an average
of 15 to 20 calls each workday and
no two situations are ever alike.
Each of the 11 country case officers
works with approximately 60 to 100
open active cases at any one time,
both Hague and non-Hague. Some cases
can be resolved in a month or less;
others may continue for years or even
until the child reaches the age of
18.
Recently, a 17-year-old
walked into a U.S. consulate in a
Middle Eastern country and applied
for a U.S. passport. His American
mother had sent him abroad to visit
his foreign national father 11 years
previously and the father never allowed
him to return. The young man asked
the consular officer for assistance
in locating his American citizen mother.
Although there had been no contact
with CI by the mother since 1996,
the country case officer was able
to track her down through clues in
the old case file. When the CI officer
called her, she burst into tears of
joy. It was even more thrilling when
she described to the CI officer her
eventual reunion with her son.
CI work is definitely
crisis-oriented and requires officers
to be knowledgeable, resourceful,
empathetic and patient in extremely
stressful and emotional situations.
Being impervious to expressions of
anger and frustration aimed at the
U.S. government is also an asset.
CI employees agree
that their work, while demanding,
is endlessly fascinating. As one officer
commented, the work is "more
interesting than all the talk shows
and soap operas combined." For
the officers of Children's Issues,
the work has a meaningful reward --
the satisfaction of helping to make
a positive difference in someone's
life.
Barbara J. Greig
is a citizens services specialist
who works on child abduction cases
in State's Office of Children's Issues.
|
