Child Custody Disputes and Abduction Risk Factors Allowing Your Chld Travel To A Foreign Country With Your Former Spouse

International parental child abduction is not just the act of snatching a child from the country they live in and illegally removing them to another country without the other parent's consent or a court order.

Abduction often takes place when one parent decides to detain a child in a foreign country without the other parent's consent or a court order. This often occurs during high conflict child custody disputes.

The reality is that wrongful detention of a child under the rules of the Hague Convention appears to be the most common form of abduction. Parents need to know and understand the risk factors associated with allowing a child to travel abroad and act proactively to protect them.

Often there is extensive deceit and fraud involved at the hands of an abducting parent.  This includes never giving any indication to the other parent that their alleged 'family vacation' is in fact an abduction scheme.

Unfortunately, there are many abduction defenses that are implemented as part of an abductor's strategy to have a court sanction their act of kidnapping.

There is no question abduction is complicated.  Especially for someone who first experiences the betrayal and fraud associated with abduction.

Recently, the I CARE Foundation launched a very unique abduction prevention tool: one that has never before been created.  It is a universal international travel child consent agreement that was created to remove possible legal defenses associated with an abductor's scheme to wrongfully detain a child abroad.

Please visit the I CARE Foundation to receive a compy of the international travel child consent agreement or to learn more about the criminal act and schemes of parental child abduction.

Kind regards to all,

Peter Thomas Senesehttp://www.stopchildabduction.org/Peter_Thomas_Senese_I_CARE.html

Department of Justice: Parental Child Abduction: Threat Of Violence and Death Are Real

Children Parentally Abducted Are At Risk Of Violene or Murder
At Hand of Parent Abductor

“Unfortunately, the threat of violence—and death—in these cases is all too real,” said Ashli-Jade Douglas, an FBI analyst in our Violent Crimes Against Children Intelligence Unit who specializes in child abduction matters.  "Most non-custodial parental abductors want retaliation. They feel that if they can’t have the child full time—or any amount of time—then the other parent shouldn’t have the child, either.”

The following statement shared on the DOJ's official website should cause great concern for society as we try to protect our children from brutal crimes connected with abduction, including murder.  This is something the I CARE Foundation has been sharing for some time: children of international parental child abduction are at risk of murder.. Truth is child abductors put children in grave risk.  Parental child abductors are willing to break rules of law they are expected to obey as well as the orders of a court.  Parental child abductors have no concern with perjury or contempt. Parental child abductors kidnap children in order to cause the targeted parent serious suffering. The aggressive act of kidnapping - using a child to cause harm - is the reality of parental child abduction. 

It is imperative that every social services program, every child welfare organization and every family protective service agency charged with investigating any claims of child abuse carefully analyze any allegations of abuse. Critically, these organizations must carefully scrutinize any claims made by a parent who was previously charged with child abduction, especially if a court determined that parent had committed a criminal act of child kidnapping, or in Hague cases during international parental child abduction that uses a civil procedure for the return of a child despite the federal act of kidnapping being committed, it is imperative that all social service personnel charged with investigating any claims of abuse or neglect made by a child abductor against their previous targeted parent be cautiously examined.  Critically, all social service agencies acting on a complaint against a child made by a parent child abductor must commence their investigation with the hard reality that the child was a victim of kidnapping along with other forms of serious abuse, and carefully review the sociopath tendencies of abductors.

As published on the United States Department of State's website, "When non-custodial parents resort to kidnapping, they believe they are acting in the best interests of their children. Although a minority of parenta1 kidnappers may actually save their children by taking them out of the reach of the other parent, the motives of most parents who steal their children are not at all altruistic. Parents find a myriad of reasons or self-justification for stealing a child from another parent Some abductors will find fault with the other parent for nonsensical transgressions; others will steal a child for revenge."

The State Department's report includes, "[A] profile [of] the parent who shows signs of flagrant paranoid beliefs or psychotic delusions. In this situation, the intervention must focus on the child and his or her safety and well-being . . . Unfortunately, the other parent and the child must be informed about a safety plan at all times."  Continuing, the Department of State's report specifically states, "[The] profile [of an international parental child abductor] is the sociopathic personality."

Again, nobody wants to think about a parent killing their child.

However, we must take into heavy consideration the statement by the United States Department of Justice's Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP)  concerning the sociopathic behavior of abductors. Grave concern was expressed, "As with paranoid and delusional parents, sociopathic parents are unable to perceive their children as having separate needs or rights. Consequently, they often use their children blatantly as instruments of revenge or punishment or as trophies in their fight with the ex-partner. Hence, the sociopathic parent believes that domestic violence and child abduction can be perpetrated with impunity. Like paranoia, a diagnosis of severe sociopathy is rare (4 percent of the studies’ samples).

Filicide.  It’s not a term that I like to talk about, but the reality is, we need to talk about it more.  For those that are not aware, the term filicide refers to the deliberate act of a parent killing his or her own child.  In the United States, hundreds of children are murdered by their parents each and every year. Proportionately, filicide occurs everywhere. It is not a phenomenon isolated within American borders: parents do kill children. And we can't put our head in the sand and think this does not exist.

According to a recent statement released by the FBI, there is a trend that I find incredibly disturbing coming from non-custodial parents - and that is the rate in which they are abducting and threatening to harm their own children... all with the intent of retaliation against the parent who has been given legal custody.

Now, with a large number of American children being born to unwed parents, along with the high rate of marriages ending in divorce, the reality is that there is an increasing number of cases where a single parent is going to have custody of the child. The FBI's statistics show that between the years 2010 and 2012 there was an increase of 41% in child abduction cases that involved custody matters.  So if we add that to the increased number of those parents seeking retaliation through harming their own child - do we need to be concerned?  You bet we do!

These facts share something that the I CARE Foundation has been saying for some time: Children that are parentally abducted are being murdered.  As much as this isn't a surprise to hear, I am deeply troubled by this.

In the FBI report there were some recent cases of filicide that occurred at the hands of non-custodial parents:

• In 2009, a non-custodial mother abducted her 8-month-old son from his custodial father in Texas. She told the father she killed the boy to prevent the father from employing his custodial rights and in retaliation for his alleged involvement with other women.
• In 2011, a 2-year-old girl was abducted by her non-custodial father in California. A week later, both were found dead. The father committed suicide after shooting his daughter.
• In 2012, a non-custodial father in Utah abducted and killed his 7- and 5-year-old sons and then committed suicide. He was angry over not being afforded sole custody of the children.

Ashli-Jade Douglas offers up this advice to help keep children safe:  “Custodial parents should inform schools, after-care facilities, babysitters, and others who may at times be responsible for their children about what custody agreements are in place so that kids are not mistakenly released to non-custodial parents.”

The common misconception that parental abductions are considered a family matter has to end. 

Parental child abduction is a serious crime. The act of abduction leads to ongoing forms of absue toward a child.

When a child is abducted they should immediately be considered to be in great danger!  Law enforcement agencies need to act quickly to ensure that these innocent children are not going to be harmed.  The sociopathic behaviors that a kidnapping parent exhibits has them believing in their own mind what they are doing is in the best interest of the child.  When we think again about the fact that many of these cases revolve around revenge or retaliation, you can see it’s not out of the question to have the ultimate revenge be at the expense of the innocent child… with the act of filicide.

This is all very disconcerting, but one thing is for certain:  raising awareness and stewarding the message about the warning signs of international parental child abduction is the key.  This awareness has played a role in reducing the number of reported outbound child kidnapping cases originating in the United States by 15% during the last two consecutive years after nearly 30 years of continued growth.

It is important to note that while the vast majority of international parental child abductions occur due to sociopathic behavior of a parent-kidnapper, there are times when a parent abducts in order to liberate themsleves and their child from abuse. We acknowledge this issue, and strongly cite that there is no room for any form of abuse in society. In analyzing the I CARE Foundation's casse load, we recognize that both men and women who have abducted their child have cited abuse as a way to have a court sanction their behavior. We also have concluded that the vast majority of these claims of abuse are false, and have been made by the abductor in order to avoid prosecution.

If I may ask you to please share the warning signs of international abduction – you may very well be getting this information out to a family that needs it… ultimately possibly saving the life of an innocent child.  It is that desire, that is so ingrained in me, that I continue my fight each and every day! 

Together we can, and are, making a difference.

- The I CARE Foundation -

Peter Thomas Senese Helping Children

                                                           

 Peter Thomas Senese: Helping Children



Best-selling author Peter Thomas Senese

As a board member of the I CARE Foundation, I take great pride in being able to have played a major role in helping a large number of children who were previously internationally abducted reunite with their targeted parent and family as well as helping an even larger number of parents protect their children from being internationally kidnapped.

It is not easy. 

In reality, the deck is stacked against any parent trying to reunite with a child or prevent a child from disappearing overseas. 



Chasing The Cyclone

Helping children from being internationally abducted or reunited with their targeted parent and family has been a goal of mine ever since I was unexpectedly forced to race into the nightmarish storms of international parental child abduction that is the basis of my novel 'Chasing The Cyclone' critics all around the world have been very generous to speak of. In fact, my committment was much more than a goal: it was a promise I made to the God I believe in that one day I would stand to help others who face the same unthinkable storms of abduction my child and I faced.

At that time that my journey into the world of abduction began, I had never even heard of the collective words 'international parental child abduction' or the 'Hague Convention'.

I sure know of them now.

But words and desires alone do no make a difference. Action makes a difference. Committment makes a difference. Standing unbowed in the face of deterents makes a difference. And acting in goodness to help others who cannot help themselves makes a difference.



The I CARE Foundation

Paying close attention to action, committment, determination, and in goodness, more than a few miracles on behalf of children have been created. Many children have been rescued. Many more children will escape the chains of international kidnapping. And many, many more children will be protected and never be taken.

These words of appreciation and insight shared by other parents who I and the not-for-profit I CARE Foundation I am the Founding Director of mean a great deal to me.  They serve as a reminder of what can do and what must be done to protect children (Click here to review sworn testimonial letters about how Peter Thomas Senese has helped children):

 EP, whose child was abducted to the Ivory Coast eight years ago spoke of the miracle Peter Thomas Senese created, “On January 16th, 2012, I received a telephone call from Peter Thomas Senese. He said to me that my son was on an airplane 30,000 feet high over Africa and on his way home to the United States . As for Peter Thomas Senese, what can I say about this incredible man who led the efforts on all fronts to rescue my son? He asked for nothing other than for me to help others one day when my child was home, he provided financial support, emotional support, and all the necessary legal support required. I will be forever grateful to Peter Thomas Senese and the I CARE Foundation for the selfless acts and considerable kindness.”

TD, whose child was abducted to Nigeria added of the miracle Peter Thomas Senese also created, “On March 22^nd, 2012 my toddler son was kidnapped from Colorado to Nigeria. All appeared hopeless. Nigeria is not a member of nay foreign treaty, there was very little the U.S. government could do to help me in Nigeria. Very few children have ever been returned to America from Africa. I eventually contacted Peter Thomas Senese, as he is well-respected in the area of IPCA, who told me, “You need to be patient, but we will get your son home.” His words were simply not words. On June 11^th, 2012 at approximately 10:15 p.m. while standing inside the Denver International Airport, I held my son in my arms! My son was back home, in America, just like Mr. Senese said he would be.  Peter Thomas Senese has given so much to my family. God Bless you Peter for all you have done for me and my family.”

CF stated, “I found myself a young mom alone facing a terrifying life threatening cancer fight while also desperately trying to find and bring home my abducted son. There is no question in my mind that without Peter’s assistance I would have lost my son. From bringing on an overseeing the investigations to attorneys needed to help me, to staying in consistent contact with me every step of the way during a very complex process, Peter’s incredible actions bespeak of his unquestionable kindness, caring, compassion, and what is right about this world. He never asked me for anything, but gave and gave and gave . . . And at 4:35 a.m. on a Friday morning standing next to me at the airport as my son was taken off a flight and [held] into my loving arms, was Peter Thomas Senese. As far as Peter Thomas Senese is concerned, he is an incredible man. He is direct, honest, loyal, compassionate, and made an enormous difference in my and my family’s life. Without him, not only would I not have reunited with my abducted son . . . I prayed to God for help and a miracle. God answered. I am forever thankful to my friend Peter Thomas Senese and all he has done for me and my family.”

AB said, “Chasing The Cyclone and Peter Thomas Senese have assisted me and my family significantly in protecting my daughters from being parentally abducted to Saudi Arabia, where women like myself have no rights. If my children were abducted there, I would never see them again. Today, I sleep a little better due to the incredible efforts of Peter Thomas Senese. Knowing Mr. Senese has helped ensure my children’s safety and has helped protect us from Chasing The Cyclone of international child abduction. Along the way, he has never asked for anything.”

MR. said, “Unequivocally, Peter Thomas Senese is a tremendous person of great honor and integrity, he acts selflessly on behalf of children all across the globe, he is honest, sincere, unbowed, and willing to stand up against those that act against others. My abducted child is coming home, finally after all these years, in no small way because of the great assistance I received from Peter Thomas Senese.”

TP, a Lieutenant Commander in the United States Navy (reserve) and a mother said, “Mr. Senese has assisted me during legal proceedings I have initiated in order to prevent my at-risk daughter from being abducted to Brazil . . . Chasing The Cyclone as a matter-of-fact guide as to the risk factors that may indicate an abduction and legal steps to take in order to prevent this from happening. Mr. Senese’s work and network continue to protect my daughter and other targeted children.”

Of course, when you are dealing with defending against international parental child abduction, the kidnapper or those working with the abductor are not going to be very happy to know that abduction prevention advocates such as myself and the I CARE Foundation team who possess a strong track record of assisting children are acting to stop their illicit and abusive act.  So, part of the turf in working tirelessly to protect children from being abducted or rescuing kidnapped children is that child abusing abductors will attempt to discredit me and the I CARE Foundation team. There efforts will have no bearing on our highly dedicated foundation: we will continue to act to stop child abduction and whenever possible, legally assist a parent in their heroic effort to reunite with their stolen child or children


                                                          The I CARE Foundation

A great deal of the goals I have set out to achieve have been connected to the I CARE Foundation.

For those of you who are not aware of the I CARE Foundation, we are a not-for-profit organization that  has gradually become a visible stakeholder in the world of international parental child abduction prevention and reunification with a large and growing list of impressive accomplishments. 

The accomplishments of the I CARE Foundation include assisting in numerous LEGAL international child abduction recoveries and reunification, heavily participated in exponentially more successful acts to prevent abduction from occurring, our ongoing groundbreaking research in the area of international child abduction and trafficking has provided new, accurate, and insightful information as to the severity of the global epidemic society as a whole has before it, our comprehensive and expansive reporting of our research findings has led other stakeholders to protect numerous children from abduction while allowing us to significantly advance our legislative initiatives, some of which have either already become law or agency policy, while legislative initiatives are moving forward in a manner we could hope for.  Additionally, we continue to build a national network of pro bono lawyers who participate in the U.S. Department of State's 'Hague Convention Attorney Network', while nearing completion for the first-ever international child abduction case law data base.

One last thing: as some of you may know, I have donated 100% of all of my publishing earnings to the I CARE Foundation in order to help try to recover children who have been abducted.  So, if you're interested in reading any of my novels such as Chasing The Cyclone, The Den of the Assassin, Cloing Christ, or War on Wall Street, know that your purchase will be directed to making a difference for children.

For more information about the I CARE Foundation please feel free to send an email to mediarelations@stopchildabduction.org.

Peter Senese: Child Advocates Honesty and Integrity In Child Custody Issues Offers Solutions

As the rapidly expanding malignant tentacles known as international parental child abduction cruelly grasp at defenseless innocent children in countries around the world it is imperative that governments everywhere defend against this malice by passing and upholding local and national child abduction prevention laws. Critically, lawmakers must create abduction prevention laws while law enforcement and the judiciary must carefully uphold these laws that were created to protect innocence: our children.

As the vast majority of individuals around the world who advocate for targeted children will testify to, the most crucial component needed to fight the global war of international parental child abduction – and make no mistake: it is a war – is for child abduction prevention laws to be created and fully enforced.

Unfortunately, one of the heartbreaking issues that targeted parents face today is the great challenge and difficulties of having a court actually uphold new laws pertaining to risk factors associated with a potential child abduction. Judicial ignorance can no longer be an unspoken acceptable truth, and Lady Justice must remove her blindfold in the name of defending a child at risk of the horrific crime of parental kidnapping.

Lady Justice, hundreds of thousands of children each year targeted for cross-border criminal abduction need you to see. Today.

Before I go further, I will share an opinion many other targeted parents of abduction I have spoken to share with me: If a court handling a potential child abduction case establishes a zero tolerance policy toward any form of perjury, then the chicanery and intended fraudulent actions of a parent intending to mislead the court and abduct a child may actually be re-considered. A pretty simple policy: if you lie to the court, particularly when it comes to a child’s welfare, then you better be prepared to pay the consequences for your action: sitting in a cell for a period of time and losing your access privileges to your child that you previously may have been entitled to.

Presently, I am voluntarily assisting in several potential abduction cases, including a few cases that are located in the State of Florida. For those of you who may not be aware, on January 1st, 2011 Florida’s ‘Child Abduction Prevention Act’ that was drafted by child abduction prevention advocate and my good friend, Carolyn Vlk, became law. The law mandates judges to assess risk factors associated with a potential international child abduction and issue orders that will protect the targeted child and parent from a possible abduction.

However, in certain cases to which I am familiar with, there have been notable failures by the courts to fully utilize the new child abduction prevention law and carefully consider risk factors associated with a potential abduction as has been mandated under the new law.

Tragically, when a judge fails to uphold any child abduction prevention law, they have broken their fiduciary responsibility to protect a child. Equally, when a court fails to consider the criteria established under the new law, they are sending the worst type of message possible: that child abduction prevention laws mean nothing and would-be abductors will not be held accountable for their conspiracy to criminally abduct a child. And this – particularly when it comes to our children – is unthinkable.

The bottom line in weighing risk factors for a court is that a judge must ask this rather simple questions to themselves: ‘What if I am wrong and the child disappears? What true recourse does the targeted parent have to recover the child?”

Well, any knowledgeable judge will know that once a child is removed from their local jurisdiction and taken to another country, the jurisdiction of their court ceases to exist for all intensive purposes. Now jurisdiction belongs to the international courts, so long as the arriving country (the country where the child was illegally taken to) participates in an international treaty such as the 'Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction'. Regrettably, too many nations, including most Asian and Middle Eastern countries are not members of the Hague Convention, while other countries such as Mexico and Brazil are known to not uphold the international treaty they freely signed.

Truly, attempting to navigate an international parental child abduction is like ‘Chasing The Cyclone’.

Consider this: presently there are approximately 230 American children criminally detained in Japan due to a parental kidnapping. Japan is not a member of the Hague Convention. No American child-citizen abducted to Japan has ever been returned. Ever.

Or perhaps a judge should consider the difficulties that a targeted mother would face if her child were kidnapped to Saudi Arabia or any other Middle Eastern country. The prospect of mom safely bringing their child home is near non-existent.

So what exactly is it that a judge must do?

Act prudently at all times and in all circumstances while carefully investigating every aspect of each unique case. Additionally, the court must realize that for many, the international courts are extraordinarily difficult to navigate, that is, if a venue really even exists for a targeted parent to attempt to seek judicial intervention.

One component not often spoken about when considering risk factors is when a parent who may abduct files a (false) police report against the other parent. In scenarios such as this, the court must be mindful that international parental child abduction is a premeditated and well-planned act against both the abducted child and the left behind targeted parent, and that the parent planning an abduction is more than likely familiar with the international laws available to them that they may use to sanction their disobedience before the court.

Specifically, Article 13 of the Hague Convention reads:

Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding Article, the judicial or administrative authority of the requested State is not bound to order the return of the child if the person, institution or other body which opposes its return establishes that –

a) the person, institution or other body having the care of the person of the child was not actually exercising the custody rights at the time of removal or retention, or had consented to or subsequently acquiesced in the removal or retention; or

b) there is a grave risk that his or her return would expose the child to physical or psychological harm or otherwise place the child in an intolerable situation.

The judicial or administrative authority may also refuse to order the return of the child if it finds that the child objects to being returned and has attained an age and degree of maturity at which it is appropriate to take account of its views.

In considering the circumstances referred to in this Article, the judicial and administrative authorities shall take into account the information relating to the social background of the child provided by the Central Authority or other competent authority of the child's habitual residence.

When a parent who is believed to be a potential abductor files a police report against the other parent the court must consider the validity of the complaint and move with great caution because the potential abductor may have now created a plausible but misleading defense under Article 13 of the Hague Convention that a return of the child back to the child’s country of origin may not be in the best interest of the child.

Thus, court’s must be especially mindful that if a parent is able to illegally depart the country of origin with the child, the difficulties of the targeted parent being able to legally return the child has grown exponentially. This said, the court’s must also consider if a complaint may be valid and act accordingly in the name of the best interest of the child.

The bottom line is this: we’re living in a multi-cultural society where individuals from around the world meet and have a child. At times, like in any other relationship, couples will separate or divorce. Unfortunately, too often the child of the partnership is used as a pawn in order to cause great hardship and pain to the targeted parent. International child abduction occurs, and is growing at substantial rates as shared in the report Carolyn Ann Vlk and I have published titled ‘Crisis In America: International Parental Child Abduction Today’. And most concerning is the fact that certain government policies such as the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative have created loopholes for abduction (Click Here to read Peter Senese and Carolyn Vlk's report)

Therefore in lieu of the rapidly growing epidemic now at hand, it is the courts and their sitting judges who offer children with their best defense so long as these judges do not put their head in the sand and mistreat the issues of a potential threat of abduction with an uneducated view of the seriousness of the matters at hand. In order for a court to fulfill its duty to the child-citizens they are obligated to protect, a judge must consider all the risk factors of a potential abduction and act swiftly, boldly, and with action that will secure the safety and welfare of both targeted child and targeted parent.

Perhaps the best overall indicator of an abduction threat is when a parent with strong ties to another country is found to be dishonest to or mislead the court during any matters when it comes to the welfare of a child. Perhaps if the courts upheld the integrity of the procedures before them, including holding a parent accountable for perjury or contempt, judges may be able to prevent the cruelty of storms from descending on a child. Perhaps each court hearing involving a child’s welfare should begin with a judge saying, “Welcome to my courtroom. I want both parties to know that if either of you act in any dishonest way or fail to obey my direction in any capacity, I will hold you in contempt of court. Now let’s proceed.”

For more information on international parental child abduction please visit Chasing The Cyclone. To visit Peter Thomas Senese's official website, please Click Here. To view Peter Senese's 'Chasing Parents: Racing Into the Storms Of International Parental Child Abduction' educational documentary film series please visit 'Chasing The Cyclone'.

Japan: The Safe Harbor For Parental Children Kidnappers

Imagine having your child criminally kidnapped and abducted by the child’s other parent to another country that is known as a fortified and impenetrable safe-harbor for child abductors. Now consider the notion that this nation is one of the United States main strategic allies and trading partners. Are you thinking that this is impossible? Are you wondering what country this is?

Welcome to Japan.

As astronomers push our minds and imaginations by studying the universe, we have come to learn that ‘black holes’ exist many light years away. Think again.

Since at least the inception of The Hague Convention On The Civil Aspects On International Parental Child Abduction – the main international treaty that addresses international parental child abduction – which Japan still has not signed – there has never been one criminally kidnapped and parentally abducted child returned by Japan to the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, or anywhere else for that matter.

Once a criminally kidnapped child enters into Japan with their abducting parent, the abducting parent has entered a safe harbor, and fear of prosecution or extradition are put aside. As for the abducted, victimized child – they, like the Chasing Parent left behind in the wake of their child’s abduction, have entered into a black hole where both short and long-term damage almost always plagues the child for the rest of their life.

I will reiterate the unthinkable: It is believed that no child abducted to Japan has ever been returned.

According to various government and independent reports, it is estimated that there presently are 85 active cases involving approximately 230 American children-citizens who have been kidnapped and are presently illegally detained in Japan during the time period of 2000 through mid-2009. There have been hundreds of cases that have been closed during this time period. Information on why these cases have been closed was not available at the time of this article.

In addition, there are at least 38 children-citizens from the United Kingdom, and at least 37 children-citizens from Canada presently being held illegally in Japan. According to William Duncan, the Deputy Secretary General of the Hague Conference on Private International Law, there are approximately 1,300 children in total presently living in Japan that are considered abducted and who’s wrongful retention is in violation of criminal kidnapping and abduction laws originating from these children’s countries of original jurisdiction.

So what do you do if your child has been abducted to Japan? This question is the very same question scores of heartbroken but determined loving parents have asked themselves for some time.

Except now, it appears that the tide is turning, and the voices of determined Chasing Parents have finally reached the policymakers in Washington and Tokyo. And their message is clear: Japan’s failure to uphold the laws of the nation of an abducted child’s original jurisdiction will no longer be tolerated.

Last month a two-day close door meeting took place between leading Hague-signatory countries and leaders in Japan, the Ambassadors of the Hague-signatory nations stated in a joint press conference:

We, the Ambassadors to Japan of Australia, Canada, France, Italy, New Zealand, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States have on several occasions expressed our concern to the Government of Japan about the increase in international parental abduction cases involving Japan and affecting our nationals.

We welcome recent statements by the Prime Minister, the Foreign Minister, the Justice Minister and other Japanese officials recognizing the seriousness of this international problem. We are encouraged by recent positive initiatives by the Government of Japan, such as the establishment of the Division for Issues Related to Child Custody within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

In this spirit, today we have concluded a two-day symposium during which experts from our nations discussed aspects of child abduction with Japanese Government officials and other leaders in this field.


So, you might be asking yourself, why is Japan clearly violating court orders from foreign courts that possessed jurisdiction of the child due to the child’s habitual residency?

Well, the answers are can be found in the nation’s culture and laws. First, change in Japan typically does not occur from within the nation’s borders. If change does occur, it is typically due to the international community expressing urgent concern over this country’s behavior. In addition, the family laws governing divorce and separation in Japan give only one parent custody and guardianship of the children of the divorce, and custody is almost always issued to the mother of the children. And in almost all cases, the non-custodial, non-guardian parent seldom sees the children of the marriage once the divorce action begins.

In addition, parties in Japan have consistently stated that there is great fear in ordering the return of the child and abducting parent because the majority of these cases involve domestic violence.

On February 2nd, 2010 Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell was asked a specific question regarding domestic violence and Japan’s policy of no-return from Maegawa, a reporter from Japan’s national newspaper Asahi Shimbun. The following was taken directly from the United States Department of State’s website.

QUESTION: Thank you for taking my question. I’m Maegawa from Asahi Shimbun, a national newspaper in Japan. I have a question on the Hague -- this issue – because some Japanese citizens are very concerned because this issue includes some of the domestic violence cases where some spouses or ex-spouses have actually fled from the spouses and had no choice but to take the children with them. How do you answer that question?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: I have to say, I've heard this on a number of occasions from Japanese friends, and I think that there is the view that this is a very widespread phenomenon. These allegations caused extraordinary unhappiness among this community, most of whom in the United States already had legal custody, sometimes had gone through divorce or were separated. We can find almost no cases of alleged or actual substantiated claims of violence and where those apply, we of course, understand and support that. But because of the legal situation in Japan, I think that this allegation is used very loosely and oftentimes inappropriately without any supporting criteria whatsoever, and our particular issue is with a situation in which once there has been a separation or a divorce in the United States and when a parent is given dual custody -- parents are given dual custody -- and one of the parents takes the children to Japan outside of a legal framework that's been established. That's kidnapping, and that's a very grave and worrisome problem that needs to be dealt with. I would say that there is a substantial misconception on this issue in Japan that the cases that we are dealing with are primarily those of domestic abuse. Our judgment would be that that is not the case. Okay, last question.

Pressure inside Japan seems to be mounting to sign the Hague Convention. Recently, a Czech father took his Czech-Japanese son to the Czech Republic outside of court orders. The action was met with a loud outcry in Japan, as the mother of the child collected 10,000 Japanese signatures urging Japan to sign the Hague Convention so that the left behind mother could legally attempt to recover her child.

So, perhaps change is occurring within Japan, but internal change has not been something the country is known for.

Diplomatic efforts by countries including the United States, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Italy, France, Spain, and the United Kingdom continue to put great pressure on the Diet and Japan’s Prime Minister, Yukio Hatoyama. In February of this past year, Hatoyama stated that he was willing to sign a treaty that addressed international parental child abduction, but cautioned that it might take until next year before this is achieved.

Japan’s Prime Minister Hatoyama is scheduled to visit Washington, D.C. on April 9th, 10th, and 11th in conjunction with the Cherry Blossom Festival.

It is expected that a large and vocal group of Chasing Parents from the United States will make their concerns known during the weeklong festivities in Washington. These parents of criminally kidnapped and wrongfully retained children are anticipated to meet with various legislative leaders, key members of the U.S. Department of State, and are expected to pass out flyers and other information during the Cherry Blossom Festival.

For more information of the children still captive in Japan, the parents who are desperately trying to bring them home, and how to show your support, please visit http://bachome.org. For more information on Peter Thomas Senese and ‘Chasing The Cyclone’ please visit www.chasingthecyclone.com