Strategies for Preventing Child Abduction
When one or both of the parents involved in a custody dispute has ties to different countries, it is extremely important to take measures to limit the danger of parental abduction of the child to a foreign country before it occurs. The failure to take appropriate precautions can be extremely costly to the parent left behind and to the abducted child in terms of both emotional well-being and economic expense. The adage that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure is especially true in the context of parental kidnapping. What should be done when a parent with foreign ties asks to take a child on a trip to visit relatives abroad? The request may seem entirely reasonable and even beneficial for the child, yet it creates significant risk and unease for the parent left behind. The answer to this question depends heavily on the specific circumstances involved, but knee-jerk reactions can be both costly and risky. Each situation should be considered carefully by professionals familiar with the subject of parental child abduction generally, and specifically with the laws of the jurisdiction to which the trip is being considered.
As in so many areas of the law, attempts of an attorney not well versed in the fundamentals of international child abduction to prevent a kidnapping can be well-intentioned but useless, expensive and even dangerous to their clients. Our office was recently approached by a client who had already spent over $10,000 having his former attorney draft a motion intended to place on absolute prohibition on his wife from traveling to Israel for what she alleged would be a vacation with their two minor children. No attempt to negotiate an appropriate stipulation between the parents, a much less expensive and more appropriate approach in these particular circumstances, was even made. Since Israel is a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (“the Hague Convention”), and has reasonably good standing in terms of honoring its obligations under the Hague Convention, and because these particular parties had sufficient assets in the United States so that the traveling wife was able to post a significant bond to guarantee her return with the children by set deadlines, as well as to finance a Hague Convention proceeding which would have to be undertaken by the father in Israel if she did not, it should have been clear to the former attorney that the likelihood of his motion being successful was, in those circumstances, questionable at best. Moreover, the former attorney took the risk of his motion being rejected outright, allowing the wife to travel without any safeguards in place at all.
Though the motion of the former attorney was not successful, luckily the client was still holding the children’s passports when he approached us. The children’s mother had, however, submitted a motion asking that the court order the release of the passports to her. It was at this point that we negotiated a stipulation on behalf of the client with the mother. According to this stipulation the mother made a series of acknowledgments which would make it extremely difficult for her to fight a Hague Convention proceeding in Israel, she posted a significant cash bond to guarantee her return to the United States by a certain date, she made certain commitments regarding the trip itinerary, a commitment to have the passports held in escrow upon her return, and she made important concessions in terms of jurisdictional and procedural issues to be binding in both Israel and the United States. The mother returned as scheduled, and in the process our client’s position was significantly improved insofar as issues of potential abduction were concerned. The negotiated stipulation cost our client a relatively small amount in legal fees and could have been pursued without the need of the costly, risky and unsuccessful motion prepared by his former counsel. It should be noted that had the mother refused to negotiate the stipulation, something that would have been apparent quite quickly, this would have served as an indication of her true intentions regarding the trip, and would have made the client’s objection to her traveling with the children more likely to carry the day.
The above example is not meant to indicate that the pursuit of a negotiated stipulation is the best course of action in every case, merely that it is an option that must be considered where the circumstances justify it. If, in the case above, the mother had had ties to a country that was not a party to the Hague Convention, for instance, or to one with a poor record for honoring its commitments under the Hague Convention even if it was a signatory, a negotiated stipulation would be of limited value and a significant risk of abduction would still exist. In circumstances like these, seeking an absolute prohibition of travel with the children might truly be the best course of action. Each case has to be evaluated on its own terms by someone familiar with the issues and familiar with the legal atmosphere of the country to which the travel is being considered. Having access to a professional well-versed in the laws and record of the foreign country in connection with child abduction issues is often critical when it comes to convincing the court to do the right thing.
There are many other practical safeguards which should be adopted in all cases where the danger of child abduction exists, such as alerting the United States Department of State and the appropriate foreign governmental bodies to insure that no new passports are issued on behalf of the children without the knowledge and consent of both parents, making sure the existing passports are not in the control of the parent whose travel is the source of concern, and many other practical measures designed to limit the risk of a child’s abduction. Some examples, taken from the United States Department of State’s website, include the following:
Keep a list of the addresses and telephone numbers of the other parent's relatives, friends, and business associates both here and abroad;
Keep a record of important information about the other parent, including: physical description, passport, social security, bank account, and driver''s license numbers, and vehicle description and plate number;
Keep a written description of your child, including hair and eye color, height, weight, fingerprints, and any special physical characteristics; and
Take full-face color photographs and/or videos of your child every six months - a recent photo of the other parent may also be useful.
If your child should be abducted, this information could be vital in locating your child.
In addition, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, (NCMEC) suggests that you teach your child to use the telephone, memorize your home phone number, practice making collect calls, and instruct him or her to call home immediately if anything unusual happens.