The Office Of Children's Issues: Heroes Who Protect Children From Abduction

The work conducted by the Office Of Children's Issues to help children at risk of abduction has been nothing short of heroic. This assessment is shared by many international parental child abduction stakeholders and is based upon the significant decline of reported U.S. outbound international child abductions over the past two years. While America's reported international child abduction rate has steadily declined, abduction occuring in countries around the world continues to surge - Peter Thomas Senese, Founding Director of the I CARE Foundation

For some time I have wanted to share my view about a group of individuals I consider to be heroes  due to their dedication helping children and families in crisis: the often under-appreciated, but highly dedicated individuals working at the United States Department of State's Office of Children's Issues Office (OCI) who work diligently assisting families in crisis due to abduction.  The perspective I share is one held by all members of the I CARE Foundation.

By virtue of their efforts, this remarkable team has created many miracles demonstrated by the significant decline of reported outbound American child-citizen abduction cases over the past two fiscal reporting years (2011 and 2012) while parental kidnappings in countries around the world continue to soar.

As the summer months of international parental child abduction is now upon us, we hope the sound work of OCI continues to educate targeted parents about the warning signs of abduction so children may be protected from abduction.



Peter Thomas Senese's
Critically Acclaimed
CHASING THE CYCLONE

As a former chasing parent who once turned to and received assistance from the Office of Children's Issues, and who now years later, as the Founding Director of the I CARE Foundation - a non-profit organization dedicated to helping stop abduction -  I can say that it is about time that the indefatigable efforts of the Office of Children's Issues is acknowledged, applauded, and certainly, many aspects of their outreach programs should be emulated by other nations.

In the near future, I will be sharing a more detailed retrospective, including coverage in the documentary film 150,000 Internationally Abducted Children now in production concerning the Office of Children's Issues and this dedicated team, many mothers and fathers themselves, who work tirelessly fighting child abduction under the legal guidelines established by the United States Congress when our government acceded to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. 

Within Congressional guidelines, OCI diligently works to assist American citizens either protect their targeted children from outbound abduction, or provide help in a chasing parent's quest to find and reunite with their abducted child who was illegally kidnapped from the United States.  Equally, individuals working at the Office of Children's Issues try to assist chasing parents who have had their child abducted to the United States.  

In its role as the United States' Central Authority with respect to the Hague Abduction Convention, the Office Of Children's Issues is responsible for taking certain action as outlined by Congress in cases involving international child abduction. OCI also provides information in response to inquiries about international child abduction, visitation rights and abduction prevention techniques. Like other Central Authorities around the world, it's responsible for working closely with other agencies and Central Authorities to ensure the speedy return of children under the Hague Convention.

The Office of Children's Issues and the broader U.S. State Department has received sustained criticism by parents of children abducted to and from the United States and the lawyers who represent them for failing to treat international child abduction as a human rights issue rather than a diplomatic irritant, and taking a non-partisan, impartial role rather than effectively advocating for victimized parents and abducted children. 

The Non-Profit
I CARE Foundation
has assisted numerous families.

From the I CARE Foundation's view, there is no question that the United States government, along with all governments around the world should and could do more to assist children and their families who are kidnapped. 

This said, we must be mindful of the authority Congress vested in the Office of Children's Issues when it became a signatory of the Hague Convention. The reality is an organization is as only as good as their governing guidelines and resources that are made available to them.  So despite their limited operational reach and resources as dictated by Congress, the fact is the individuals who work in the Office of Children's Issues happen to be some of the most dedicated and concerned stakeholders in the world who work in the never-ending storms known as international parental child abduction. 

As a group of individuals with direct first-hand insight at being on the front-line in the war against child abduction, the I CARE Foundation recognizes the incredible tasks all individuals working with the Office of Children's Issues face.

Truth is, when you deal each and every day with international child abduction: trying to assist children and families of internationally kidnapped children while having limited means to do so; and, while you try to comfort the targeted parent who is emotionally and often financially overwhelmed at the abduction of their child; and, while you try to manage the large case load you are tasked to oversee because Congress has limited the resources the Office has been given; and, while you see what appears to be an unending parade of abduction cases (inbound and outbound) come through your door, there is no question that abduction pulls out you. 

Reality is that the individuals who dedicate their lives trying to aid families in crisis of abduction know heartbreak.  Sometimes, they succeed in assisting a family. Sadly, sometimes, they do not. Unfortunately, fighting abduction is very complicated.

However, despite the limited resources made available to them, the Office of Children's Issues has been making one heck of an impact as demonstrated by hard statistics. 

Due to the significant decline in outbound U.S. international parental child abduction cases that the Office of Children's Issues is a key stakeholder in, combined with a general, though limited increase of abduction return cases (see 'Extreme Difficulties In Returning Internationally Abducted Children'), I speak for the I CARE Foundation when I say OCI is made up of many heroes of children.

This past December, 2012 the U.S. Senate passed Senate Resolution 543, condemning international parental child abduction. The resolution was a powerful statement concerning the reality of abduction. In it's passage, we can hope that OCI will receive more funding and broader power to further assist children and their families of abduction. 

Reported Cases Of Outbound Child Abductions From The United States Declines: Contradicts Global Trend For Second Year In A Row

Impressively, the Office of Children's Issues abduction prevention outreach has done something that apparently no other country in the world has accomplished: as international parental child abduction continues to soar around the world, with abduction rates surpassing anywhere from 10% to over 80% per year based upon countries reporting abduction (note: Canada has stopped reporting abduction since 2008), the reported outbound cases of American child abduction has declined by over 15% per year during fiscal years 2011 and 2012.

This is nothing short of a Herculean effort that has created miracles for a large number of families. When considering that primarily due to a large number of anticipated unreported cases of outbound child abductions from the United States associated with the slightly over 11.1 million unregistered alien residents living in America that has been forcast to represent at least 100% of the reported outbound abduction rate according to several I CARE Foundation published studies, the decline in the outbound abduction rate may represent several thousand children, and that, is nothing short of a miracle.

But let's put this in a clearer light in order to truly understand the remarkable effort by the Office of Children's Issues team.

Using a five year reporting period from 2006 to 2010, average international parental child abduction growth in the United States surpassed 20% per year.  Additionally, abduction appears to have increased each year during the three decades the United States took part of the Hague Convention.

Specifically, during 2012 there were 799 reported international parental child abduction cases filed with the United States Central Authority representing a total of 1,144 children. Previously, in 2011 there were a total of 941 reported international parental child abduction cases filed with the United States Central Authority, representing a total of 1,367 children.

Thus, the reduction by 142 filed cases represents a decline of 15% of reported abduction cases from 2012 from 2011. During the same reporting period, there were 223 fewer children internationally kidnapped in 2012 from 2011, representing a 16.3% decrease of total children abducted.

Comparatively, there were 1022 reported international parental child abduction cases in 2010 representing 1,492 children. Thus, there has been a reduction of 223 reported abduction cases from 2010 to 2012, representing a total decline of 348 children between the two years. This represents a two year decline from 2010 to 2012 in reported cases by 21.8%, and a 23.3% reduction over the same two year period in the number of children kidnapped.

Now, is this dramatic decline in the abduction rate completely due to the Office of Children's Issues?  Of course not.

However, OCI is a key and critical stakeholder in the fight to prevent international child abduction amongst American children, and their efforts to do so have unquestionably reduced abduction despite a skyrocketing global trend in abduction.

Why is international parental child abduction occurring?

The answer is rather direct. Our world is becoming filled with global citizens. Individuals from different countries travel abroad to study or work. Some enter into relationships with a person from the country they are visiting, and a child is eventually born from that relationship. During the course of the time, some of these relationships fail. Divorce is a reality. However, often, the foreign-born national living in a foreign country may feel isolated and may desire to return to their country of origin with their child, who more than likely possesses a right of citizenship to that parent's country of birth. Realizing that the child's other parent probably would not consent to having the child relocated abroad, and that a court more than likely would not grant mobility to relocate either, that parent often creates a deceitful scheme to illegally remove the child from the child's country of jurisdiction without consent from the other parent or consent from the court. This is called international parental child abduction. And it is not only an abusive act against a child, but it is a serious, and at times, dangerous crime of kidnapping that has both short and long term effects on the victimized child.

The sad fact is that a large number of marriages, estimated to be between 40% and 50%, in the U.S. end in divorce.  The divorce rate increases to nearly 70% during multinational marriages.  And as recently reported by The New York Times, the whole concept of marriage really is . . . well, 'Why Do People Still Marry? Why Bother? - which I think says a great deal about the shift in committed partnerships in a mobile world.

Another Way To Measure The Office Of Children's Issues Effectiveness: Immigration Migration and Its Affect On Child Abduction Cases 

Regardless of the side of the debate you may be on regarding immigration reform, and your view of unregistered alien residents living in the United States today, the fact is that if a child is born in the United States by two unregistered residents, that child is an American citizen.  

This fact as it is associated with abduction is that just like failed marriages or relationships between legal residents living in the United States, partnerships between unregistered residents fail. And when this occurs, there are times when one of the child's parents may seek to return to their native country, and take the American child-citizen with them.

Unfortunately, when the threat of abduction occurs, undocumented residents have not realized that they can turn to the Department of State's Office of Children's Issues for legal assistance as OCI.  I know this first-hand as the I CARE Foundation's legal team of attorneys has in the past worked with OCI when dealing with undocumented residents and child abduction.

Has the Office of Children's Issues been effective in assisting unregistered parents with abduction cases? 

The answer is not one that can be statistically determined; however, insight can be provided by the increase in abduction prevention cases originating from unregistered residents.  For example, the number of unregistered abduction prevention cases the I CARE Foundation assisted in during fiscal year 2012 to 2013 increased by 175% from the number of cased we assisted in during fiscal year 2011.  In addition, during the first 5 months of 2013, the I CARE Foundation's outreach assisting undocumented residents is already at 70% of the case load during fiscal year  2012.  We fully expect that the number of undocumented alien abduction prevention cases we will assist on during 2013 will double our case load of 2012.

One of the primary reasons why the number of abduction prevention cases is occurring is because the Office of Children's Issues has in fact worked hard to reach Hispanic communities and share a strong and honest message that OCI is there willing and able to help these often forgotten families.

The I CARE Foundation, with our view from the trenches fighting abduction, applauds OCI's commitment.

A report compiled by the renowned Washington-based Pew Hispanic Center reports that most immigrant groups are comprised of young families. The likelihood that a child will be born while the parents are present in the U.S. is high. Prior to 2007, data collected on parents of children under 18 only identified one parent, and a second parent could only be identified if they were married to the first parent. Currently, a second parent identifier is considered whether or not the parents are married to each other. The new data more accurately reflects the number of children living in the U.S. with at least one foreign-born parent.

In 2008 that meant that 22% of all children in the United States had at least one foreign-born parent. In fact, consider the following statistics compiled by the Center for Immigration Studies in its March 2007 analysis. Immigrants and their U.S. born children under age 18, as a share of population: California – 37.9%, Los Angles County – 50%, New York State – 27.9%, New York City – 46.7% and Florida – 27.9%.

It must be noted that although 31.3% of all immigrants originate from Mexico, other countries have significant entry numbers as well. Included in the March 2007 Current Population Survey (CPS) were statistics indicating that 17.6% of all immigrants were from East/Southeast Asia, 12.5% from Europe, 5.5% from South Asia, 3.5% from the Middle East, and Canada at 1.9%.

Traditionally, states such as California, New York, Florida, Texas, Illinois and Arizona have had large numbers of immigrants in their population. What is surprising is the trends in migration toward new centers of immigrant growth. The CPS prepared an analysis of states with statistically significant growth in immigrant population between 2000 and 2007. Most notably, Wyoming, which experienced a percentage increase of 180%, Tennessee at 160%, Georgia at 152.1%, and Alabama at 143.6%. The impact of unprecedented increases in immigrant migration is likely to create multiple challenges as states struggle to keep pace with their newest segment of population and their children.

As a nation of immigrants, it is important to note that as our nation’s population increases due to immigrant migration, so too does the likelihood of increased cross-border child abduction.

Additionally, it has been well established that illegal aliens do not respond to surveys such as the US Census or the CPS. Because the U.S. government does not have accurate records of arrival and departures for individuals present illegally in the country, their numbers must be estimated, as there is no hard data to draw from. However, indirect means for establishing these figures are used, and they must be viewed with a considerable amount of uncertainty. In 2007 CPS, it was estimated that of the approximately 37.9 million immigrants present in the U.S., nearly 1 in 3 immigrants were present illegally.

It is important to note this segment of our population when discussing child abduction because when a child is born in the U.S. that child automatically is a U.S. citizen. While the available data gives us fairly accurate figures regarding the number of children born in the U.S. as well as those immigrants who are present legally, a number is impossible to compile accurately in relation to the unauthorized resident population.

In regards to children born to illegal immigrants, in the five-year period from 2003 to 2008, that number rose from 2.7 million to 4 million. The report published by the Pew Hispanic Centers reported that nationally the children of illegal immigrants now comprise 1 in 15 elementary and secondary students in the U.S. Additionally, in Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada and Texas more than 1 in every 10 students in those states are the children of illegal immigrants.


A Possible Decline In Unreported Cases of Abduction On The Horizon?

One thing that is of great interest, is a comment made by Jeffrey S. Passel, a senior demographer at the Pew Center.  Passel said, "When we look at the unauthorized immigrant population today, there are a lot of people who came more than 10-15 years ago, and not a lot from the last five years. Two-thirds have been here more than 10 years."

Does this mean that the number of expected unreported cases of abduction, or the number of reported cases filed by undocumented residents will decline?

If we simply consider a statistical curve based upon unregistered population and forceasted abduction's, then the answer is yes, particularly since OCI's outreach to this portion of the population living in the United States has made a big difference.

So What Can The Office Of Children's Issues Do, and What Can They Not Do?

 I speak first-hand as a former Chasing Parent, that it is important to have realistic expectations from the Office of Children's Issues with regard to abduction.  Until such time that Congress changes the role of OCI, this is what you should expect:

• OCI can provide you with information about various resources that may assist you in your efforts to return your child to the United States;
• If your child was abducted to a country that is a U.S. partner under the Hague Abduction Convention, as appropriate, OCI may accept your Hague application, forward it to the foreign central authority in the country to which your child has been abducted, and monitor developments concerning your child’s case through the Foreign Central Authority;
• OCI can provide a list of attorneys in the country where your child is located;
• OCI can answer questions from local and federal law enforcement about the Department’s role in international parental child abduction cases;
• OCI can facilitate your communication with U.S. government agencies and non-governmental organizations that may be able to assist you.

What you should not expect from OCI is the following:

• OCI will not recover your child for you;
• OCI will not assist you with any financial costs associated with reunification;
• OCI will not provide you with legal advice;

Expanding Understanding Of International Parental Child Abduction Amongst The International Community

Japan Appears to Finally Be
Prepared To Sign
The Hague Convention 

One of the more impressive, but little talked about accomplishments of the Office of Children's Issues is that using diplomacy, individuals in the Office have worked tirelessly to educate their counterparts in foreign countries about international abduction, and have assisted many countries create their own Central Authorities as required by the Hague Convention.  In addition, the Department of State has applied continued pressure on countries who have either not signed the Hague Convention (such as Japan, which is expected to become a signatory in 2014, or South Korea, which is now a signatory of the Convention).  Furthermore, ongoing diplomatic efforts to have non-complying Hague signatory countries follow the intent and spirit of the Hague Convention are a big part of OCI's global outreach.

Contact Information

For More Information On The Office Of Children's Issues, please visit The Department of State's Website.  Additional information is as follows:

Office of Children's Issues

International Parental Child Abduction

Phone: 1-888-407-4747; 202-501-4444
Fax: 202-736-9132
E-mail: AskCI@state.gov
Web Address: www.childabduction.state.gov
Mailing Address:United States Department of State
Bureau of Consular Affairs
Office of Children's Issues
SA-29
2201 C Street, NW
Washington, DC 20520

Phone: 1-888-407-4747; 202-501-4444
E-mail: AskCI@state.gov

Children's Passport Issuance Alert Program

Phone: 1-888-407-4747
Fax: 202-736-9133
E-mail: PreventAbduction@state.gov
Mailing Address:
U.S. Department of State
Overseas Citizen Services Attn: Children's Passport Issuance Alert Program
SA-29
2201 C Street, NW
Washington, DC 20520

Se habla Español: 1-888-407-4747

Intercountry Adoption Division*

Phone: 1-888-407-4747; 202-501-4444
Fax: 202-736-9080
E-mail: AdoptionUSCA@state.gov
Web Address: Adoption.State.Gov

 More To Come

 As shared in the beginning of this essay, this is a short overview of the Office of Children's Issues and why the efforts of many individuals associated with the OCI should be considered heroic and the individuals themselves heroes.  Is there room to improve? There always is for each of us. However, today we take the time to acknowledge the incredible achievements accomplished, with an eye toward building upon the success of protecting children.  And by no means are we out of the woods, but the mountain of abduction is being pushed back, and OCI's efforts have had a big reason to do with that.

During the time I was Chasing The Cyclone of international parental child abduction, I turned to the Office of Children's Issues with reasonable expectations.  Was the abduction of my child awful? Of course. And there could never be anything that could properly share the evil acts committed against him or me.  But with reasonable expectations, there will never be a day that goes by that I will not hold the individuals at OCI with great respect and esteem, for I will always be thankful for what they did to assist me under the guidelines they were able to.

One last note: To all the individuals who have worked or presently worked at the Office of Children's Issues, the work you perform is so important to so many. Reality is the impact you have and continue to have will be felt by so many families you will never know nor ever hear about.  But that does not diminish the important work you have done.  And as is often shared, the tragedy of abduction is one that causes a targeted parent the desire to forget the nightmare their family faced, you should know that there is so much appreciation from so many families - and I and my family are part of that expansive group.

On behalf of the I CARE Foundation

Peter Thomas Senese

Passport Concerns Associated With International Parnetal Child Abduction: Fraud, Dual Passports, Ease Of Border-Crossings



Peter Thomas Senese: "Illegally Obtained Child Passports At Core Of International Parental Child Abduction And Demonstrate Well-Planned Schemes of Kidnappers."

 

In the wake of another international parental child abduction enabled because a parent-kidnapper was able to illegally obtain a valid passport for their child by alledgedly forging the signature of the child's other parent, one thing is certain: as the summer vacation approaces, many children will be targeted for international abduction.  This past memorial day, news traveled across North America because a young Colorado child was parentally abducted from his assaulted mother, and illegally removed to Canada despite an Amber Alert. 

The abduction of three year old Luke Turner sounds the alarm of several serious concerns regarding a parent and a nation's ability to protect children from abduction.

Of noteworthy concern are the following issues:

1. The abducting father was able to obtain a valid passport for the child by allegedly forging passport documents on behalf of the child's mother.

2. The Amber Alert that was issued failed to reach the Canadian Border Control, and was limited to only several states.  Thus, creating concern over how local, untrained law enforcement charged with abduction cases may handle concern over illegal border exits based upon either a parent obtaining a valid passport under fraud, or, by traveling to an adjacent border (Mexico or Canada), or by traveling abroad by sea via a cruise ship under the existing Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative policy which requires a minor under 16 years of age to cross the bordre by land or sea by presenting a photocopy of a naturalization document.

3. The physical and potentially life-threatening lenght an abductor may go to cause the targeted other parent grave harm.

4. Concerns over international parental chld abduction associated to dual passports and the inability of countries to effectively safeguard against abduction when a taking parent has in their possession a passport for their child issued by another nation (this occurs when that parent is a citizen of another country, which is always the case in multinational relationships).


Luke Turner's abduction highlights many immediate challenges and grave concerns targeted parents of abduction are going to face as the summer approaches. Knowing the warning signs of international parental child abduction is critical. . 

As stated by Detective Commander Jeff Satur, Mrs. Turner was not aware that Luke had an American passport.  According to U.S. law, both Mr. and Mrs. Turner were required to sign the passport application for their child. Clearly this did not happen, as the notion of abduction to Canada was initially not considered by law enforcment because Mrs. Turner did not know of the passport. 

In a similar case of international parental child abduction case that utilized illegally obtained passports the I CARE Foundation was heavily involved in and played a key role in reunification, another Colorado mother had her two-year old son abducted to the not-so-cooperative non-Hague Convention country of Nigeria last year.

At the time of her son's abduction, the child's father had illegally obtained a valid U.S. passport for the child by forging the mother's signature on the passport application. Then, under the guise of a weekend visitation, the father, who lived in Colorado, but possessed dual citizenship, fled to Africa.

Through great effort and cooperation from key individuals in Nigeria, the child was returned to the United States.  Seargent Paul Cortapasso, based out of New York, and who assisted the I CARE Foundation during the reunification process said, "It is very troubling to see how these illegally obtained passports for children are being obtained with relative ease and are unknown to the targeted parent.  The parallels between the two Colorado mothers and how the abductor was able to leave the country present a serious concern for society, particularly now as the summer months approach and abduction rates dramatically increase. I will never forget the sense of happiness I felt seeing the young child when he was returned from Nigeria."

Raising awareness of international parental child abduction is one of the main defenses against abduction.In fact, over the past two years, international parental child abduction reported outbound cases originating from the United States has declined by 15% per year. This was accomplished in great part because of social stewardship about abduction.

Clearly, the key to stopping child kidnappings is to prevent it from happening in the first place.

One of the things we can do is modify the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative policy so that all children traveling abroad, regardless if they are traveling by land, sea, or air, must present a valid passport.

In addition, we must create a stronger verification system in place when passports are being requested for children.

We must be mindful that parents who possess a right of citizenship to another country provide a child of a multinational relationship the same right of citizenship.  Chldren who possess dual citizenship have a high rate of being victims of international parental child abduction when a marriage or relationship fails.

In the United States, one immediate remedy all parents concerned with possible child abduction can do is place their child on the U.S. Passport Issuance Alert Program.

For more information of international parental child abduction, please visit the I CARE Foundation and Chasing The Cyclone. In Canada, please visit I Cheapeau.

International Multicultural Child Custody, Divorce and Summer Child Abductions Warning Signs

Hi, I’m Peter Thomas Senese, the Founding Director of the I CARE Foundation and as the summer school vacation period approaches, I would like to share with you the assortment of warning signs and risk factors associated international parental child abduction that targets thousands upon thousands of unsuspecting parents and defenseless children each year primarily who are a product of a multi-national relationship or marriage that is or has ended. In sharing some key warning signs today, it is my hope that children will be protected from kidnapping and overwhelming abuse.

Now if you’re like hundreds of thousands of parents around the world the term international parental child abduction may be one you are not familiar with. . . . . . until a child you know is kidnapped and illegally detained in a foreign country by the child’s other parent.

Before I go any further, let me say this: the vast majority of children abducted abroad never come home. Tragically, some can’t – they are gone forever.

According to United States Federal Law, the illegal removal of a child from the country without consent of a court or the child’s other parent is a criminal act of kidnapping. The conspiracy that leads up to the child snatching is generally filled with a host of illegal activities, including false allegations toward the targeted parent of abuse toward the child or other parent. This is something I will touch upon later. However, one thing more than anything else should be clear: parental child abduction is not just an act of kidnapping against an innocent child, but inherently, an abducted child becomes a prisoner of the kidnapper forced to follow and obey the predators instruction under the deplorable acts of parental alienation that the kidnapper deploys as they need to rationalize their behavior toward the child-victim.

Generally, the vast majority of abductions are well-planned and are orchestrated so that the other parent is off-guard when the abduction occurs. Blindsided by the act of international parental child abduction – that tragically is treated very differently than a stranger abduction by law enforcement despite the act being a federal crime of kidnapping - parents who attempt to reunite with their child often enter a dark and dangerous world that will change their world forever.

But what are we fighting for?

Lives.

We’re fighting for a child’s life.

Filicide – a term you may not know - is the act of child murder by a parent. In the United States, hundreds of children are murdered by their parents each year. This is not a phenomenon – parental child murder is a reality that knows no borders.

In cases of parental child abduction the kidnapper uses the child as a pawn to cause hurt and suffering toward the other parent. Denying that parent access to the child is a common theme and often the reason why abduction occurs.

The fear is – the reality is – that many abductors exhibiting sociopath behavior often believe that if they can’t have sole custody of a child – nobody will. Additionally, there appears to be a strong correlation of adult suicides connected to child abduction victims.

None of its easy to discuss yet we’re all only three degrees of separation from knowing someone who may be a target of abduction.

In the course of events leading up to the actual abduction or attempted abduction there are clear warning signs that may allow a parent to protect themselves and their children. And with the summer months upon us – the time of year when most child kidnappings take place – I hope that some insight I will share may be of use to you.

On behalf of my colleagues at the I CARE Foundation, one thing is certain: raising awareness and stewarding the message about the warning signs of international parental child abduction 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.

Make no mistake; the reality is that tens of thousands of children living in cities and on farms across our nation are targeted for kidnapping each year. It is carefully estimated that only 10% of these children will ever come home when we consider the ‘reported’ and ‘unreported’ cases of abduction.

Do you really want to play those odds?

Now before I get into a list of warning signs of international abduction you may ask yourself why is international parental child abduction affecting tens of thousands of families?

The answer is complex, but in general terms, we are seeing a substantial increase in multi-national relationships, which personally I think is great; however, with the notion of ‘global citizenship’ comes some challenges.

You see, as our world becomes a closer, more connected society, individuals from different nations develop relationships with one another, some leading to the birth of a child. Unfortunately, some of these relationships end, and when they do, the foreign-born national parent often desires to return to their home country – and when they do – they usually have a desire to take the child with them.

Except they have one problem: the other parent does not want their child to live abroad after being born and raised in their home country.

Knowing that the likelihood of a court granting them permission to live abroad with their child more than likely will not occur, the parent seeking to relocate to a foreign country often creates a clever, well thought-out plan to either abduct the child from the child’s country of original jurisdiction, or, they will create a deceitful scheme that will enable them to legally remove the child from the country they live in – such as plans to travel on a family vacation with intentions of permanent removal.

Once they are abroad, the scheming parent will often lay a host of criminal charges against the other parent, including domestic physical and mental abuse, threats of murder, and outlandish acts of child abuse and neglect – all for one purpose: to sever the other parent’s relationship with the child and to gain legal actions to the foreign courts they are now physically located in by having the targeted parent arrested and prevented from seeing either them or the child.

Now what most individuals do not realize is that once that child steps foot on foreign soil, that child’s temporary welfare becomes the responsibility of the rules of law and courts of the country they are located in.

Which means this: the police and courts must follow the procedures established under their law: the targeted parent more than likely will be arrested, issued restraining orders against them, and have their access to their child denied until an investigation is done. In the meanwhile, the scheming taking parent files a host of legal motions in the country that will further restrain the targeted parent.

Welcome to a scheming kidnappers idea of a vacation.

Sometimes - and I have seen this happen many times – but a kidnapper will say that the other parent actually consented to have the child relocate . . . so that they can litigate ‘what’s in the child’s best interest’ abroad – in their country of origin – and at a tremendous disadvantage to the child’s other parent.

I want to make this very clear: the scheme of a parental child abductor does not discriminate by gender. Men and women generally abduct equally and often cite abuse and mistreatment as the reason why they abducted. They make the claim that they are not abductors but liberators fleeing abuse. The majority of these claims are false. They are lies created to defend against Federal kidnapping charges. They are lies created in hope a court would sanction the abduction under Article 13 of the Hague Convention – a rule that allows an abductor the ability to relocate if they can prove it is not in the child’s best interest to return to their home country. These lies are intended to cruelly cause the targeted parent suffering, including arrest in hope to make any litigation they may bring to reunite with their child difficult or impossible.

So if you think that since you may have a U.S. custody order, and that THAT order will allow you to simply go and bring your child home, you should know this: that once your child is in a foreign country, the pragmatic reality of the custody order you are in possession of may mean very little, especially if the abductor has made a criminal complaint against you and/or filed a civil action for custody. Usually, they happen at the same time.

And so here’s your reality: should you attempt to remove your child and take them home with you, you may be violating laws in the country you and your child are located in and you may be arrested . . . . Your custody order is at least temporarily, useless. Welcome to the world of parental child abduction.

But like Dante’ descending into the Inferno, your nightmare as a targeted chasing parent has only just begun. For example, as an American citizen, do you know that even though the abduction was a criminal act toward you and your child, you are responsible for 100% of all costs associated with finding, monitoring, and litigating your case, including the costs to bring your child home unless you become dead-broke – which often occurs for many targeted parents because the cost to reunite with a child often costs parents hundreds of thousands of dollars. So if you don’t have a large amount of money available, chances are you’re not going to bring your child home. But that’s not it: you still have to deal with the false charges and claims, and litigate abroad. If you don’t think foreign courts have prejudice, you are sadly mistaken.

And if you think you’ll simply be able to get an arrest warrant issued and seek extradition proceedings against the kidnapping parent, you’re in line for some serious disappointment because numerous countries that the United States has extradition agreements with do not have agreements in place regarding parental abduction. In fact, in certain countries, this is not even a crime!

Do you get the sense of hopelessness? If you do – welcome to the world of many chasing parents.

Add to it that while your child is gone, he or she is taught by the abductor to think you are a bad mother or father out to hurt them and their taking parent. Yes, parental alienation and parental isolation are alive and well – and in its abuse, it destroys the innocence and very fabric of your child.

So as the summer approaches, this is the time of year when parents need to be aware of the warning signs of parental child abduction.

I have often heard from parents who tragically stuck their head in the sand and didn’t pay attention to the warning signs that ‘Their partner was not that clever’, to find out just how cunning and deceitful they really were only after their child or children were gone.

The key to stopping child abduction is to prevent it from happening.

The MOST IMPORTANT WARNING sign of abduction is to understand the present relationship you have with the child's other parent and ask yourself 'May that parent have the intent, desire, ability, and means to take your child to another country without your permission, or possible intent to keep your child in a foreign country should you grant permission for your child to travel abroad with you, the other parent, or both of you?

Abduction often occurs as a prelude to parents separating or beginning divorce proceedings, though there are a significant number of abductions that occur post-divorce commencement litigation. In many cases, the abduction is a planned scheme, which means that generally, the parent intending to abduct a child will try to create an atmosphere that is opposite of their intent: meaning that they will try lull the other parent to thinking that they are committed to the relationship, when in fact they are not. This is a critical issue because it is easier to abduct a child when the targeted parent is not seeking to prevent abduction. So having the targeted parent think that there is a loving, committed relationship is critical for the abductor.

So - if you have been in a difficult, strained relationship with a person who has deep ties to a foreign country, and suddenly that person is demonstrating a new-found love or new-found commitment . . . and they eventually pose the idea of traveling abroad with the child so the child could visit that person's family, THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS WARNING SIGN that abduction may be planned.

Remember, even if you are invited to travel with the other parent and child, this does not mean you or your child are safe. I know many parents who traveled abroad with the other parent and child who were in possession of custody orders - only to have false claims of abuse, neglect, or acts of violence made against them within days of touching down in the foreign country. Once that happens, the legal nightmare begins - despite possessing joint custody, there is very little that the targeted parent can do to remove the child from the inbound country because the abducting parent usually has filed legal documents seeking court relief to remain abroad - typically in their country of origin.

So here we are - the school summer vacation season is upon us. Parents need to ask themselves this question: Has my relationship with my child's other parent been strained, and all of a sudden there is a new-found love or commitment by that parent - and is there a trip abroad being suggested or planned? Because if so - you should be very concerned.

As touched upon earlier, if you believe the other parent may remove or retain the child abroad in order to gain an advantage in expected or pending child-custody proceedings by seeking the jurisdiction of the courts located in their country of origin, you should be very concerned.

For example, if a child is taken to a nation in the Middle East, there is a high probability that that nation will allow the abductor to keep the child abroad since the legal environment or cultural traditions may provide the abductor the safe harbor they seek.

In fact, there are many nations who simply do not return internationally kidnapped children, and this includes the majority of countries found in the Middle East, Asia, and Africa, who outrageously, are not signatory members of international treaties on abduction. And before I let you think that having a child abducted to European or South American countries is any better you better think again. For example, I have a good friend who is a highly decorated police officer in New York who had his daughter abducted to Germany. For nearly 4 years this loving, honest, compassionate father has fought to reunite with his child. Yet she remains in Germany and he is as close as bringing her home today as he was when the kidnapping first occurred.

Unfortunately, there are countries, particularly in the Middle East, that have cultural environments that make it very difficult for a woman to recover their child. Cultural norms in Asia make it equally difficult for a man to recover their child. But child recovery and reunification is rare. In fact, there are many cases when the international courts order for a child to be returned to their country of original jurisdiction, and the kidnapping parent does not follow the court orders and does so without fear of retribution or arrest . . . . its a common theme.

Now back to the WARNING SIGNS - If the other parent threatens you that they will take your child abroad and you will never see them, don't take this threat as a non-event. Many abductors who have successfully kept a child abroad did in fact make at least one threat that they were returning to their own country of origin.

Another WARNING SIGN is if the other parent presses you to sign a passport application for your child to obtain a passport from their country of their origin. Remember - your child has a right to dual citizenship if their other parent is a foreign born national.

BEWARE that many nations do not require a second parent's signature in order to obtain travel documents for a dual national child. . . for example France - so you very well may not know if the other parent has a secondary passport issued from another country. THIS IS SO IMPORTANT because even though the U.S. courts may obtain or even cancel your child's American passports, they have no control on passports issued by another country. The fact is that even though a U.S. court order may restrict international travel for the child - passports issued by a foreign country are accepted without question at points of departure from the U.S. "

So if abduction is going to occur - there is a high probability that foreign issued passports will be used to leave the United States.

NEEDLESS TO SAY, if you discover a foreign passport for your child issued from another country that you were not aware of, you have a serious problem on your hand.

Often the scheming parent will use a sudden illness of a family member abroad as a scheme to play on the targeted parent's heart, often seeking to have their child, 'See their grandmother or grandfather before they pass away.' I can't even begin to tell you how many scenarios like that I am aware of - when the targeted parent who let their child travel with the other parent - soon finds out that there was no family emergency, but instead - an abduction scheme.

A CRITICAL WARNING SIGN is if you soon realize that the other parent is sending large sums of money or other personal belongings abroad - or if they are removing all financial ties to the country they presently live in . . . such as selling their home, quitting their job, selling their car. You get the idea.

There is one other VERY IMPORTANT WARNING SIGN that I would like to touch upon here: if there is a false police complaint and incident report filed by your child's other parent against you, there is a likelihood that they are establishing a case against you based upon domestic violence and abuse which will be very beneficial to them in court should they abduct your child.

Disgracefully, both men and women abductors are known to make false claims of abuse toward the other parent when planning to abduct . . . if you think it can’t happen to you – you better think again.

With false police complaints in mind, there is something every parent should be aware of: generally, a parent seeking to abduct a child will often make a false police report against the other parent on Thursday afternoons thru Friday afternoon in hope to have their targeted parent arrested and detained by law enforcement over the weekend so that while the child's other parent is in jail, they have an unimpeded path to depart the country.

When the abductor arrives in the inbound country where they had schemed to abduct the child to - they have established a paper trail of domestic abuse or violence reports that may provide the court in the foreign country with all the evidence they need to allow the abductor the right to keep the child there, thus becoming a 'liberator' as opposed to an 'abductor' because they created the false appearance that they had to run to protect their lives.

Remember, children under 16 years of age living in the United States, Canada, or Mexico are not required to present a valid passport when traveling within North America so long as they travel by land or sea under policies established by the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative . . . . which means that a closed circuit cruise ship that starts and ends in the same port, but that may travel to foreign ports, is in fact a vehicle for abductors to use.

Hopefully the I CARE Foundation's efforts will cause our government to modify this policy and mandate that children traveling abroad, regardless of age must present a valid passport.

The Truth is that there are a substantial amount of warning signs of abduction, and parents need to pay attention to them TODAY.

Should you believe that your child is at risk of abduction, please contact a qualified attorney who has true experience litigating international child abduction prevention cases.

If child abduction is in process, please contact law enforcement immediately as well as a qualified attorney familiar with abduction. You should also immediately contact the United States Department of State's OFFICE OF CHILDREN'S ISSUES.

As the summer approaches, the reality is that thousands of children will be targeted for abduction. It is anticipated that several thousand children will be kidnapped abroad when combining reported and unreported cases of abduction.

Of these children taken, only a small number will ever return home . . . ever see their targeted parent again . . . ever return to the community they were raised in . . . ever see their family now left behind.

In the process, their identity will be stolen . . . who they are will be denied . . . they will learn to know hatred because that is what an abductor will preach to them in order to have that child hate their left behind parent . . . and they will live a life as a fugitive.

Most of all they will become prisoners illegally detained by a vengeful abductor who is using that child to cause harm and destruction to the other parent.

Tragically, these children will lose their innocence. As I said earlier, many will never come home . . . some simply will never have the opportunity to . . . . they can't.

For more information I urge you to visit the I CARE Foundation's website. You may also visit the official website for Chasing The Cyclone, which is the website of my deeply inspired novel about international child abduction that contains an extensive amount of resources. And of course, you should visit the United States Department Of States Official Website, particularly if abduction is in progress.

Protect yourself and your child. Educate yourself.

Click here to read how to stop international parental child abduction when a child may be issued two dual passports.

　

　

Summer Vacation. Child Abduction. Dual Citizenship. Two Passports. How To Prevent Abduction.

I CARE Foundation Director Peter Thomas Senese:

 

Dual Citizenship And International Child Abduction

 

Many U.S. citizen children who fall victim to international parental abduction possess dual nationality. Being aware of the child's other parent's possession of a secondary passport issued from that parent's country of origin is critical in preventing abduction because children abducted abroad usually travel outside of the country on their foreign passport. Preventing the issuance of your child's secondary passport to a foreign country is possible, but not guaranteed, based upon the country of origin of the child's other parent and their laws. Nevertheless, it is important to strongly note the majority of international parental child abductions that occur are carefully planned schemes that attempt to catch the targeted parent off guard. A parent intending to snatch a child may use an assortment of reasons in order to obtain the secondary passport. Certain countries require signatures of both of the child's parents, while many require only the signature of the parent that possesses citizenship to that country.

In scenarios where only the parent who possesses citizenship to the country the child has a right to secondary citizenship to can apply for their child's passport, the grave risk and reality is that if abduction is planned, the abducting parent will attempt to conceal the existence of the secondary passport from the other parent. Additionally, in cases where dual signatures are required, it is possible that the taking parent can fraudulently submit the other parent's signature to the passport bureau of the other country as generally there are limited documentation controls in place set up to validate the application request.

Of troubling concern is the fact that the United States does not possess border exit controls, thus there are limited ways to ensure that a child departing the country is doing so without violating a custody order. Granted, there are certain government programs that exist that have worked extremely well, such as the Prevent Departure Program; however, there are restrictions to such programs such as the Prevent Departure Program, including that a person considered to be a high-abduction risk cannot possess a right of American citizenship. Thus, if a parent who is planning to abduct a child possess dual citizenship, they cannot be placed on the secure screening list established to protect against international kidnapping. Additional difficulties abound, including the reality that a U.S. court has limited authority in obtaining records from a foreign embassy or consulate to determine if a parent has requested or obtained secondary passports for a child. 

While the Department of State will make every effort to avoid issuing a U.S. passport if the custodial parent has provided a custody decree, the Department cannot prevent embassies and consulates of other countries in the United States from issuing their passports to children who are also their nationals. 

All is not lost if you act thoughtfully. For example, you can ask a foreign embassy or consulate not to issue a passport to your child. On numerous occassions I or one of the attorneys associated with the I CARE Foundation have accompanied a targeted parent and personally visited a foreign embassy or consulate and requested that a secondary passport not be issued in the name of the child due to an abduction threat.

If traveling to an embassy or consulate is not a possibility, I suggest you contact the consulate, locate a supervisor who oversees their passport issuance program, and speak to them about your concern for abduction and specifically state you do not want that country to issue a passport. Immediatly after that telephone call, you must submit a written request, along with certified complete copies of any court orders addressing custody or the overseas travel of your child you have. From experience, I strongly suggest you also include your marriage certificate, your child's birth certificate, and any other relevant documentation that establishes your marriage or legal partnership and establishes that you are the parent of the child or children. In your letter, inform them that you are sendinga copy of this request to the U.S. Department of State. 

If your child is only a U.S. citizen, you can request that no visa for that country be issued in his or her U.S. passport. No international law requires compliance with such requests, but some countries will comply voluntarily.

With respect to your requests to a foreign country, there is one thing I would like to share from experience: you are likely to get more cooperation at times if you or your legal representative schedule an appointment in person. This is something I have seen first-hand in my capacity as a director of the I CARE Foundation.

But what is dual nationality?

The concept of dual nationality means that a person is a citizen of two countries at the same time. Each country has its own citizenship laws based on its own policy. Persons may have dual nationality by automatic operation of different laws rather than by choice. For example, a child born in a foreign country to U.S. citizen parents may be both a U.S. citizen and a citizen of the country of birth.

A U.S. citizen may acquire foreign citizenship by marriage, or a person naturalized as a U.S. citizen may not lose the citizenship of the country of birth.U.S. law does not mention dual nationality or require a person to choose one citizenship or another. Also, a person who is automatically granted another citizenship does not risk losing U.S. citizenship. However, a person who acquires a foreign citizenship by applying for it may lose U.S. citizenship. In order to lose U.S. citizenship, the law requires that the person must apply for the foreign citizenship voluntarily, by free choice, and with the intention to give up U.S. citizenship.

Intent can be shown by the person's statements or conduct.The U.S. Government recognizes that dual nationality exists but does not encourage it as a matter of policy because of the problems it may cause. Claims of other countries on dual national U.S. citizens may conflict with U.S. law, and dual nationality may limit U.S. Government efforts to assist citizens abroad. The country where a dual national is located generally has a stronger claim to that person's allegiance.

However, dual nationals owe allegiance to both the United States and the foreign country. They are required to obey the laws of both countries. Either country has the right to enforce its laws, particularly if the person later travels there.Most U.S. citizens, including dual nationals, must use a U.S. passport to enter and leave the United States. Dual nationals may also be required by the foreign country to use its passport to enter and leave that country. Use of the foreign passport does not endanger U.S. citizenship.Most countries permit a person to renounce or otherwise lose citizenship.

Information on losing foreign citizenship can be obtained from the foreign country's embassy and consulates in the United States. Americans can renounce U.S. citizenship in the proper form at U.S. embassies and consulates abroad.

　

Two Parent Signature Law for a Passport

As stated earlier, The United States does not have exit controls on its borders for holders of a valid passport. This makes preventing a passport from being issued to your child without your consent very important. Generally, if your child has a passport, it can be difficult to prevent the other parent from removing the child to another country without your permission.

U.S. law requires the signature of both parents, or the child's legal guardians, prior to issuance of a U.S. passport to children under the age of 16. To obtain a U.S. passport for a child under the age of 16, both parents (or the child’s legal guardians) must execute the child’s passport application and provide documentary evidence demonstrating that they are the parents or guardians. If this cannot be done, the person executing the passport application must provide documentary evidence that he or she has sole custody of the child, has the consent of the other parent to the issuance of the passport, or is acting in place of the parents and has the consent of both parents (or of a parent/legal guardian with sole custody over the child to the issuance of the passport).

EXCEPTIONS:

The law does provide two exceptions to this requirement: (1) for exigent circumstances, such as those involving the health or welfare of he child, or (2) when the Secretary of State determines that issuance of a passport is warranted by special family circumstances.

　

Prevent Departure Program

Since 2003, United States citizens have had available a very effective international child abduction prevention tool called ‘The Prevent Departure Program’. Unfortunately, many parents at risk of having their child internationally abducted are not aware that this incredibly useful tool is available to them.

In the aftermath of 911, the Department of Homeland Security’s ‘Prevent Departure Program’ was created to stop non-U.S. citizens from departing the country. The program applies to non-US citizens physically located in America considered individuals at risk of child abduction. The Customs and Border Protection (CBP) oversees this program and it is monitored 24 hours a day.

What the ‘Prevent Departure Program’ does is provide immediate information to the transportation industry, including all air, land, and sea channels a single point of contact at Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and provides a comprehensive database of individuals the United States believes may immediately depart to a foreign country.

The program only applies to aliens, and is not available to stop U.S. citizens or dual U.S./foreign citizens from leaving the country.

Under Section 215 of the ‘Immigration and Nationality Act’ (8 U.S.C. 1185) and it’s implementing regulations (8 CFR Part 215 and 22 CFR Part 46), it authorizes departure-control officers to prevent an alien’s departure from the United States if the alien’s departure would be prejudicial to the interests of the United States. These regulations include would-be abductions of U.S. citizens in accordance to court orders originating from the child’s court of habitual residency.

If the abductor and child are identified, they will be denied boarding. In order to detain them after boarding is denied, there must be a court order prohibiting the child’s removal or providing for the child’s pick-up, or a warrant for the abductor.

In order for an at risk parent to participate in the program, all of the following must be demonstrated:

1. Subject may NOT be a US citizen; and,

2. The nomination must include a law enforcement agency contact with 24/7 coverage; and,

3. There must be a court order showing which parent has been awarded custody or shows that the Subject is restrained from removing his/her minor child from certain counties, the state or the U.S.; and,

4. The Subject must be in the US; and,

5. There must be some likelihood that the Subject will attempt to depart in the immediate future.

With respect to the established guidelines listed above, note that in order to request the listing of the other parent, that person must be an alien of the United States. The program does not apply to US citizens at risk of leaving the country.

The second mandate states a request to place an individual’s name on the Prevent Departure Program must include support by a law enforcement agency or from the Department of State’s Office of Children’s Issues, which has the authority of requesting for the Department of Homeland Security to list a suspected child abductor on the ‘Prevent Departure Program’.

The third criteria: possessing a custodial order, is essential. Regardless if the other parent has joint custody or rights of visitation, critically, you must make sure that there are injunction orders in place prohibiting the child from being removed from the jurisdiction of habitual residency. Unfortunately, many international parental child abductions are well planned out in advance of the actual abduction, and the targeted parent has no idea that an abduction is in progress until it is too late. This is why it is essential for parents in partnership with non-nationals to be fully aware of the warning signs associated with a potential international child abduction.

The fourth criteria states the obvious: in order to prevent an alien-parent suspected of abducting a child on U.S. soil, that parent must be on U.S. soil.

The fifth criteria requests that the applying parent demonstrate that the alien-parent has demonstrated the likelihood of abducting the child across international borders in the immediate future. Remember – you need to document and record as much evidence as possible.

For many parents who face the risk of having their child abducted and removed across international borders, the nightmare that both targeted parent and victimized child face is unbearable.

The Prevent Departure Program is not for everyone and should not be abused; however, in situations where an abduction threat is real and the targeting parent intent on abducting a child is a non-US citizen possessing the capacity to breach court orders and abduct a child of a relationship, the Prevent Departure Program may be a useful tool.

Be aware that if a person has a right of U.S. citizenship, including possessing sole American citizenship or dual citizenship, they cannot be placed on the Prevent Departure Program (The I CARE Foundation is hoping to have the government change that policy since individuals who possess singular citizenship do abduct children abroad).

Conclusion

The I CARE Foundation has assisted many families in crisis who are at risk of having a child internationally abducted from the child's country of jurisdiction based upon one of the child's parent's scheme to remove the child by obtaining a secondary passport. In many of these cases, the targeted parent did not know that the other parent already possessed a secondary passport for their child. In cert

ain situations the parent possessing a right of citizenship to another country did not need the other parent's signature, and in other cases, a passport signature of the targeted parent was forged on the foreign passport application for the child.

Targeted parents and attorneys overseeing an abduction prevention case need to be aware that when there is an abductin concern that they should immediately contact the consulate where the child's other parent is a national of and request if a passport has been issued in the child's name. There are times when the consulate or embassy may provide this information. Often this is not the case.

In all cases where a secondary passport is a concern, one of the legal strategies the attorneys associated with the I CARE Foundation have successfully implemented is to seek an emergency order from the court possessing jurisdiction of the child whereas, the petition requests that 'responding parent' (parent believed to planning an abduction) provide formal documentation from the consulate or embassy of their country of origin that grants the consulate or embassy permission to answer a court subpeona concerning the issuance of a passport (the consulate or embassy is not required to do so even if a subpeona is issued), or, that the court order the responding parent to provide an official letter from their country of origin stating that neither a passport for the child has been issued from that country and no application for a passport has been submitted.

During the emergency application, the targeted parent (the 'applicant') has sought a host of measures, including seeking for the court or the applicant to take possession of the child's American passports; and, for the child being placed on the United States Passport Issuance Alert Program; and, for either removal of child access or limited, supervised access of the targeted child by the parent suspected of child snatching. If the Prevent Departure Program is applicable, attorneys have previously sought for the court to request that the U.S. Department of State petition the U.S. Department of Homeland Security place a person considered a high-risk child abductor on the secure screening list to ensure that person does not travel outside of the country with the child unless permitted to do so by court order.

Obviously there are many other steps that can be taken, but one I think worth sharing is the concern that a parent traveling by land or sea across international adjacent borders (For the United States this means travel to Canada, Mexico, or certain Caribbean island-nations) with a minor under 16 years of age does not need to present a valid passport for their child at the border-crossing (valid passports are required for all travelers regardless of age only when traveling abroad by aircraft) as established by the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative. Thus, a parent planning to abduct a child could do so by boarding a closed circuit cruise, or by simply driving across the border. It is critical that an attorney attempting to prevent abduction familiarize themselves with the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative loopholes and present these issues to the court they are litigating over. One other good idea is that they present to the court the statistical realities of child abduction return, including whether a country that appears to be a likly inbound country is a member of the Hague Convention, and whether or not they are a complying country. Of course, that's not all that should be presented to the court. A few other important issues include the potential for severe abuse to the child; and, the severe abuse to the targeted parent, the cost to litigate; and, the ability for the taking parent to disappear abroad, including departing the country they initially 'landed' in, and travel to another country; and finally, the likelyhood that a child will be returned.

I invite you to read Summer Vacations and International Parental Child Abduction and to visit the official website of the U.S. Department of State, I CARE Foundation and Chasing The Cyclone for more information about abduction.

One little word of advice: the majority of parents who have had their child abducted never saw it coming. Do not stick your head in the ground and think this cannot happen to you. Educate yourself.

- Peter Thomas Senese -
Founding Director - The I CARE Foundation