Bouncing Back The wellbeing of children in international child abduction cases

163 Pages·2017·6.99 MB·English

by  Hilde Demarré

Bouncing Back
The wellbeing of children in international child abduction cases
Kim Van Hoorde, Researcher at University of Antwerp
Marieke Putters, Researcher at Centrum IKO
Gwenaelle Buser, Researcher at CFPE-Enfants Disparus
Sara Lembrechts, Researcher at University of Antwerp
Prof. dr. Koen Ponnet at University of Antwerp
Prof. dr. Thalia Kruger at University of Antwerp
Prof. dr. Wouter Vandenhole at University of Antwerp
Hilde Demarré, Project Manager at Child Focus
Nel Broothaerts, Project Coordinator at Child Focus
Coskun Coruz, CEO at Centrum IKO
Anne Larcher, CEO at CFPE-Enfants Disparus
Delphine Moralis, Secretary General at Missing Children Europe
Christelle Hilpert, French Central Authority at Ministry of Justice
Nelly Chretiennot, French Central Authority at Ministry of Justice

Members of the Steering Committee:
Kerstin Bartsch and Frédéric Breger, Hague Conference on Private International Law
Javier Forcada, Senior judge (Spain)
Harald Weil, Guardian at Litem (Germany)
Agris Skudra, Central Authority (Latvia)
Part I
Part II
Part III
Enhancing the Well-being of Children in Cases of International Child Abduction (eWELL)
Contents
INTRODUCTION
PART I QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH SURVEY WITH PARENTS
CHAPTER 1. BACKGROUND AND GOALS

CHAPTER 2. METHODOLOGY AND SURVEY POPULATION

CHAPTER 3. WELLBEING OF THE CHILD
CHAPTER 4. CHARACTERISTICS BEFORE THE ABDUCTION

CHAPTER 5. CIRCUMSTANCES DURING THE ABDUCTION

CHAPTER 6. THE LEGAL PROCEDURE AND MEDIATION

CHAPTER 7. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RETURN

CHAPTER 8. AFTER THE ABDUCTION

CHAPTER 9. CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
PART II QUALITATIVE INTERVIEWS WITH CHILDREN
CHAPTER 1. BACKGROUND AND GOALS

CHAPTER 2. METHODOLOGY
CHAPTER 3. SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF RESULTS
CHAPTER 4. THE CHILD’S EXPERIENCE BEFORE AND AFTER DEPARTURE?

CHAPTER 5. HOW DID THE CHILDREN EXPERIENCE THEIR STAY IN THE OTHER COUNTRY?

CHAPTER 6. HOW DID THE CHILDREN EXPERIENCE THE PERIOD AFTER THE
REMOVAL/RETENTION?

CHAPTER 7. CONCLUSION

CHAPTER 8. DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
PART III CASE LAW ANALYSIS

CASE LAW: BELGIUM
CASE LAW: FRANCE

CASE LAW: THE NETHERLANDS

APPENDICES
Introduction
This report contains the results of a three-part research project conducted in the framework of the
project Enhancing the Well-being of Children in Cases of International Child Abduction (eWELL).
Part I contains an overview of the results of a quantitative survey conducted among parents who have
been in a situation of international parental child abduction. The quantitative survey data collection
was financed by the European Commission and was undertaken by the University of Antwerp in
collaboration with Centrum IKO, CFPE-Enfant Disparus, Child Focus, the French Central Authority and
Missing Children Europe (MCE, the European umbrella organization for missing children).
Part II provides an overview of the qualitative interview results conducted with children who were taken
by to another country by one parent without the consent of the other. The qualitative data collection
was co-financed by the European Commission and undertaken by the University of Antwerp, Centrum
IKO, Child Focus, CFPE-Enfant Disparus, and in collaboration with the French Central Authority and
Missing Children Europe (MCE, the European umbrella organization for missing children).
Part III examines international parental child abduction court rulings, jurisdictions and the application
of Art. 13 (2) of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction in
Belgium, France and the Netherlands. It discusses age and maturity attainment and assessment; the
involvement of intermediaries; the definition of the child’s objections to return and other relevant matters.
Part I
Quantitative research survey with parents
01/12/2016 - 31/05/2017
Chapter 1. Background and Goals
The increasing political focus on the rights of the child, stipulated in the UN Convention on the Rights
of the Child and the European Convention on the Exercise of Children’s Rights, amplifies the necessity
of collecting information on the needs and wishes of children in all matters affecting them directly. The
EWELL project (‘Ensuring the wellbeing of children in judicial cooperation in cases of international child
abduction’) aims to provide a better understanding of factors that influence the wellbeing of children
in international parental child abduction cases. This report presents the results of an online survey
conducted among parents who have been in a situation of international parental child abduction in
Belgium, France and the Netherlands. The topics of international parental abduction and ‘child
wellbeing’ are introduced in the first chapter where the goals of the study are set out. The second
chapter reviews the survey’s methodology and survey population and the findings are discussed in
chapters three to eight. Chapter nine summarizes how abduction affects the child’s wellbeing by
responding to 12 hypotheses that were made at the start of this project. The hypotheses were drawn
from previous studies about the impact of general marital discord or separation as well as abduction
related ones, and were validated by the steering committee of the project.
1.1. International parental abduction
Every year, thousands of children in the EU and more than 100,000 throughout the world become
victims of a wrongful removal to or wrongful retention in another country by a parent due to situations
arising from cross-border marriages and the changing institution and function of families (Cancedda,
Day, Dimitrova, & Gosset, 2013; Paul & Kiesewetter, 2014). Contemporary communication
technologies, which have increased ease of travel and mass migration, have expanded possibilities
for transnational relationships and the complexities of conflicts arising from the dissolution of marital or
sentimental ties (Greif, 2009). In Europe, more than 170,000 bi-national divorces are registered each
year. However, parental conflict inevitably escalates if one of the parents returns to the home country
with the child(ren) (Paul & Kiesewetter, 2014). An ‘international parental child abduction’ occurs when
a child is taken by one parent without the other parent’s (or person legally accorded parental authority)
consent (Hammer, Finkelhor & Sedlak, 2002).
This report provides an overview of factors based on five stages that potentially influence an abducted
child’s wellbeing. The first stage consists of a culminating process that leads to planning the
international parental abduction. Families in which abduction has occurred are likely to have
experienced pre-stressors, i.e. stress related to life before the abduction of their child/children. Typical
pre-stressors include: separation or divorce, child visitation arrangements and rights, domestic violence,
and financial insecurities. Severe stress is potentially then added to these past stresses when a child is
abducted (Freeman, 2014).
The second stage is the period between the start of the removal or retention and the time before the
return or non-return of the child to the country of habitual residence (i.e. country from which the child
was abducted). The length of this period can vary greatly: some abductions are solved in a matter of
days while others last several years. There are many factors to consider with respect to the child’s
wellbeing in this stage including: the contact that the child did or did not maintain with the other parent
and/or with other family members, and the level to which the child integrated in the new country (in
which he or she might not be staying) (Plass, Finkelhor & Hotaling, 1996). Abducting parents may not
have a specific source of emotional or financial support when they move frequently. This is a contrast
to parents who are part of a community while in hiding (Greif, 2009).
Third, there are different pathways in reaching a solution if parents disagree about parental authority
and/or visitation rights. The two most common legal instruments are The Hague Convention on the Civil
Aspects of International Child Abduction (1980) and the EU Council Regulation 2201/2003 concerning
jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters
of parental responsibility (Brussels II bis, 2003). The principle underlying the Convention and Regulation
is the return of the child to his/her natural place of residence from which he/she was unlawfully taken,
as rapidly as possible. This objective is consistent with the welfare of the child in that the abduction
from his/her natural place of residence is disruptive for his/her wellbeing. The custody of children who
have been abducted by one of the parents shall be determined only by a court in the child's
permanent place of residence. Accordingly, as a rule, the court in the country to which the children
have been abducted shall promptly arrange for them to be returned to their country of habitual
residence. There are exceptions to this principle, but they must be applied strictly and with caution
(Kruger, 2011).
Emergent realities of global family relations call for alternative dispute resolution methods to the
traditional judicial way. As such the Brussels II bis regulation stresses the need for mediation in
international cross-border family cases, including child abduction. Mediation aims to restore healthy