I CARE Foundation's International Travel Child Consent Form Continues To Make A Difference Protecting Children From Abduction

The I CARE Foundation's International Travel Child Consent Form continues to be a tool utilized by parents and the legal community on a global scale that is making an incredible impact on the fight to stop children from being internationally parentally abducted.

As many of you are aware, the summer months are a time where international abductions are at the highest levels and, in my role as the Executive Director of the I CARE Foundation, I am pleased to say that every child that was expected to be returned home around the world, that used the Travel Consent Form, has indeed done just that... come home!

I invite you to read a piece that the Colorado Bar Association wrote about the I CARE Foundation and our groundbreaking International Travel Child Consent Form. 

To read more about the I CARE Foundation's International Travel Child Consent Form and to download a copy of the form, please visit The I CARE Foundation's website. 

Kindest regards to all,

Peter Thomas Senese
Executive Director
The I CARE Foundation

International Child Abduction and The Prevent Departure Program

Earlier this summer I had shared an article that I had written on Summer Vacations and International Child Abduction Warning Signs.  The article explained in detail some of the possible scenarios and techniques that a potential abductor may use in order to wrongfully remove a child from their home country of jurisdiction.  Even though that article was focused on the time of summer vacations, a time where approximately 85% to 95% of all parental abductions occur in the United States or abroad, even though summer is almost over international parental child abduction still poses a very serious threat for many families.

As always, the I CARE Foundation works toward the goal of preventing international child abductions.  One of the major keys to protecting innocent children from abduction is raising awareness of the realities of international abduction with the hope that our messages about the risks and warning signs that a kidnapping is being planned may allow a parent or other stakeholders the opportunity to prevent abduction.  Historically, the U.S. rate of reported cases of outbound abduction has declined by approximately 15% during the fiscal years 2011 and 2012, and that is after nearly 30 years of reported growth.  This tells us that abduction prevention efforts are working.

Now one of the most concerning risk factors that will lead to international child abduction is the use of a would-be taking parent to use a secondary passport not issued by the United States government in order to depart the country as shared in detail in the article published on behalf of the I CARE Foundation titled Summer Vacation. Child Abduction. Dual Citizenship. Two Passports. How To Prevent Abduction. 


I urge any parent who believes they are at risk of abduction to read both articles that I have listed.

One of the most effective tools available for at-risk parents trying to prevent abduction is the Prevent Departure Program, which is a secure screening program that lists any individual considered by the courts or law enforcement to be a high-risk child abductor.  In order to be placed on the Prevent Departure Program, there are certain requirements, one of which presently includes that the person cannot be a citizen of the United States of America.  Thus, only aliens residents (or non-residents) physically located in the United States may be put on the Prevent Departure Program at the request of the Department of State to the Department of Homeland Security.

Unfortunately, the caveat is that in order for a person to be considered a candidate for the Prevent Departure Program they are not American citizens, which presents a problem since individuals who possess dual citizenship, including American citizenship, cannot be placed on the Prevent Departure Program list.  Hopefully, there will be a modification in policy so that American citizens who are considered to be high-risk child abductors can be placed on a secure screening list.  The following press release provides details of the need to have the Prevent Departure Program policy modified:  Peter Thomas Senese & The CARE Foundation Supports GAO Recommendation to Create Departure Screening List for High-Risk U.S. Citizens Considered High-Risk Child Abductors.

So what is the Prevent Departure Program and how can it be applied?

Case Study 

Lets begin by suggesting Parent A is a citizen of another country but lives in the United States with Parent B. Parent B is a United States citizen. Parent A need not be married to Parent B.

During the course of A and B’s relationship, a child is born in the United States. When this occurs, the child is automatically a United States Citizen by birth.

In all likelihood, the child also will retain automatic citizenship to the nation that Parent A is a national of.

Let us assume both parents enjoy a right of custody to the child either through marriage, or, in cases where there is no marriage, either by state statue or by court orders.

During the course of time, Parent A decides to end the relationship and desires to return to their nation of origin with the child.

Now, Parent B, having great concern that Parent A intends to take the child and flee the United States and go to another country, obtains court orders forbidding Parent A from taking the child out of the country. The court orders for Parent A to turn over to the court the child’s US passport if one has been issued, and further directs the child’s name to be registered with the Children’s Passport Issuance Alert Program, thus essentially removing the potential abducting parent from being able to remove the child from the United States using an American passport issued in the child’s name.

In addition, Parent B successfully requests that the court notify the embassy of the country Parent A is a citizen of, whereas, the court informs the embassy that a child custody dispute is alive and well in the jurisdiction of the child’s country of habitual residency, and the court requests for that foreign embassy not to issue a passport in the child’s name, thus securing the inability of the child from departing until the court proceedings are finalized.

Problem solved? No

In many circumstances, a pending departure is already well planned before the targeted parent becomes aware of it. Parent A may already have in their possession a passport issued by their nation of origin for the child. If this is the case, it is very difficult for the US court to seize the foreign passport of the child, particularly if it is not known whether a passport has been issued in the child’s name.

If a passport has not been issued in the child’s name, then in all likelihood, Parent A will attempt to obtain one regardless if the child’s passport application requires Parent B’s signature or not. In fact, certain countries do not require the signature of the mother of a child, only the father.

In addition, each nation obtains a sovereign right to oversee their own citizens, and since the child may be considered a citizen of the country of Parent A too, the embassy is not required or obligated to follow the U.S. court’s orders. They have every right and may issue a passport in the child’s name despite requests not to do so. And make no mistake about this, in more cases than not, particularly if Parent A is very persuasive when communicating with someone from their own embassy, they will successfully obtain the passport.

If Parent A has possession of a non-US passport for their child, they very well may be able to physically leave the country with the child and illegally abduct the child. What is perhaps even more troubling is the fact that Parent B has no way or right to know if a passport was issued from the native country of Parent A in the name of the child.

A disaster waiting to happen? You bet it is.

But there is hope for those parents who find themselves in a scenario where Parent A is not an American citizen living in the United States with their child and, Parent A possess a foreign passport for the child of the relationship.

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.

For more information on the ‘Prevent Departure Program’, please visit the U.S. Department of State’s website or contact the Office of Children’s Issues.

Finally, the Department of State's Office Of Children's Issues Abduction Prevention Division is in charge of requesting that an individual be considered a candidate to be listed on the Prevent Departure Program.  From our experience, it is critically important that a court order be issued stating that a specific person be listed on the Prevent Departure Program, and that person is restrained from traveling outside of the United States with the specified children of the partnership considered by the court to be at risk of possible abduction.  

For more information on international parental child abduction please visit the I CARE Foundation.  Some of you may be interested in also visiting the official website of my deeply inspired novel about abduction titled CHASING THE CYCLONE, which contains a great amount of information on abduction.

Kindest regards to all -

Peter Thomas Senese

FBI States Risks Of A Child Victim Of International Parental Child Abduction: Murder

“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 I CARE Foundation has, for some time now, been sharing the fact that children of international parental child abduction are at risk of murder. The above statement, from the U.S. Department of Justice website, shows that children who are targeted and become victims of parental child abduction are subjected to brutal crimes - and that includes murder. No child should be subjected to such crimes of violence - ever - and society should be very concerned that this is happening.  At the hands of an abducting parent, children are put in grave risk.  A parental child abductor is willing to break the laws, ignore the orders of a court, and they have no concern with perjury or contempt.  Parental child abductors kidnap children in order to cause the targeted parent hurt and suffering.

Children of Parental Abduction are Prisoners

We must remember that children who are abducted by a parent are prisoners forced to comply with the will of their hostage-taker.

Dr. Wagner, a leading child psychologist, used the word "compliance" while discussing the reason of why hostages may not be able during their imprisonment speak-up and free themselves.

Compliance.

It hit me like a ton of bricks falling off a ten-story building.

You see, in the the world of international parental child abduction, and in this world's post-abduction reunification when both the targeted parent and the abductor may by court-order need to exist in the world of the victimized child, courts often do not realize that when they allow the kidnapper to remain bonded with the child-victim, not only does this create a sense of uncertainty for the child, but it wrongfully sends a message to the child that there was validity to their kidnapping.

Now it is imperative to remember that during the time of a child's international abduction, these children are in fact hostages. They are manipulated. They are brainwashed. They are taught to fear. And in the kidnapper's need to have that child sanction their kidnapping, kidnappers teach that failure to comply will be met with grave consequences.

Sadly, during many post-abduction reunification's, the abductor's intent to cause pain and suffering to the target parent continues via manipulation of a child.

Since the child cannot break free from the bindings of their kidnapper despite the efforts of the targeted parent, many of these children still live in fear, and are forced to live in spiritually and mentally bound ways.

They are still prisoners.

They must comply with the ever-present abductor's will.

And this must end.

Child Services Need To Heavily Consider Any Claims Made By A Parent Abductor

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 parental 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."

Profile of a Parental Child Abductor: Narcistic Sociopaths

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).

Parents Murder Their Children

Filicide is 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!

In the FBI statement 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 abuse 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.

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 -

Japan Moves Toward Ratifying The Hague Convention. Will This Help Abducted Children Wrongfully Detained In Japan Today?

After more than a decade of urging from the U.S., including an unwaivering protest by a large number of American parents, primarily victimized fathers, Japan’s parliament on Wednesday finally gave the go-ahead for the government to ratify the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects Of International Child Abduction - an  international treaty for settling international child custody parental abduction disputes. The move by Japan's parlament offers hope to many chasing parents who were left-behind as their children were whisked away across the Pacific primarily by their Japanese mothers. But realistically, how much can present chasing parents left behind in the wake of their child's abduction count on unification with their children? 

The move by the Diet (Japan's parliament) will make Japan the 85th signatory to the 1980 Hague Convention on Aspects of International Child Abduction appears on the surface to be a step in the right direction; however, Japan's final ratification of the treaty is not expected for another year. And during that time a lot can go wrong, including, potentially, women right activists in Japan who wrongfully think that every mother abducting their child to Japan was fleeing abuse.  As study after study has demonstrated - both women and men equally cite abuse when they try to have a court sanction their act of kidnapping. The vast majority of these claims are not true.

Is there hope? Yes. But we need to be reminded that there is a long way to go and now is not the time to stop putting pressure on Japan's government to ratify the Hague Convention under any circumstance.

For years, Japan has come under fierce criticism mainly from the U.S. fathers and more recently, American lawmakers, for its reluctance to join the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abductions due to cultural differences on how divorce and child custody is viewed and handled in their own homeland. Traditionally, during times of divorce in Japan, the courts grant the mother full sole custody, and the father of the children is permanantly removed from the child's life.

Welcome to insanity Japanese style.  In fact, it is estimated that there are well over 300,000 Japanese fathers seeking to reunite with their own chldren who have been removed from their lives by the courts. 

Legal experts welcomed Wednesday's decision, but said the treaty would have little effect unless it is accompanied by changes in Japan's domestic law. Courts in Japan routinely favor the Japanese parent – usually the mother – in custody cases involving international marriages.

"I am concerned that Japan won't implement the convention at face value," says Takao Tanase, a law professor at Chuo University in Tokyo. Mr. Tanase points to numerous loopholes in Japanese family law that could be cited to prevent the return of children to their original country of residence, including the suspicion – without any burden of proof – that the child could be exposed to harm or that the mother's welfare could be affected.

"Japanese law and the convention contradict each other, and this can be used as an excuse not to return the child," he said. "The tradition of awarding sole custody was introduced 60 years ago, but Japanese society has changed dramatically since then."

Yuichi Mayama, an upper house politician who has pushed for the legal change, was more optimistic. "This is a meaningful development," he said. "I'm delighted that Japan is finally catching up with the rest of the world."

But he added: "The tradition in Japan is to award sole custody, and that's supported by the law. Unless we change that we won't be able to use the convention properly. We take a very traditional view of the family in Japan, and changing that is going to take time."

The convention is intended to protect children from being taken to another country by one parent without permission in bitter custodial battles. While 89 countries have signed the convention, Japan has been the last member of the Group of Eight major nations holding out. But with Wednesday’s parliamentary approval, Tokyo is expected to ratify the treaty by next March, 2014. (Of the Group of Eight, it should be noted that Germany is consistantly considered a non-complying signatory member of the Hague Convention).

Japanese parliamentarians have long argued that the country’s single-custody tradition is incompatible with the Hague Convention. Unlike in the U.S. and many European countries, Japanese family law doesn’t recognize joint custody of children after divorce, and typically gives the mother full custody.

Like many other countries, Japan has seen an increase in mixed marriages—-a five-fold jump over the past 35 years. While these international marriages only account for about 4% of all marriages in Japan, they have a higher-than-average divorce rate. In 2011, about 40,000 international couples got married. In the same year, about 19,000 divorced, according to Mr. Mayama.

Given that a disproportionate number of American husbands make up the other half of mixed marriages, typical cases that would violate the Hague Convention consist of a divorced Japanese mother flying back to Japan with her child without permission or not allowing her child to return to the U.S. from Japan after a visit, then severing all contact with her American husband. Japanese women married more American men in 2011 than any other nationality except for Korean men, who are mostly permanent residents of Japan.

These international parental child abductions havee landed a number of Japanese mothers suspected of child abduction on the FBI’s most wanted parental kidnappings list. The U.S. State Department says that as of 2011, there are 100 active cases involving 140 American children wrongfully detained in Japan by a parent.  However, activist groups in the United States, who have their heart on the pulse of the real situation, have estimated that the number of children wrongfully detained are well over 300 (this is due to the fact that many targeted parents may not have reported their child's abduction to the Department of State since Japan is not a member of the Hague Convention). Additionally, the Asahi Shimbun reported Wednesday that Britain, Canada, and France each claim over 30 cases of their children being wrongfully kept in Japan.

Despite international parental child abduction being a U.S. Federal crime, parents who have fled to Japan with a kidnapped child have not faced concern of criminal charges because since Japan's laws do not make international parental child abduction a crime, Japan would not allow extradition proceedings to go forward against any of its citizens.  This theme - failure to extradite  - is something that the I CARE Foundation has spoken out about in the past, particularly in courts during abduction prevention cases whereas a sitting judge may think that they and U.S. law would have far reach abroad: it does not.

With hardly any domestic attention given to the matter, though, there has been little incentive to ratify a treaty mostly detrimental to Japanese nationals. Lawmakers who have rejected submitting the treaty to parliament in the past point to the need to protect women and children from domestic violence and abuse should courts forcibly expatriate mothers and children to overseas residences they have escaped from. In itself, the domestic violence claim against women appears to be a deflective way for some of Japan's politicians to not welcome change. And it clearly does not take into consideration the increase of domestic violence acts against men, or, more commonly, the use of false claims of domestic violence as a reason for a parent to abduct, knowing they may find protection under Article 13 of the Hague Convention.

But during a U.S. visit in February, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe surprised some by promising President Barack Obama he would seek approval for joining the convention. Mr. Abe’s visit was aimed at strengthening ties with Washington after a cooling in relations during the previous Japanese administration.

Progress?  Yes, however, Japan must still clear various governmental and legislative hurdles before the Hague Convention can take full effect. The government has said it aims for final ratification by the end of this fiscal year -- March 2014.

A central authority will be set up in the foreign ministry to take charge of locating children who have been removed by one parent following the collapse of an international marriage, and to encourage parents to settle disputes voluntarily.

If consultations fail, family courts in Tokyo and Osaka will issue rulings.

The law will, however, allow a parent to refuse to return a child if abuse or domestic violence is feared, a provision which campaigners say is vital, but which some say risks being exploited.

It will also allow for parents who separated before its enactment to apply to get a child returned. But it contains a provision stating that the application can be refused if a child has been resident in the country for a year or more and is happily settled.

Few foreign parents have much faith in the Japanese justice system as a means of getting back their children once they have been brought to Japan.

Are there concerns about the Japan's language in the new law passed that would make a child's return difficult?  Yes.

 There are others in Japan, primarily from women-rights groups that have concern about the Hague Convention.

Yumiko Suto, co-founder of a women's rights group, took issue with the convention on the grounds it would leave youngsters open to violence when she said, "What's worrying about the Hague Convention is that it won't protect victims of domestic violence, mothers and children who barely escaped alive from their violent husbands. It is very difficult for women and children in shelters to hide their whereabouts for a year... so the provision is not very helpful to them," adding that providing evidence of domestic violence in a foreign country is also difficult.

Kimio Ito, professor of sociology at Kyoto University, said he hopes Japanese domestic laws "will remove worries over domestic violence that the convention doesn't fully address".

Under growing pressure from Washington and other Western capitals, Japan has repeatedly pledged to sign the treaty into domestic law, but it has until now never made it through parliament.

With cautious reason to be excited that the nightmare of hundreds of children and their chasing parents left behind in the storms of abduction may soon be over for many, the reality still remains that Japan is at least one year away from final ratification, and in a country that has made promises to sign the convention many times in the past, there still remains a long road ahead for so many.

 

*************************************

 



The following information has been shared by Paul Toland regarding pro bono legal assistance that may be available to U.S. parents to obtain access to their children in Japan using the provisions of the Hague Convention once Japan ratifies the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Paul is the contact point for this and his email address is pptoland@yahoo.com.

If you wish to have your case listed, the following is the information that should be submitted:

Contact Information
Name:
Address:
Phone Number:
Email Address:
Child/Children information
Child name:
Child Sex: (Male or Female)
Child Birth Date:
Child Abduction Date:
Abductor:
Last known address:

The following is the email from Paul Toland:

Subject: Article 21 Hague Convention Access Application – Requesting your response

All,
Please forgive the length of this email, but it is important to be a thorough and clear as possible. With Japan nearing ratification of the Hague Convention, we have the opportunity to gain access to our children under Article 21 of the Hague, which reads:

“An application to make arrangements for organizing or securing the effective exercise of rights of access may be presented to the Central Authorities of the Contracting States in the same way as an application for the return of a child. The Central Authorities are bound by the obligations of co-operation which are set forth in Article 7 to promote the peaceful enjoyment of access rights and the fulfillment of any conditions to which the exercise of those rights may be subject. The Central Authorities shall take steps to remove, as far as possible, all obstacles to the exercise of such rights.

The Central Authorities, either directly or through intermediaries, may initiate or assist in the institution of proceedings with a view to organizing or protecting these rights and securing respect for the conditions to which the exercise of these rights may be subject.”

I know this is not what everyone wants, we want our children returned, but my attorney, renowned Hague attorney Stephen Cullen, has told me that if done properly and en masse, simultaneous delivery of dozens or perhaps hundreds of Hague Access applications in the immediate aftermath of Hague Ratification by Japan would severely test Japan and put them on notice that we’re watching their compliance. Stephen is perhaps one the foremost Hague attorneys in the US (Baltimorean of the Year in 2004, American Bar Association Pro Bono Attorney of the Year 2003, Maryland Trial Attorney of the Year in 2008, etc.) having litigated over 200 Hague Abduction Cases, with well over 100 successful returns. He has VOLUNTEERED to submit Hague Applications for ANY AND ALL JAPAN ABDUCTION CASES PRO BONO.

The plan would be to hold an event in DC shortly after Japan ratifies the Hague, where we march en masse from his office on K Street in DC to the State Department to deliver the Hague Article 21 Access Applications. We would do this march in front of members of the press and garner as much publicity as we can. Additionally we would do a symbolic delivery of the Applications in front of the Japanese Embassy as well (although the actual applications would be delivered from our Central Authority, the State Department, to Japan’s Central Authority). First, though, Japan has to ratify the Hague and Stephen has to prepare the applications.

Questions and Answers:

1. Question: Who can submit an Article 21 Hague Application:

    Answer: ANYONE who is a US Citizen and has a US Citizen or dual-national child in Japan that they do not currently have access to. This includes what have historically been referred to as both “Abduction” cases and “Access” cases.

2. Question: Will performing an Article 21 Hague Application affect my ongoing legal case in any way?

    Answer: No, if you have Warrants out for the arrest of your former spouse, those warrants still stand. This is simply a request to have access to your child under Article 21 of the Hague.

3. Question: I am American, but I do not currently live in the United States, can I still submit an Article 21 Hague Application to see my child?

    Answer: Yes.

4. Question: Will this process subject me to the Jurisdiction of the Japanese courts, and affect the US Court jurisdiction over my case?

    Answer: It will not affect your US jurisdiction of your case, but the Japanese court system may be utilized under the Hague in facilitating the access to your child. The extent to which the Japanese court system will be used is really a matter of how the Hague implementing legislation is written in Japan.

5. Question: I am not a US Citizen. Can I participate?

    Answer: Yes and no. You cannot file via Stephen Cullen with the US State Department. However, you can file an Article 21 Hague Access application through your country of citizenship, and I highly encourage you to do so to further test Japan’s system.

6. Question: What will this cost me?

    Answer: Stephen, whose normal attorney fees are about $800 per hour, is doing this PRO BONO. There will probably only be small costs associated with copying, and filing fees.

So what’s the first step? Stephen has asked me to collect as many names as possible of as many parents who would be interested in filing Hague Article 21 Applications. We are hoping to get at least 50, and if we get 100 that would be a tremendous success. I will collect your information centrally for Stephen and then his office will be contacting you to begin the process. I am not sure if he will begin the process prior to Japan’s ratification of the Hague or after. I will let you know when I find out.

For now, though, please provide some basic information to me so I can collect it for Stephen. Your name, your current address, phone, email address, and the names and ages of your children. Stephen’s office will collect more information after the process begins, but for now, I’m simply trying to get a parent and child head count and contact information.

Please distribute this request as far and wide as you can among the community of US Citizen parents who have had their children taken from them to or within Japan. The more parents we get, the better!

(End Paul Toland communication)

Child Custody Disputes During Summer And International Child Abduction

Sitting here this evening and having spoken to 9 different attorneys over the last 4 hours who are part of the I CARE Foundation's attorney network, my eyes continue to be drawn to a 2 foot stack of files.  I must admit, I don't want to really look at them for contained in these folders are files associated with horrific international parental child abduction cases.

In almost every case, the targeted parent was a victim of a clever scheme to abduct by the child's other paent. For many, the abduction took place during a so-called 'Family Vacation Abroad To Visit Family'.

The reality is the vast majority of children who will be internationally abducted will be kidnapped during the summer school vacation. The planning for their abduciton more than likely is well under way. Except the targeted parent does not even know it just yet. They seldom do.

Educate yourself.

Read the report about Summer School Vacation and International Child Abduction.

- Peter Thomas Senese -

Peter Senese: Preparing To Film At The United Nations

For anyone who has worked in film and television production knows, creating a production takes a great deal of time and patience. If there was a prerequisite to being a producer, it is that you need first attend juggling school and graduate with an advanced degree that acknowledges you have the ability of keeping a host of issues or 'balls' up in the air while walking forward on a trapeze line.

There are many moving parts - none taking the same shape or form - in film or television production. If you ask any juggler what one of the keys to keeping the 'balls' in the air, they will tell you there is a rhythm that is created because the 'balls' are generally the same shape and weight.

Well, you can toss that idea out the window when dealing with production.  From creating the 'right' script, to selecting the 'right' cast, to the ever-consuming budget issues, scouting and location issues, having a host of personalities to deal with in front of and behind the camera, and then the ever daunting challenges of distribution, not to mention the agenda or agendas of a studio or network, a producer is problem-solver, thoughtful storyteller, cheerleader, and thinker who must walk a trapeze line while juggling a large number of different sized 'balls' in the air at once, knowing that if any one ball drops the production they are carrying on their back will fall off the high-wire.

Fun stuff.

But in reality, producing is a great deal of fun when you get it right.

On this note, I am very pleased to share that the I CARE Foundation is co-producing (along with Mark Joseph Productions) a television special on international parental child abduction prevention in hope that as the summer months approach, we will be able to reach a large group of targeted parents at risk of having their child or children kidnapped. The show will initially air throughout the New York metropolitan area and then is expected to be distributed in large metropolitan areas.

Location for the show will include taping at the United Nations, which in my opinion, makes a great deal of sense.  In fact, yesterday was a fun day spent scouting key locations at the United Nations for the upcoming shooting schedule.

It is a great honor to have been granted permission to film at the United Nations, as it was a great honor previously to have the I CARE Foundation host a conference on international parental child abduction at the United Nations previously.

As the upcoming television production's host, it is my hope that the information shared in the segment will help protect children and their families. 

If there is one thing more than anything else I have learned during my years of advocacy for children at risk of kidnapping, it is that stewarding the message of risk factors and warning signs of abduction does make a major difference in preventing abduction.

Now you might ask yourself, "Really, how impactful has stewarding the warning signs of abduction actually been?'

Consider this: prior to the I CARE Foundation's formal operations commenced, and using outbound cases of abduction originating from the United States, the international parental child abduction rate experienced substantial increases in abduction for each of the first 30 years since the United States became a member of the Hague Treaty on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. includng long periods when the abduction rate grew on average of 20% per year; however, over the past 2 years, the rate of outbound cases of abduction have dropped by over 15% per year during fiscal years 2011 and 2012 as reported by the Department of State to the U.S. Congress this past February, 2013.

Now what has not changed, but has increased, is the primary reason why international parental kidnappings take place: multi-national relationships fail, and one parent abducts a child to their country of origin.  In fact, more people than ever before from different countries are having relationships, which in theory means more children will be born from these relationships.

So what's the difference?

Clearly it is stewarding the message that the term 'international parental child abduction' exists, what the warning signs, risk factors, and immediate course of action should be if a parent finds themselves at-risk of having a child taken, or, what they should do if a child ws kidnapped abroad.  Weaved into the grass-roots awareness campaign is the fact that part of 'awareness' has been to raise awareness in courts and wherever possible, create case law and new precedent so that courts can protect defenseless children.

Getting the information out into the public's view has been key.

On that note, I am so pleased to share that the ongoing production of the documentary film  '150,000 Internationally Kidnapped Children' will also film several important scenes at the United Nations.

Step by step, the I CARE Foundation along with many other individuals and organizations continue to make a difference fighting against abduction.

A fight well worth joining as children are indeed our greatest resources . . . and worth fighting for.

- Peter Thomas Senese -

 Author of the critically acclaimed novel on abduction titled 'Chasing The Cyclone' available on Amazon (Peter Thomas Senese Donates 100% of all proceeds to the I CARE Foundation)


Click Here To Learn More About The Warning Signs Of International Parental Child Abduction

Peter Senese Film On International Child Abduction To Film At United Nations

Peter Senese's Child Abduction Film To Shoot On Location At United Nations

Film. Books. Advocacy. Rescuing Children. Heroes. International Child Abduction. United Nations. The Hague Convention. Kidnapping. Fighting Kidnappers. Chasing The Cyclone. Hope. Murder. Abuse. Targeted Parents. Hopelessness. The I CARE Foundation. Protecting Children.

In no particular order, these are some of the words that come to my mind when I think of international parental child abduction (IPCA). 

For those of you who are not aware of IPCA, it is the crime of child kidnapping.  It is a brutal crime against both child and targeted parent: one that is legally complicated to obtain true justice on, and one which in many ways, does not protect innocent children of kidnapping the way you might expect.

The reality is every child of abduction is severly abused. Some are murdered.

It is a worldwide epidemic. A plague that is finally being pushed back in the United States, but one that continues to spread in nations around the world.

The key to curing this plague is to educate society, particularly those parents who may be at risk of abduction ... and who may not know that such risk exists.

Creating various tools that educate others has played a very important role in having the abduction rate in the United States decline by over 15% per year the last two years.

My work in this area continues.



I am very pleased to share that a portion of the film on international parental child abduction titled 150,000 Internationally Kidnapped Children presently in production and being produced in conjunction with the I CARE Foundation will add the United Nations as a key location to the film.

Filming at the United Nations is no easy task. I am very thankful to the team at the United Nations for granting the necessary access required to film on location.

However, having previously sponsored a conference and spoken at the United Nations in my capacity as the founding director of the I CARE Foundation concerning the issue of international parental child abduction (IPCA) in conjunction with the United States Department of State's International Visitor Leadership Program, it is both an honor and only fitting to have an important portion of the film take place at the United Nations.

I am very excited about the potential positive impact that 150,000 Internationally Kidnapped Children may have on others, including parents who may be targeted to have a child internationally abducted by the child's other parent or by a stranger.

Previously, and in an ongoing effort, I produced the rather straight-forward educational documentary series on international parental child abduction titled Chasing Parents: Racing Into The Storms Of International Parental Child Abduction which discussed a wide-range of issues associated with international parental child abduction, including warning signs and risk factors, what to do if your child is targeted or taken, the Prevent Departure Program, and the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative amongst many critically important topics associated with child kidnapping.

Judging from the tens of thousands of views of the Chasing Parents: Racing Into The Storms of International Parental Child Abduction along with the rather large number of parents who personally contacted me and shared that the information contained in the educational documentary series made the difference between having their child remain at home as opposed to being internationally abducted, there is a clear international need for a film such as 150,000 Internationally Kidnapped Children: one that not only shares critically important new research conducted by the I CARE Foundation concerning IPCA, but a film that clearly shows both the incredible dangers of stranger and non-stranger abduction in a way that gives light to ways which these kidnappings may be prevented.

Of course, at the core of all the information that I create concerning IPCA is the unbending desire and commitment to help educate society and targeted parents so that children will not face the dangerous, and at times deadly ordeal of IPCA.

There unquestionably is a great crisis on our hands as too many children around the world are being abducted. However, if the statistics of reported cases of abduction originating from the United States demonstrate anything - there has been a two-year consecutive decline of over 15% per year the last two years - it is that stewarding the message that IPCA is a real threat, and enlightening society of the reality of IPCA does in fact mean something: after nearly 30 years of near-consistent growth in the number of IPCA cases, we've pushed back the proverbial mountain in the United States . . . and though there is a great deal to still be done, there is measurable indicators that raising awareness has made a sizeable difference in protecting children from abduction.

On a very personal note, and as a storyteller and writer, when I first began my journey as an international parental child abduction prevention advocate by writing the critically accalimed novel Chasing The Cyclone that was deeply inspired by my own experiences, I never thought that so many miracles would happen as a by-product of these efforts. But that is what happened because through it, dozens of internationally kidnapped children have been reunited while an even larger number of targeted children of abduction have remained safe.

And that is very cool.

-Peter Thomas Senese-

Heroes, Miracles, Children, and Abduction: A Heroic Rescue

I am pleased to be able to finally share the wonderful news that my good friend Kalli Atteya has safely reunited with her young son, who was previously internationally snatched by the child's father during a despicable and cunning scheme that lured Kalli and her son to revolutionary Egypt two years ago (the abduction took place on August 1st, 2011) under the guise of the extremist father, Mohamed's, claims that his mother was dying and that she wanted to see her grandson before her death.

Kalli's efforts are nothing short of heroic.  The love she holds for her son is what is right about our world.

This is what occurred in short form.

Kalli had met Mohamed (an Egyptian national reported to be part of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood) in 1999 while he worked in a restaurant in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. A year later they married. And a year later, Niko was born (2001).

"Three months after our boy was born, he left,” Kalli Atteya told FoxNews.com. “He moved back to Harrisburg, and he dated many, many women. I tried to save my marriage but it didn’t work. Basically, he married me for a visa."

Finally, in 2005 Kalli was granted a divorce from the child's father, who quickly moved from the United States to China, leaving Kalli - who is a few classes short of receiving her Masters in Education, alone to raise her young son.

During the next six years, Kalli kept in touch with Mohamed in order for her child to know his estranged father under remote circumstances.

Then, in 2011, Kalli and her son's nightmare occurred.

Mohamed was able to convince Kalli to travel with their son to Egypt in order to see his alleged dying mother.  What was really going on unknown to Kalli was that Mohamed was planning to snatch his son, and bring him into the world of the Muslim Brotherhood.  

Shortly upon Kalli and her son's arrival, Mohamed's long-planned scheme went into place and culminated with him tossing out of the car Kalli and her sister Maria (who traveled with her sister and nephew from Pennsylvania to Egypt), while they were on a desolate road while in route from Alexandria to Port Said on August 1st, 2011.

Kalli stated that Mohamed had complained of car trouble and forced herself and her sister (Maria Panagos) out of the car in extreme heat, leaving Niko, himself and a driver to speed away. "Mohamed threw me off on the side and ran to the car. I remember seeing Maria dragging behind the car as my son pounded on the windows. It was so unreal to me. At that very moment, I knew this was all preplanned."

And so, Mohamed, disappeared into the turbulent sea of the Egyptian Revolution, leaving Kalli and Maria (what am amazing sister) looking into the foreboding eye of the cyclone of abduction. 

Unfortunately, at the very same time in Egypt, the Spring Uprising also essentially tossed out any rule of law, and despite the fact that Kali was able to obtain an array of national court orders and arrest warrents against Mohamed, the political atmosphere resulted in nothing being done against Mohamed for his act of abduction. 

In the meantime, Kalli was rightfully petrified for her life, as threats by Mohamed were not to be taken as hot-winded words, but a reality. 

Still she persisted. How could she not? She had a child to protect: one whom she loved with all of who she is. 

Perhaps that's the one thing about being a targeted parent of international parental child abduction that most others don't really know: as a parent you know you're about to chase the cyclones of the biggest storms conceivable - you know you're going to get battered if you are lucky enough to simply walk out of it - but you do it anyway because love is worth risking everything for. 

Welcome to the world of international parental child abduction where schemes such as Mohamed's are the norm, not the atypical.

In fact, young Niko is quoted by Fox News as saying, "“My Dad forced me to be Muslim, which I did not want to do."

“My son told me [it was] to make him a Muslim,” Atteya stated when asked why she thought her ex-husband snatched the boy. “He said that we lack the morality and the values that their system has. And he said that Americans were so violent, he said we are a rotting society.”

So just how did Kalli regain her son?

Well, she traveled to Egypt on three separate occasions, only letting her most trusted friends familiar with her intent to know what she was doing.

Along the way, she sadly paid over $100,000.00 to a company that helps recover internationally abducted children.  According to Kalli that company took her money but did nothing.  Fox News added, "Kalli turned to a Norwegian company for help. With each new bit of hope came a new charge until she had spent more than $100,000, depleting her savings and funds borrowed from relatives. Still, she seemed no closer to reuniting with her son."

As you may imagine, Kalli's despair and concern for her son grew as her funds quickly depleted. 

But there was one thing that Mohamed did not bank on: the unbowed love Kalli had for her son, and her will to bring her son home. 

Along the way, Kalli kept certain government non-government organizations abreast of her plans, always making sure that whatever she was doing, was in fact, legal and in accordance to international law (I applaud this act at the highest level).

As to the exact details of how Kalli was able to find and reunite with Niko, needless to say, she walked a hire-wire act that included finding, watching, and planning on when and how to approach her son, who was being carefully guarded - yes guarded (remember, the reality is that children of abduction are in fact 'prisoners'). 

In fact, there were a few times that Kalli actually got to close to Mohamed for comfort. Fortunately, he did not recognize her underneath the veil of the Burqa she was required to wear in Muslim-controlled fundamentalist Egypt.

With careful timing and awareness of Mohamed's whereabouts, Kalli had a limited opportunity to rescue her son.  

Her plan came together as Niko was exiting the school he was attending that Kalli had successfully tracked him to.

Seeing her son on the street as school was letting out the children, Kalli quickly approached her son while she wore her Burqa.  Eyeing him, she said, "Niko. Its mommy. Come with me quickly."

Under the dark veil, the child saw his mother's piercing blue eyes. He knew it was his mother. He listened.

“My first reaction was [to wonder] if that was my mom or not, and then I saw her eyes,” Niko said. “I thought, ‘Thank God. I’m going to finally get out of here. I’m going to be free."

Quickly walking to a rickshaw, Kalli put her on on the back seat seat of the three-wheel bike commonly found in Egypt, and peddled as fast as she could away from the town where the child had been detained. 

Once the school was a distance away, Kalli changed Niko's clothing.  "I dressed him up as a girl. We made it back to a safe house," she told Public Opinion. 

But the journey was far from over. 

Now alone in Egypt with her son, and knowing that the father would soon be looking for her and her child, Kalli needed assistance from home, while trying to create a plan that would cause Mohamed to misdirect his own fanatical search.  

United State Department of State officials have publicly stated that they are aware of Atteya’s case, but declined to provide further details due to privacy concerns.

“One of the Department’s highest priorities is the welfare of U.S. citizens overseas,” the statement reads. “This is particularly true for children, who our most vulnerable citizens.”

Read what you will into this statement, but one thing was certain: Kali was going to operate within the rules of international law. And today, with the assistance of her friends combined with the unbowed love and courage she has for her son - both mother and son are home. 

How lucky are they?

Well, according to heavily reliable sources, Mohamed Atteya and his henchmen have attempted to track down anyone who assisted Kalli bring her son home, leaving a trail of heavy violence in his path, as he and his goons have attacked anyone he thinks may have helped his ex-wife. 

Mohamed Atteya, 38, who speaks Arabic, English and Chinese, and is wanted by the U.S. State Department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security Service for making false statements and providing forged documents to obtain a U.S. passport, amongst a series of criminal complaints against him.  Should he attempt to enter the United States, he will be immediatley detained. 

In the meantime, the friends of Kalli celebrate openly her and Niko's return.  It has been a long road for mother and child, but for all those who have supported them.  

When Fox News shared part of the story today of how Kalli reunited with Niko, it was time to finally share the news we have guarded carefully to our vest.  

With reflection on Kalli's story, the question must be asked: How far are extremist parental kidnappers willing to go?

Below is a portion of a story I shared yesterday concerning this very topic. I am including it here for further reading.

There is a significant and growing side of international parental child abduction that makes me shudder at the very notion of kidnapping I am too familiar with: the alarming act of cross-border parental child kidnappings committed by political extremist and religious zealots.

It has taken a while for society to grasp the notion that when one parent illegally removes a child from the child's country of habitual residency, this is a cruel criminal act of kidnapping.  And the abducted child is not simply with one of their parents, but instead, is a hostage held by an abductor who generally does not have the child's best interest in mind.

Tragically, and most alarming is the reality that children of abduction are being put into extraordinarily dangerous situations.

Previously, I have shared the reality that felicide - child murder by a parent - along with suicide amongst child abduction victims is a real issue.

So where does the use of a child come into play amongst political extremest, social revolutionaries, and religious zealots?

What I am about to share should not be classified as a rare occurrence. They are not.

Let this image sit with you for a moment: a young girl is internationally kidnapped by one of her parents: a parent who possesses extreme religious beliefs that all things born from the West are evil, including his daughter.  In that parent's religious zealot fever, he thinks that the only way to have penance is to do the unthinkable. Meanwhile, the young girl's mother, frantic at knowing the truth of the monster who took their child, along with knowledge of his intent, seeks any way to rescue a child now taken to a world where women have no rights, and foreign women have even less.

But here is an innocent child now delegated to becoming a sacrifice.

Welcome to the unforgivable world of international parental child abduction.

Now imagine a young boy abducted to the nation, if you can call it that, in the midst of a bloody civil war in impoverished Africa. The child was taken by his mother, who left him behind, as a bargaining chip in the conflict between two of that nation's leading militant tribes. As bombs exploded and casualties rose, the child is taught to think that his left-behind parent not only did not love him and that he was an evil man; while the brainwashing ordeal unfolded, war's bloodshed continued to fall.  And for the father who searched, he knew that returning back to the country his child was held hostage could lead to his immediate death, and further harm to his family that remained in his country of origin.

So here is another innocent child delegated to becoming a pawn in a nation's civil war.

Welcome to the brutal world of international parental child abduction.

A young child just learning how to ride a bicycle is snatched from a Norman Rockwellesque mid-
America town and taken to a nation of zealot fundamentalist revolutionaries who preach intolerance for the West.  The child is taught to hate the peaceful world he was taken from.  Gone is the loving, peaceful, and gentle world he was born and raised in. In its place is a world filled with daily bombings and gunfights, violent protests that lead to deadly stampedes, and an unforgivable God (the God the kidnapper teaches his child is not a loving God, nor does it represent the kind God taught in Christian, Jewish, and Muslim faiths).  As this child lives an imprisoned life terrified by everything around him, his left behind parent knows that entering the world of the brutal abductor in order to find her child if caught means entering a world so brutal, that your imagination's notion of brutal punishment and torture, simply could not conjure the realities that would await her if caught.

Sadly, another defenseless child imprisoned into the worst of nightmares. Except it is his reality.

Welcome to the world where the God worshipped is a God filled with hatred.

And do not think that a child is not at risk of death. They are.

Perhaps this reality is the one singular thing that drives all child abduction prevention advocates the most: the hope to prevent the death of a child either at the hands of their parent abductor, or at their own hands later in life due to the brutal psychological trauma they endured during the time of their abduction.  I know my own activism in this arena is greatly due to my desire to help protect children from all forms of harm.

As you can see, the common denominator in the scenarios I presented above is that the child was used as a pawn to advance the abductor's own agenda.

This is something that occurs in every international parental child abduction case.

For the taken child, they are indeed brought into a harsh world that emotionally and spiritually resembles the lonely, wind swept barrier prison known as Alcatraz.  Short-term and long-term trauma is real. So too are the challenges the majority of children face going forward.

One of the things that appears to not have been spoken about in the dialogue concerning international parental child abduction is the general view by the abducting parent that life in the country of the child's habitual residency is one that they often dislike, or in some cases, despise.

In these types of situations, the abductor's (who is nearly always a foreign born national living in another country) resentment toward most things in the country they are residing in prior to the act of kidnapping grows significantly.

Eventually, some of these parents sermonize their view to the child: preaching - and brainwashing - their views to a child is a necessity for all abductors since they need to justify the act of kidnapping to the child under the guise of 'liberation'.

And extreme cases of 'liberators' does exist, creating a potentially greater danger to society than what anyone is talking about.

The question needs to be asked: What are the long-term social risks if a zealot abductor kidnaps a child born in the West, removes that child to a nation of political and religious extremism which the abductor is an active part of, and who evangelizes the messages of hatred and intolerance toward the child's country of previous habitual residency to the point that the child buys into the parent abductor's sermons as 'liberator' that is preached in order to justify the international abduction?

Well, we have a potentially serious problem on our hands.

Make no mistake, all forms of international parental child abduction are severe forms of child abuse.  Under no circumstance should child abduction be tolerated.  Fortunately, this notion is beginning to take hold by society due to the stewardship of the realities of abduction by concerned parents and advocates alike.

In fact, by raising awareness of international parental child abduction the cross-border kidnapping rate has declined in the United States by 15% per year for two years in a row, after nearly thirty years of steady growth.

So our voices are making a difference in the United States.  And unquestionably, the United States Department of States' Office of Childrens Issues has to be given a great deal of credit in their outreach efforts attempting to increase the threat of abduction amongst targeted parents.

Nevertheless, our children remain at great risk. For example, imagine being a mother who living in the United States trying to prevent your daughters from being abducted to Saudi Arabia - a nation where women have essentially no rights. Or a father trying to find your child is Japan or South Korea - nations known to not return abducted children. The realities and hard-truths are disheartening: between the reported and unreported cases on international parental child abduction, it is estimated that only 10% of all kidnapped children ever come home.

In ending this article I would like to share this message: as the summer approaches, now is the time thatwarning signs of abduction are so important.  Parents involved in multi-cultural relationships are particularly at risk of abduction.  The last thing any parent wants to do is find themselves Chasing The Cyclone of abduction.  The best defense against abduction is to educate yourself.
would-be abductors are planning their scheme to illegally snatch their child.  Raising awareness of the risk factors and knowing the

One final note: as the Founding Director of the I CARE Foundation, I am pleased to share with you that the children I mentioned above in the examples I provided are all now at safely home.  Since inception, the I CARE Foundation has assisted a large and growing number of children and their families at risk of abduction. Our work continues.

Click here to read more about The I CARE Foundation.
Click here to read more about Chasing The Cyclone.
Click here to visit the official website of Peter Thomas Senese.