PARENTAL ABDUCTION JUSTIFICATION AS EGO DEFENSE

Abducting parents sometimes justify their actions as a form of ego defense. This brief report discusses observations that may be helpful to practitioners involved in resolving custody and visitation disputes following parental abduction.     

INTERNATIONAL PARENTAL CHILD ABDUCTION: WHY WE NEED TO EXPAND CUSTODY RIGHTS PROTECTED UNDER THE CHILD ABDUCTION CONVENTION

The Child Abduction Convention, an international treaty, protects custody rights internationally among its member states by providing a remedy of return in cases where a child was wrongfully removed in violation of a parent's custody right. There is no such remedy for the violation of a parent's access (or visitation) rights. A ne exeat clause in a child custody agreement restrains a custodial parent from removing a child from a predetermined jurisdiction (such as a particular country) and can be issued when there is a risk that the custodial parent might flee to another country with the child(ren). Currently there is a circuit split within the United States as to whether a ne exeat right coupled with the right of access should equal a protected custody right under the Convention. Most international courts protect the ne exeat right under the Convention; however some do not. A ne exeat right should convey a protected custody right for policy reasons. The beneficial implications of a ne exeat right creating a protected custody right under the Child Abduction Convention clearly outweigh the detriments. While there is no instant solution to the inconsistencies among various courts in interpreting the Child Abduction Conventions’ scope in regard to a ne exeat right, there are ways to resolve the problem. If consistency in judicial interpretation cannot be achieved, a movement needs to be initiated to create a protocol to the Child Abduction Convention to further explain the scope of custody rights and ne exeat rights under the Convention.     

FAMILY COURTS-20 YEARS AFTER REFORM

The Rt. Hon. Dame Elias discusses the changes the people of Australia and New Zealand have seen and can expect from their respective family courts. She goes on to say that if judges of the family court are to play a more positive role in society, they need to stay abreast of what is happening with current legal trends as they relate to the "best interest of the child" standard, equal rights (especially between genders), and changing international trends in family law. The Chief Justice also addresses problems concerning lack of legal aid funding and an increase in unrepresented litigants. The Chief Justice explains that these issues and problems can best be dealt with through legislative reform as well as family court reform. Where there is an influx of additional resources better preparing judges to deal specifically with those seeking justice in the family court, these additional resources should also lead to a greater general understanding of current trends in the community. Chief Justice Elias asserts that without community support, these issues cannot be resolved.     

INTERNATIONAL ABDUCTION OF CHILDREN

Justice Kay discusses the abduction of children and the application of the Hague Convention from the Australian perspective. The article begins with an outline of the common law and the appropriate legislation. Signatory nations to the Hague Convention are listed and Australian case law reviewed. Statistics are also given regarding children who have been taken to what nations.     

THE REPRODUCTIVE AND PARENTAL RIGHTS OF INCARCERATED MOTHERS

Acknowledging the explosive growth in the number of incarcerated women in the United States, this Note critically examines the current treatment of mothers and expectant mothers in the U.S. prison system. This Note highlights the severe inadequacy of current prison policies and accompanying maltreatment of incarcerated women and their children, especially with regard to the frequent separation of mothers from their children and the poor health care available to expectant mothers. The damage inflicted by current prison policies must be comprehensively redressed through the creation of prison nursery programs, halfway houses, the provision of optimal prenatal care, and the elimination of the draconian practice of shackling pregnant women. Such reforms will not only benefit incarcerated women and their children, but will also deter recidivism and promote the welfare of the community at large.     

THE HAGUE CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL CHILD ABDUCTION AND THE GRAVE RISK OF HARM EXCEPTION

International child abduction is a problem that affects families around the world. The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction was instituted to ensure that abducted children are promptly and safely returned home. Although the goal has been met, recent decisions and their use of Article 13(b) have limited the return of children to Israel on the premise that political turmoil and increased incidences of terrorist attacks constitute war. Although few would dispute that the recent escalation of terrorist attacks in Israel is troublesome, these incidences do not rise to the level of war. Such interpretations of Article 13(b) is too broad and undermines the Convention's policies. Unfortunately, in the global post-September 11th climate, terror attacks are inevitable throughout the world. In light of this harsh reality, courts must not be quick to declare that a country is a zone of war absent clear and convincing evidence.     

NETWORK REGULATION: THE MANY FACES OF ACCESS

Telecommunications regulation has experienced a fundamentalshift from rate regulation to increased reliance on compelledaccess, perhaps best exemplified by the Telecommunications Actof 1996's imposition of no fewer than four new access requirements.Unfortunately, each access requirement is governed by a separateset of rules for determining both the scope and the price ofaccess. The resulting ad hoc regime has created difficult definitionalproblems and opportunities for regulatory arbitrage. In thisarticle we propose a system inspired by the discipline of mathematicsknown as graph theory that integrates all of the different formsof access into a single analytical framework. This system separatesdifferent access regimes into five categories: (1) retail access,(2) wholesale access, (3) interconnection access, (4) platformaccess, and (5) unbundled access. It also provides insightsinto how each type of access complicates the already difficultproblems of network configuration and management and introducesinefficient biases into decisions about network capacity anddesign. The approach we propose also provides insights intothe transaction cost implications of the different types ofaccess. Drawing on the Coasean theory of the firm, our approachexamines the tradeoffs between internal governance costs andthe external transaction costs of providing access to offera theory of network boundaries. This framework shows how accessregulation distorts networks' natural boundaries and providesa basis for evaluating whether private ordering through marketswould lead to more efficient network design.     

PARENTAL CONFLICT RESOLUTION

Six-, 12-, and 15-month follow-up data are presented evaluating a program for high-conflict parents. Funded by a grant from Health and Human Services, the program's content reflects an extensive review of research literature, including the relevant literature on personality disorders. Introduced in Phoenix, Arizona in October 1999, the program has served more than 1,000 families in several jurisdictions. Whereas other programs for entrenched, high-conflict cases are typically time intensive, involving 2 to 6 months, this is a one-time 4-hour program. As such, the authors are heartened to report a suprisingly positive—and enduring—response from the parents.     

CHILDREN'S AND PARENTS’ PERCEPTIONS ON CHILDREN'S PARTICIPATION IN DECISION MAKING AFTER PARENTAL SEPARATION AND DIVORCE*

This article outlines the views of children and parents involved in family law disputes, about the need for and appropriateness of children's participation in decisions regarding residence and contact arrangements. Ninety parents and 47 children (ranging in age from 6 to 18 years) who had been through parental separation, were interviewed. Both parents and children had a range of views about the general appropriateness and fairness of children being involved, but the great majority, particularly of parents, thought that children should have a say in these matters. Core findings of the study include the considerable influence that older children had over the arrangements either in the aftermath of the separation or in making further changes over time, and the higher stated need of children who had experienced violence, abuse, or high levels of conflict to be heard than those in less problematic and noncontested matters. Parents involved in contested proceedings supported the participation of children at a younger age than those who were not. There was a reasonable degree of agreement between parents and children about the need for children to be acknowledged and the value of their views being heard in the decision‐making process. Parents, however, expressed concern about the pressure and manipulation that children can face and exert in this process, whereas children were generally more concerned about the fairness of the outcomes, and maintaining their relationships with their parents and siblings.     

FATHERS AND CHILD ABUSE ALLEGATIONS IN THE CONTEXT OF PARENTAL SEPARATION AND DIVORCE

Fathers' role in child abuse in the context of parental separation and divorce has been the subject of continuous stereotyping over the last several decades. This article examines the stereotypes projected against current research, particularly findings from a study of an experimental family court program designed for the better management of residence and contact disputes where child abuse allegations had been made. These findings are discussed in regard to similar studies internationally. While the two prevailing but opposing stereotypes of fathers' role in child abuse in this context were not confirmed by the research, aspects of the stereotypes regarding fathers' views and mothers' views of each other were supported. Problems associated with the paradoxical position of fathers as the most frequently alleged perpetrators of abuse, the most frequently substantiated perpetrators, and also the most frequently unsubstantiated perpetrators tend not to be fully addressed by the current court process for these disputes.