THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD AND THE NEED FOR ITS INCORPORATION INTO A BILL OF RIGHTS

In this article I discuss the failure of most democratic countries to accept or properly implement the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, despite, except in the case of the United States, having ratified it. I consider the domestic implementation of treaties. I discuss, from an Australian perspective, that country's failure to enact a Bill of Rights and argue that children in Australia have suffered as a result. I also discuss judicial approaches to international law and compare the situation in countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and New Zealand and suggest that even in those countries that do have a Bill of Rights, it is not oriented toward children and therefore does not properly recognize their rights.     

THE FIFTH WORLD CONGRESS ON FAMILY LAW AND THE RIGHTS OF CHILDREN AND YOUTH

Editor's note on the 5^th World Congress on Family Law and Children's Rights held in Halifax Nova Scotia, August 23–26, 2009     

STATE LAW AND THE TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS

This paper presents the findings from a content analysis of state laws authorizing the termination of parental rights. The analysis yielded a taxonomy of termination criteria and it identified those criteria that were most widely adopted by the states. State termination criteria were compared to those listed in the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) of 1997. The comparison shows that state laws identify more types of termination criteria than are listed in ASFA. In addition, criteria related to neglect and “parental failure” were often ambiguous and lacked detail. The study identifies possible directions for research on state termination law.     

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.