persuasive case may be made for so doing.29 However, in other cases, it is a misguided attempt to subvert the child and ensure the child’s whole-hearted support for the abducting parent. Those parents interviewed who had suffered this loss of contact remember it vividly and with horror. The adults abducted as children remember it with guilt and remorse. Many years after the abduction has ended the lack of contact appears to remain a “live” issue with all those concerned, including the children, who revealed their regret regarding this issue during the child interviews. 30
Only 4 of the 19 current cases were settled, in terms of there being no on-going issues between the parties regarding contact,
residence or leave to resulting in litigation.
remove from the jurisdiction, All 4 cases involved left-behind
with the child(ren) cases the
parent and 2
with the other
was having no
were cases where the parent. In all of those 4 contact or very limited
since the last interview there had been on-going changes in terms of contact, residence and leave to
disputes and remove from
the jurisdiction. 14 interviewees (56%)
of the stated
25 previously interviewed adult their dissatisfaction with current
contact (either the arrangements or the frequency); some these parents complained about the lack of contact between
child and the the paucity of 2 parents live
other parent, some of them expressed sadness at contact but realism about what was possible when separately and, sometimes, in different countries,
29 See, e.g., Bruch, The Unmet Needs of Domestic Violence Victims and Their Children in Hague Child Abduction Cases, GPSolo, September 2005 (American Bar Association) where she states: [i]n some cases, however, there are what have been called objective, justifiable reasons for a child’s removal”.
See Child Report below.