discussions of the uncertainty the child felt about ever seeing the left-behind interviewed parent again and the loneliness (s)he experienced while being away and alone,
explanations from the child(ren) to the interviewed parent of the reasons that the child(ren) had not been able to contact that parent and the amount of times the child(ren) had asked to see that parent during the time away,
descriptions from the child(ren) to the interviewed parent of the “holiday feeling” experienced during the time away,
confirmation from the child(ren) to the abducting interviewed parent of understanding the reasons why that parent had abducted the child(ren).
In the cases of the adults abducted as children, the interviewees expressed anger with the abducting parent and guilt towards the left-behind parent, as well as feelings of excitement experienced during the time away.
(b) Physical and/or Emotional Effects on the Child(ren):
It might have been predicted that the abductor parent interviewees would not have thought that the abduction had affected the child(ren) and the left-behind parents would have thought that the abduction had done so. However, as can be seen from what follows, there were abductors who thought the abduction had affected the child(ren) and left-behind parents who did not think this was the case. Care must be taken, however, with the understanding that is given to the phrase “the abduction” in this context. Although parents may have stated their view that the abduction had caused effects, deeper probing produced evidence that “the abduction” had a more global meaning to many of those who had been through the experience and the “ancillary matters” detailed below form every bit as