without even those that she would like to have in her life. This sentiment, which was repeated in parental interviews, has a deeply disturbing effect on those who experience it.
It has been interesting to compare the views expressed by the children in their individual interviews on the effects of the abduction with those expressed by the parents in their own interviews. Largely, the custodial parent’s perception has been an accurate reflection of the child’s view. The effects of the conflict seem to be the greatest problem for the children, one child insisting that this will remain with him forever, “[i]t will never go away”, and another child stating, many years after the abduction and return, that a day never goes by when she does not think about it at some point.
Some of these issues are, sadly, inevitable in familial breakdown where a once-united family must make new, fragmented, lives. However, all that can be done must be done to prevent abductions taking place.73Where they do occur, it is crucial to ensure that contact is maintained74 (both during the time away and after the return) between the abducted child and the important people in her life, and that after-care provision is made75 to enable these sometimes tormented families to cope
73 Some possible ways in which this may be achieved are (i) through the continued raising of awareness, (a) for those families at risk of the possible implications of abduction for the abductor and families, (b) with legal advisers throughout the jurisdiction and (c) with legal advisers in other jurisdictions, (ii) through continued debate on the implications of relocation in cases of familial breakdown. It is hoped that the availability and dissemination of this report may contribute towards fulfilling this aim.
74 There is provision within art 7 of the Hague Convention (combined in the jurisdiction of England and Wales with the Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 (CACA), Ch. 60, s. 5), for contact orders to be made in the pendency of Hague proceedings without need to resort to domestic proceedings, see Cannon v Cannon  EWCA Civ 1330,  3 FCR 438 Court of Appeal (Civil Division). S5 CACA relates to interim powers: “Where an application has been made to a court in the United Kingdom under the Convention, the court may, at any time before the application is determined, give such interim directions as it thinks fit for the purpose of securing the welfare of the child concerned or of preventing changes in the circumstances relevant to the determination of the application”. However, although this may be good practice, it is important not to get diverted away from concentrating on the aim of returning the child to the State of habitual residence. The greatest attention should focus, as already discussed, on the continued contact, post return, between the child and all important family members in both sets of families.
75 It is unlikely that such services could be anything other than locally provided and administered and,
as such, will depend upon the resources which are available in individual jurisdictions and the