Molshree A. Sharma

When did you first handle a child abduction case?

I first handled a child abduction case in 2016. My client’s child was abducted from Chicago, United States, to a non-Hague Convention country, India. My client and his family, including his young daughter, went to India for a family vacation and to see grandparents. He woke up to find that his wife had already initiated legal proceedings in India and obtained possession of their child.

This started a legal proceeding that I am now finally completing. It took several emergency orders from the Chicago courts, long litigation in India and the support of the State Department to make progress. Ultimately, we were able to obtain Orders from the Court in Chicago, to give us not only custody of the child but also order that the father be able to obtain the child’s passport without the requirement of the mother’s signature. Ultimately, the father was able to reunite with the child, after proceedings in India, Nepal and the United States.

I am greatly involved in organizations such as Bring Our Kids Home and I-stand, which are non-profits for left behind parents. My client obtained information about my practice from these hard-working parent organizations, and I have had the privilege of working with him to the successful return of the child who is thriving.

What would you like to say to judges who handle these cases?

I believe Judges need a lot more training and support when hearing a child abduction case. In the United States, there is concurrent jurisdiction of both state and federal court. I believe Judge’s in both courts, but especially Judge’s state court, must remember that the Hague Convention is a jurisdictional treaty. Often, because State and local family court Judges are more familiar with applying best interest standards and determination of custody, they struggle with focusing on the foremost issue, which is essentially, whether the Court has jurisdiction, what is the habitual residence and if an exception applies.

Further, Judges must prioritize international abduction cases especially as the Hague Treaty itself seeks to resolve cases expeditiously within 6 weeks. When a case begins to resemble a custody hearing and with Judges who have busy dockets, it is frustrating that cases often take several months to be completed and at times even longer especially when Judges tend to try and apply a best interest standard used in custody.

What is your advice to parents dealing with international child abduction?

My advice to parents who are dealing with a child abduction is to work on matters expeditiously but strategically, which is difficult in such stressful circumstances.

First, the parent should contact an attorney in their own jurisdiction and then work to coordinate with an attorney who practices in the jurisdiction that the child has been taken. This is an essential step as every country and jurisdiction has its own case law and precedent.

Further, the attorney abroad will have the practical experience of taking abduction cases to court. For example, I make sure to talk to the counsel abroad to ensure that any orders I obtain in the United States have language that may be helpful to the counsel in the other country.

Also, it is crucial for the attorneys to work in tandem to achieve the best results possible.

What do you think will change in the future in this area of law?

I believe that the Hague Convention on the civil aspects of child abduction will need to be modified to adapt and provide clarification on key issues.

For example, the convention does not address the issue of undertakings. This has been a judicial interpretation mostly to resolve the tension between overarching principal and goal of the convention, which is to return children to their habitual residence and the appropriateness of that with the fact intensive and deeply personal situation of an individual child. For example, the overarching principle of the convention is that the child must be returned to the habitual residence and abduction must deterred. However, where there is a clear and convincing exception such as domestic violence, it may not be appropriate in every situation to return the child, yet the court must try and balance what is right for the individual child with the application of the Convention. Therefore, the future will require a modification of the treaty to deal with the reality of parties fleeing violent situations and what protective measures if any can be put in place to remain true to the Convention.

What can people do to support the children during these proceedings?

Children in child abduction cases must be supported at each stage of the process. I have had clients whose children were told that the left behind parent had died or was in prison. I

t is important to ask a Court for the child to receive counseling during the case and unless inappropriate have daily contact on face time or video call with the left behind parent.

Additionally, a child must receive intensive therapy once the case is resolved and at least for a year. In many cases, the child initially may not fully express the trauma they have endured, or fear experienced. Therefore, it is crucial that the child is supported through therapy and given age-appropriate information to help them cope and be able to talk about their wishes.