U.S. : Preventing re-abduction

by | May 26, 2022

U.S. : Abbott v. Abbott

U.S. : Preventing re-abduction

A return procedure can bring a very stressful period for both parents. The earlier international move may have already been a life-changing event, which can bring about all kinds of emotions. The move itself may be related to the grief surrounding an (upcoming) divorce. The move may have become a disappointment and led to isolation and uncertainty.

These kinds of circumstances can lead the abducting parent to move the child to another country once again without the consent of the other parent with custody. This can happen with the aim of being closer to family, but also with the aim of making the return impossible or at least more difficult. The parent who remains behind must then start a new return procedure in the other country, if there is a legal basis for this.

This is why preventive measures during the return process are so important. In the United States judges have ample opportunity to take measures to prevent re-abduction. These are:

– the child’s passport(s) to be deposited with authorities
– the alleged abductor’s passport to be deposited with authorities
– obtaining orders toe prevent the removal of the child
– issuing border and/or port alerts
– requiring the alleged abductor to pay a bond/deposit
– temporary placement of child in institutional care
– entering a child into the Children’s Passport Issuance Alert Program (CPIAP).

You can discuss with your attorney what facts and circumstances you want to bring forward to convince the court to take these actions in your case.

 

Read more about International Child Abduction

Read more about child relocation and child abduction in:

Visit the U.S. Government website about International Child Abduction

All blogs from The Author:

All blogs from Jan van Kuijk