Preventing International Child Abduction

Kansas is the 5th state to adopt The Uniform Child Abduction Prevention Act, International Family Law reports at Preventing International Child Abduction:

The Uniform Child Abduction Prevention Act – which includes some specific provisions designed to prevent international child abduction – was signed into law in Kansas on April 6, 2007. Kansas is the fourth state to enact it, along with Nevada, Nebraska and South Dakota. Bills to adopt the new law have been introduced in at least five other legislatures -- Colorado, Connecticut, Kansas, South Carolina, Utah, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Governor Kathleen Sebelius said, "Children aren't just abducted by strangers. Sometimes, abductions take place during custody disputes. We want to identify situations where a child is potentially at risk for abduction and provide ways to prevent that abduction from taking place."

The American Bar Association’s House of Delegates at its Midyear Meeting in Miami in February approved the Uniform Act.

The Act authorizes a proceeding in a court between contestants in a child custody dispute during which the court considers the probability that a contestant will abduct a child to another state or foreign jurisdiction. Upon a finding that an abduction is highly probable, the court may issue orders as necessary to prevent that abduction. The court hears evidence respecting the risk of abduction, based upon statutorily provided risk factors: previous abductions or attempts to abduct; threats by a contestant respecting abduction; abuse of the child; domestic violence; negligence; or, refusal to obey an existing child-custody order.

There are further risk factors if the anticipated abduction is to a foreign country, especially if the country is not a party to the Hague Convention on International Child Abduction. Standing to bring such a proceeding broadly includes the court itself, a contestant in a child-custody proceeding, a prosecutor or a public attorney. UCAPA relies upon the jurisdictional rules of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act.

Even where the country is a Hague signatory there can be problems. See Jeremy Morley's follow-up post, Venezuela “Noncompliant” with Hague Child Abduction Convention.

Comments

[Nicholas James]

Louisiana, at the request of family law attorney Harold Murry and LaDads modified the UPACA to make it only apply to international cases and then only to non-Hague states and/or states not in compliance with the Hague convention.

[Nicholas James]

The bill not only protects against 'international' abductions, but in August of 2004 it was expanded to cover 'inter state' abductions.

So if a parent has 'strong family ties' in another state - as most of us do, then they can be charged as being a 'potential abductor'.

And there is no telling what they meant by the 'strong cultural or emotional' connections with another state. That provision is extremely broad.

In fact, the 'potential risk factors' that are defined in this bill are so vague that they can be applied against any person in this country.

[Nicholas James]

The proposed UCAPA is an extremely dangerous bill that will violate the longstanding U.S. tradition on treating people as 'innocent until proven guilty'.

Under this bill, people can be tried using civil law for a potential felony even if they have not committed any act.

Another extremely dangerous provision in the bill allows a persons ex or even the judge on the judges own motion to obtain an ex-parte, no-knock warrant authorizing the seizure of the children. Think - Eliane Gonzales.

[Nicholas James]

Preventing INTERNATIONAL child abduction? ROFLOL.

You didn't bother to read the bill either, did you?