Indian SC asks a 7 yr. old minor who has been fatherless for over an year and likely being brainwashed if she wants to stay with mother or father to decide custody. Is this OUTRAGEOUS or what? In the process the SC overturned both US and Calcutta HC orders. WAY TO GO SC…!!!!!!!!!
Does the judiciary realize that putting a child in a situation where she has to choose between her parents is insane?
Does the judiciary realize that children too have survival instincts and in cases of parental alienation will always do whatever it takes to please the alienating parent even if that means deriding/abusing/abhorring the left behind parent?
Does the judiciary realize that its prime goal is to rule keeping in mind the welfare of the child and that children are not always the best judge of their welfare, especially minors and alienated children?
READ THE ARTICLE HERE
Posted in child custody, child rights, divorce, fatherless society, fathers, gender bias, indian child custody, judgements, parental child abduction
Tagged brainwashing, calcutta high court, child custody, indian supreme court, nalini chowdhuri, parental alienation, rana ray, US court order, webcam sessions with child
WOW is all i could say when i read this case. Father detains children in India, Mommy comes back to US and files a habeaus corpus petition in Kerala HC. Kerala HC orders father to return US citizen children to Mom in Texas until a court in Texas rules on custody because Texas is the right jurisdiction. WOW is all I can say….WHY
Reverse the genders in this situation and you get my story. I too filed a Habeaus Corpus in Delhi HC which was dismissed by a vague one line order (“it does not lie here, hence dismissed”) and currently I am appealing in SC and none of the judges seem to be taking the tack that this Kerala HC judge took in this case. WHY? BECAUSE I AM DADDY, I AM A MAN!!!!!
read the Kerala HC judgement here
Posted in child custody, fatherless society, gender bias, indian child custody, judgements, parental child abduction
Tagged child custody, eugenia archetti abdullah, habeaus corpus, j m james, jamshed ahmad abdullah, k a abdul gafoor jr, kerala HC, TEXAS, US citizen children
Parental kidnapping is a crime in the US. However the way the US code is written (see below), if the kidnapper has made allegations of domestic violence/child abuse, the kidnapper can try to take shelter under these as “affirmative defense”.
No surprise then that so few moms who kidnap their children and take them abroad escape federal warrants and criminal prosecution. Because if there is anyone who knows how to make false allegations of abuse, it is MOM. Dads, even if they were to make allegations will probably be laughed off.
§ 1204. International parental kidnapping
(a) Whoever removes a child from the United States, or attempts to do so, or retains a child (who has been in the United States) outside the United States with intent to obstruct the lawful exercise of parental rights shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 3 years, or both.
(b) As used in this section—
(1) the term “child” means a person who has not attained the age of 16 years; and
(2) the term “parental rights”, with respect to a child, means the right to physical custody of the child—
(A) whether joint or sole (and includes visiting rights); and
(B) whether arising by operation of law, court order, or legally binding agreement of the parties.
(c) It shall be an affirmative defense under this section that—
(1) the defendant acted within the provisions of a valid court order granting the defendant legal custody or visitation rights and that order was obtained pursuant to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act or the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act and was in effect at the time of the offense;
(2) the defendant was fleeing an incidence or pattern of domestic violence; or
(3) the defendant had physical custody of the child pursuant to a court order granting legal custody or visitation rights and failed to return the child as a result of circumstances beyond the defendant’s control, and the defendant notified or made reasonable attempts to notify the other parent or lawful custodian of the child of such circumstances within 24 hours after the visitation period had expired and returned the child as soon as possible.
(d) This section does not detract from The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Parental Child Abduction, done at The Hague on October 25, 1980.
Congratulations to this hero father for not only getting custody of his children in their best interests but also for continuing to fight
He has lost more than 5 years with them which even the Good Lord cannot return but he has saved these innocent souls from the devastation they would have faced with their unfit mother
He has allowed the mother to have unrestricted visits with the children, hopefully he will monitor those and make them supervised to prevent further child abuse.
This is also a good case that shows the reasoned approach taken by the judge in the best interests of the child without exhibiting any form of gender bias
Read the judgement here
If you are an NRI married to a woman whose permanent home is not in the country you reside in, have children, and you are seeing any signs whatsoever of issues in your marriage, YOU NEED TO ACT FAST to prevent the international parental abduction of your children.
What do i mean by need to act fast? Get a court order to prevent the abduction, have the court rule that passports should be kept in a safe place and accessible only by both parents consent, and once you have the court order ensure that the immigration authorities enter the likely kidnapper’s name in a database so that if the kidnapper tries to leave the country they are apprehended immediately
Remember, prevention is better than cure
There are zillions of cases where parents did not do this and now are suffering. Once a child leaves the jurisdiction of the country you are in, the arms of law become very weak. If the child is kidnapped to a country that is not a signatory to the Hague convention treaty (e.g. India), you’re screwed.
It is not easy to convince the courts but do not give up, get a good lawyer and push the court hard to ensure the order is given
READ THIS ARTICLE WHICH TALKS ABOUT TEXAS AND GETTING THE ORDER PASSED
A mom who kidnapped her son away from father was ordered by the SC to return the child to the father. See the difference in the mom and dad and determine for yourself who is likely to be the better parent
MOM–“It is so easy for the court to talk about the importance of parental relations, but then they go and kick the mother out of his life,” she said, adding that with no course of action left for her in Israel, she plans to take her case to both the United Nations and the European Union.
DAD–“I hope his mother comes back with him, too,” he concluded. “A child needs both parents.”
READ FULL STORY HERE
UPDATE (May 09, 2008): Japan to sign Hague Child Abduction Convention
Japan is known for having virtually no established family law and no tradition of dual custody. Once a couple gets divorced, there is no concept of visitation rights. Children are generally assigned to one parent, never to have contact with the other parent.
Without faltering, judges continuously uphold the cultural imperative that it is in the child’s best interest to stay with whomever she or he is with at that moment. The status quo is protected as police don’t intervene on family matters and judges have no authority over enforcement.
Japan is not a signatory to the Hague convention
READ THIS HEARTBREAKING STORY THAT I AM ALL TOO FAMILIAR WITH
Posted in child abuse, child custody, child rights, Hague convention, parental child abduction
Tagged CANADA, child custody, extradition, FEDERAL WARRANT, Hague convention, JAPAN, parental child abduction