Child Abduction/Hague Convention

http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/families/article6941434.ece

This is an interesting but upsetting read. This woman sent her son to visit his father in the US for the summer holidays and his father didn't let him come back and because the dad has now convinced the boy to fear/distrust his mother the courts are dragging their feet about returning him although she has full custody! So awful.

(don't read the reader's comments, some of them are vile!).

Wow, that is really upsetting. And, of course, I had to read the comments since you said not to.  While I do agree that fathers often get "the short end of the stick" as far as custody matters are concerned, it is unexcusable what this father did to destroy the boy's relationship with his mother. If the boy had wanted to spend more time with the father or vice versa, I am sure some arrangement could have been made. But because of his actions, this child has gone from having two loving parents to just one. Very sad. 

This is very very wrong. I can't believe that the laws of this country are not being respected.

I can't imagine the anquish that this mother is going through. How is this going to affect the boy in the long run? He is probably frightened as hell and I dare say his feelings have not been considered once. This is just so sad.

This is so sad. 

This is both heartbreaking and terrifying.

Very sad

this happened to a friend of mine - US/Canadian/UK citizen and living in US,  and daughter went to visit her father for the summer - UK citizen living in London.  Halfway through the summer, the father's family convinced the daughter that she did not want to go back to living with her mother in the US and they just announced it point blank.  The mother eventually got the daughter back under the Hague convention - good lawyer in the UK and it helped that mother is also a UK citizen; once the Hague convention was invoked, things happened pretty swiftly - but I don't think the daughter was ever the same after that.   It was heartbreaking to witness the manipulations that went on. 

this happened to a friend of mine - US/Canadian/UK citizen and living in US,  and daughter went to visit her father for the summer - UK citizen living in London.  Halfway through the summer, the father's family convinced the daughter that she did not want to go back to living with her mother in the US and they just announced it point blank.  The mother eventually got the daughter back under the Hague convention - good lawyer in the UK and it helped that mother is also a UK citizen; once the Hague convention was invoked, things happened pretty swiftly - but I don't think the daughter was ever the same after that.   It was heartbreaking to witness the manipulations that went on. 

That's so sad. Glad she got her little girl back, though.

It may sound out of place and seems obviously false with regards to article, but is there no scope for such a change to take place?

There does seem to be a key difference in my mind between poisoning a child's relationship with a parent and stopping/smothering contact and the more benign and understandable move of persuading the child. A great example is one of my old friends from school: He started off with his father in NYC but decided after one summer that he wanted to stay in London with his mother. His father accused her of abduction and all that, and it caused a lot of problems which were only resolved in the end because my friend insisted to his father that he honestly preferred to stay in London. His mother did persuade him, but his desire was still honest and she didn't try to poison the relationship. He still sees his dad a lot and in fact the parents have started to get along a lot better now even though custody is a non-issue now.

He would not liked to been forced back to NYC and that probably would have done more damage to his relationship with his father than staying in London.

It seems to me that the need to protect existing settlements also needs to be balanced with a flexibility in the regime and a recognition that the wishes of the child should be increasingly relevant as the child grows up.

Of course there scope for a change in custody arrangements, but it should be done properly, by one parent informing the other parent of the change they want and then agreeing it amicably or going through the courts if necessary. But to just not return a child after a holiday and brainwash the child to be scared of the other parent in order to gain custody?? No, that is plain old wrong whichever way you look at it.  I do agree that the child's wishes have to be taken into account, but the paramount concern is the welfare of the child which may or may not be consistent with their own wishes at the time. 

Oh no, I completely agree and it's a very unfortunate situation made all the more unfortunate because it is very hard for the courts to distinguish between brainwashing, persuasion and original thought - 3 very different things with different implications but which we know can be confused.