Background: In my co-authored column “Family Abduction Prevention Act Fails to Address Causes of Parental Kidnapping,” (The Hill, 1/8/07), I criticized the FAPA, which was sponsored by California Senator Diane Feinstein and Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison. We wrote:
“Feinstein and Hutchison portray FAPA as a protection against abducting noncustodial fathers. However, according to the US Department of Justice, mothers and fathers abduct their children in equal numbers…According to the US Department of Justice’s Office of Juvenile Justice, children in sole custody settings are at a far greater risk of being abducted by a parent than children in joint physical custody settings. The driving force behind parental abductions is the win-lose child custody system.
“Under this system, when a couple divorces or separates, one and only one parent is awarded true custody of the child, and many noncustodial parents are allowed little or no role in their children’s lives…This sets up a situation where disenfranchised parents may go outside the law to regain their relationships with their children.
“This is not to say that parental abductions are justified or are in children’s best interestsâ€â€they rarely are. And in some cases parents have lost custody because they are unfit. Yet current divorce policies set up incentives to abduct.â€Â
Judi Cochran has some interesting and thoughtful criticisms of my column. Cochran is a consultant on Interstate and International Parental Abductions, Interstate custody issues, Sex Offender Profiling (primarily false allegations in custody cases), and Parental Alienation. Her letter appears below.
Dear Glenn:
I generally have no argument with your comments or interpretations. However, I believe that your “assumption” that shared parenting presumption, joint custody awards or any other creative ideas will stop or slow down parental abductions is off the mark. You state that the non-custodial parent is more likely to abduct and this is not what I have seen in 30 years of working with parental abduction cases. The abductor is, more often than not, the custodial parent or in pre-decree cases the parent who has possession of the child “in the moment”, usually the mother.ÂÂ
The reasons for the abductions vary, but rarely have anything to do with the custodial status but more to do with revenge and control. While, when caught, the abductors will usually scream “Abuse!” since it’s the only affirmative defense to criminal interference with custody, it is rare to find a shred of evidence to support this allegation. Slowly States are amending their statutes to include custodial parent abduction, but the sad fact is that many criminal statutes (including Ohio) protect ONLY the custodial parent. The reason for these changes is the recognition that today it is the custodial parent who more often disappears with the child.
The anger is often seeded when mom doesn’t get her way in the custody court, but not because she becomes the non-custodial parent. Most often, she IS the custodial parent but interferes with the visitation order, attempts to alienate the child from the father, believes if she simply moves away Dad is powerless, doesn’t win her DV “case” (more courts are finally saying “Fine, you can have your protection order. HOWEVER, it will NOT include the child and the custody order will not be interrupted.”) and narcissistic behavior that NO custody order can control. I have dealt with hundreds of these cases, and no matter what the “excuse”, the pattern of behavior is almost always the same. And a shared parenting order often only increases the anger. (more…)
|
