Showing posts with label department of state. Show all posts
Showing posts with label department of state. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 30, 2013

Stopping International Parental Child Abduction - Dual Passports and Dual Citizenship

Dual Citizenship Issues: How To Stop International Parental Child Abduction 
 

 
It is a mistake to think that the United States Government cannot help prevent the international parental child abduction of an American child-citizen by an abducting parent who possesses either sole American citizenship or is a dual citizen of the United States and another country.

For any parent, lawyer, or stakeholder who is involved in attempting to prevent an international child abduction originating from the United States whereas the suspected taking parent may possess secondary passports issued from a foreign country for the targeted child, I urge you to contact the indefatigable, dedicated team at the United States Department of State's Office of Children's Issues Abduction Prevention Unit.

If you are an at-risk parent who believes your child's other parent is planning or in the process of international parental child abduction, please contact the United States Department of State's Office of Children's Issues Abduction Prevention Bureau to discuss potential measures that may be available to you to ensure the individual parent suspected of an international child abduction threat does not illegally depart the United States and remove your child in violation of a court order or in breach of your right of custody.  

Please contact the Office of Children's Issues Prevention Bureau to discuss if there are potential prevention techniques unique to your case that may allow the Department of State to work with other federal agencies so to secure your child is not a victim of international parental child abduction.
The United States Department of State
Office Of Children's Issues
Abduction Prevention Bureau

                                                                      CA/OCS/CI
                                                                   SA-17, 9th Floor  

Washington, DC 20522-1709 
                                           Phone: 1-888-407-4747   or   202-501-4444
                                                       Email:  prevention@state.gov

 
To contact the I CARE Foundation concerning abduction matters including possible methods available to stop international parental child abduction please email us at legal@stopchildabduction.org.

                              
Many U.S. citizen children who fall victim to international parental abduction possess dual nationality. Being aware of the child's other parent's possession of a secondary passport issued from that parent's country of origin is critical in preventing abduction because children abducted abroad usually travel outside of the country on their foreign passport. Preventing the issuance of your child's secondary passport to a foreign country is possible, but not guaranteed, based upon the country of origin of the child's other parent and their laws.

In the United States, it was apparent that parents intending to illegally remove a child in a foreign country knew that if they possessed dual citizenship, that it would be rather easy to depart America using their foreign issued passport that they have had issued for them and more than likely, the child they are intending to wrongfully remove.  In part, this belief appears to have been circulated because it was commonly believed that the United States does not have exit controls, and, existing policies such as the Prevent Departure Program (discussed herein) does not apply to individuals who posses a right of American citizenship.

Well - I am here today to tell any individual who is thinking that you can illegally remove an American child-citizen from the United States using a secondary passport issued from another country in your and in the child's name - you better think again. 

For all parents, lawyers, court officials, policymakers, policy administrators, child advocates - and to any person who is thinking of aiding or abetting a person intent on committing the crime of international parental child abduction - here's what you need to know: The United States Department of State's Office of Children's Issues and the branch's Child Abduction Prevention Bureau is deeply committed to stopping the abduction of American children.

Want a little proof?

Well, let me begin by saying that due to a host of factors, the global international parental child abduction rate appears to be growing at over 20% per year. Except in the United States of America, where the international parental child abduction rate declined by over 15% in 2011, declined by over 16% in 2012, and is expected to decline further in 2013.

Why is this happening?

Many reasons - first and foremost - it is because the Department of State has committed necessary resources to the Office of Children's Issues and their Abduction Prevention Unit. In turn, their has been real cooperation between the Department of State and other federal agencies who have the ability to assist in stopping a child's international abduction.

For those of you who may be a target of abduction, it is important to know the majority of international parental child abductions that occur are carefully planned schemes that attempt to catch the targeted parent off guard. A parent intending to snatch a child may use an assortment of reasons in order to obtain the secondary passport. Certain countries require signatures of both of the child's parents, while many require only the signature of the parent that possesses citizenship to that country.

In scenarios where only the parent who possesses citizenship to the country the child has a right to secondary citizenship to can apply for their child's passport, the grave risk and reality is that if abduction is planned, the abducting parent will attempt to conceal the existence of the secondary passport from the other parent. Additionally, in cases where dual signatures are required, it is possible that the taking parent can fraudulently submit the other parent's signature to the passport bureau of the other country as generally there are limited documentation controls in place set up to validate the application request.

While the Department of State will make every effort to avoid issuing a U.S. passport if the custodial parent has provided a custody decree, the Department cannot prevent embassies and consulates of other countries in the United States from issuing their passports to children who are also their nationals. 

All is not lost if you act thoughtfully. For example, you can ask a foreign embassy or consulate not to issue a passport to your child. On numerous occasions I or one of the attorneys associated with the I CARE Foundation have accompanied a targeted parent and personally visited a foreign embassy or consulate and requested that a secondary passport not be issued in the name of the child due to an abduction threat.

If traveling to an embassy or consulate is not a possibility, I suggest you contact the consulate, locate a supervisor who oversees their passport issuance program, and speak to them about your concern for abduction and specifically state you do not want that country to issue a passport. Immediately after that telephone call, you must submit a written request, along with certified complete copies of any court orders addressing custody or the overseas travel of your child you have. From experience, I strongly suggest you also include your marriage certificate, your child's birth certificate, and any other relevant documentation that establishes your marriage or legal partnership and establishes that you are the parent of the child or children. In your letter, inform them that you are sending a copy of this request to the U.S. Department of State
 

If your child is only a U.S. citizen, you can request that no visa for that country be issued in his or her U.S. passport. No international law requires compliance with such requests, but some countries will comply voluntarily.

With respect to your requests to a foreign country, there is one thing I would like to share from experience: you are likely to get more cooperation at times if you or your legal representative schedule an appointment in person. This is something I have seen first-hand in my capacity as a director of the I CARE Foundation.

What is dual nationality?

The concept of dual nationality means that a person is a citizen of two countries at the same time. Each country has its own citizenship laws based on its own policy. Persons may have dual nationality by automatic operation of different laws rather than by choice. For example, a child born in a foreign country to U.S. citizen parents may be both a U.S. citizen and a citizen of the country of birth.

A U.S. citizen may acquire foreign citizenship by marriage, or a person naturalized as a U.S. citizen may not lose the citizenship of the country of birth.  U.S. law does not mention dual nationality or require a person to choose one citizenship or another. Also, a person who is automatically granted another citizenship does not risk losing U.S. citizenship. However, a person who acquires a foreign citizenship by applying for it may lose U.S. citizenship. In order to lose U.S. citizenship, the law requires that the person must apply for the foreign citizenship voluntarily, by free choice, and with the intention to give up U.S. citizenship.

Intent can be shown by the person's statements or conduct.  The U.S. Government recognizes that dual nationality exists but does not encourage it as a matter of policy because of the problems it may cause. Claims of other countries on dual national U.S. citizens may conflict with U.S. law, and dual nationality may limit U.S. Government efforts to assist citizens abroad. The country where a dual national is located generally has a stronger claim to that person's allegiance.

However, dual nationals owe allegiance to both the United States and the foreign country. They are required to obey the laws of both countries. Either country has the right to enforce its laws, particularly if the person later travels there. Most U.S. citizens, including dual nationals, must use a U.S. passport to enter and leave the United States. Dual nationals may also be required by the foreign country to use its passport to enter and leave that country. Use of the foreign passport does not endanger U.S. citizenship. Most countries permit a person to renounce or otherwise lose citizenship.

Information on losing foreign citizenship can be obtained from the foreign country's embassy and consulates in the United States. Americans can renounce U.S. citizenship in the proper form at U.S. embassies and consulates abroad.
 


Two Parent Signature Law for a Passport


U.S. law requires the signature of both parents, or the child's legal guardians, prior to issuance of a U.S. passport to children under the age of 16. To obtain a U.S. passport for a child under the age of 16, both parents (or the child’s legal guardians) must execute the child’s passport application and provide documentary evidence demonstrating that they are the parents or guardians. If this cannot be done, the person executing the passport application must provide documentary evidence that he or she has sole custody of the child, has the consent of the other parent to the issuance of the passport, or is acting in place of the parents and has the consent of both parents (or of a parent/legal guardian with sole custody over the child to the issuance of the passport).


Exceptions:

The law does provide two exceptions to this requirement: (1) for exigent circumstances, such as those involving the health or welfare of he child, or (2) when the Secretary of State determines that issuance of a passport is warranted by special family circumstances.
 


Prevent Departure Program


Since 2003, United States citizens have had available a very effective international child abduction prevention tool called ‘The Prevent Departure Program’. Unfortunately, many parents at risk of having their child internationally abducted are not aware that this incredibly useful tool is available to them.

In the aftermath of 911, the Department of Homeland Security’s ‘Prevent Departure Program’ was created to stop non-U.S. citizens from departing the country. The program applies to non-US citizens physically located in America considered individuals at risk of child abduction. The Customs and Border Protection (CBP) oversees this program and it is monitored 24 hours a day.

What the ‘Prevent Departure Program’ does is provide immediate information to the transportation industry, including all air, land, and sea channels a single point of contact at Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and provides a comprehensive database of individuals the United States believes may immediately depart to a foreign country.

The program only applies to aliens, and is not available to stop U.S. citizens or dual U.S./foreign citizens from leaving the country. CRITICALLY -  as I stated earlier, if  you are an at-risk parent who believes your child's other parent is planning or in the process of international parental child abduction, please contact the United States Department of State's Office of Children's Issues Abduction Prevention Bureau to discuss potential measures that may be available to you to ensure the individual parent suspected of an international child abduction threat does not illegally depart the United States and remove your child in violation of a court order or in breach of your right of custody. The Office of Children's Issues Prevention Bureau may be able to determine if there are potential prevention techniques unique to your case that may allow the Department of State to work with other federal agencies so to secure your child is not a victim of international parental child abduction.

Under Section 215 of the ‘Immigration and Nationality Act’ (8 U.S.C. 1185) and it’s implementing regulations (8 CFR Part 215 and 22 CFR Part 46), it authorizes departure-control officers to prevent an alien’s departure from the United States if the alien’s departure would be prejudicial to the interests of the United States. These regulations include would-be abductions of U.S. citizens in accordance to court orders originating from the child’s court of habitual residency.

If the abductor and child are identified, they will be denied boarding. In order to detain them after boarding is denied, there must be a court order prohibiting the child’s removal or providing for the child’s pick-up, or a warrant for the abductor.

In order for an at risk parent to participate in the program (remember: the Department of State may be able to assist a parent targeted by another individual who is in possession of dual citizenship and find issues unique to your case that may enable them to work with other federal agencies in cases of American or dual citizenship), all of the following must be demonstrated:

1. Subject may NOT be a US citizen; and,

2. The nomination must include a law enforcement agency contact with 24/7 coverage; and,

3. There must be a court order showing which parent has been awarded custody or shows that the Subject is restrained from removing his/her minor child from certain counties, the state or the U.S.; and,

4. The Subject must be in the US; and,

5. There must be some likelihood that the Subject will attempt to depart in the immediate future.

With respect to the established guidelines listed above, note that in order to request the listing of the other parent, that person must be an alien of the United States.

The second mandate states a request to place an individual’s name on the Prevent Departure Program must include support by a law enforcement agency or from the Department of State’s Office of Children’s Issues, which has the authority of requesting for the Department of Homeland Security to list a suspected child abductor on the ‘Prevent Departure Program’.

The third criteria: possessing a custodial order, is essential. Regardless if the other parent has joint custody or rights of visitation, critically, you must make sure that there are injunction orders in place prohibiting the child from being removed from the jurisdiction of habitual residency. Unfortunately, many international parental child abductions are well planned out in advance of the actual abduction, and the targeted parent has no idea that an abduction is in progress until it is too late. This is why it is essential for parents in partnership with non-nationals to be fully aware of the warning signs associated with a potential international child abduction.

The fourth criteria states the obvious: in order to prevent an alien-parent suspected of abducting a child on U.S. soil, that parent must be on U.S. soil.

The fifth criteria requests that the applying parent demonstrate that the alien-parent has demonstrated the likelihood of abducting the child across international borders in the immediate future. Remember – you need to document and record as much evidence as possible.

For many parents who face the risk of having their child abducted and removed across international borders, the nightmare that both targeted parent and victimized child face is unbearable.

The Prevent Departure Program is not for everyone and should not be abused; however, in situations where an abduction threat is real and the targeting parent intent on abducting a child is a non-US citizen possessing the capacity to breach court orders and abduct a child of a relationship, the Prevent Departure Program may be a useful tool.

What To Include When Contacting The Department Of State's Office Of Children's Issues:

Individuals seeking to Department of State assistance and implementation of the Prevent Departure Program should make sure that they have the following information ready to submit to the Office of Children's Issues:


1.      Full name, date, place of birth of Potential taking parent.

2.      Full name, date, place of birth of Potential left behind parent (and PLBP’s contact info, including a surface address).

3.      Passport number and issuing country (if available, and not U.S.) for both parents.

4.      Full name of child.

5.      Date, place of birth of child.

6.      U.S. passport number of child.

7.      Passport number and issuing country of any dual national passport of child (if available).

8.      Copy of court order with travel restrictions.

9.      Full contact details, including a 24/7 phone and email (to email court documents, we do not have after hours fax access), for law enforcement contact.

10.   Details of potential travel plans.
The contact information for the Department of State is as follows:


The United States Department of State
Office Of Children's Issues
Abduction Prevention Bureau
CA/OCS/CI
SA-17, 9th Floor  
Washington, DC 20522-1709
                                           Phone: 1-888-407-4747   or   202-501-4444
                                                       Email:  prevention@state.gov




Conclusion
In the United States, International Parental Child Abduction is clearly beginning to be taken as a serious crime against innocent children. The incredible efforts by the Office Of Children's Issues to protect American children from abduction has produced real, measurable, and impactful results. As the world's abduction rate spirals out of control, an anomaly is occurring in America: children are being protected from kidnapping. 

From our vantage point in the battle trench fighting abduction, and from our own measurable history of protecting a large number of children who have either been abducted or were targeted from abduction, the I CARE Foundation is fully aware that none of the successes we have had assisting targeted children would be possible if not for the Department of State and the tremendous cooperation protecting children provided by other agencies.

I think it is important to point out that in all cases where a secondary passport is a concern, one of the legal strategies the attorneys associated with the I CARE Foundation have successfully implemented is to seek an emergency order from the court possessing jurisdiction of the child whereas, the petition requests that 'responding parent' (parent believed to planning an abduction) provide formal documentation from the consulate or embassy of their country of origin that grants the consulate or embassy permission to answer a court subpoena concerning the issuance of a passport (the consulate or embassy is not required to do so even if a subpoena is issued), or, that the court order the responding parent to provide an official letter from their country of origin stating that neither a passport for the child has been issued from that country and no application for a passport has been submitted.

During the emergency application, the targeted parent (the 'applicant') has sought a host of measures, including seeking for the court or the applicant to take possession of the child's American passports; and, for the child being placed on the United States Passport Issuance Alert Program; and, for either removal of child access or limited, supervised access of the targeted child by the parent suspected of child snatching. If the Prevent Departure Program is applicable, attorneys have previously sought for the court to request that the U.S. Department of State petition the U.S. Department of Homeland Security place a person considered a high-risk child abductor on the secure screening list to ensure that person does not travel outside of the country with the child unless permitted to do so by court order.

However, as stated previously - each abduction prevention case is different. It is imperative that at-risk parents contact the Department of State.  Should a parent or attorney have questions they would like to address with the I CARE Foundation, they may do so by email at: legal@stopchildabduction.org.  

I think it is also worth sharing the concern that a parent traveling by land or sea across international adjacent borders (For the United States this means travel to Canada, Mexico, or certain Caribbean island-nations) with a minor under 16 years of age does not need to present a valid passport for their child at the border-crossing (valid passports are required for all travelers regardless of age only when traveling abroad by aircraft) as established by the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative.

Thus, a parent planning to abduct a child could do so by boarding a closed circuit cruise, or by simply driving across the border. It is critical that an attorney attempting to prevent abduction familiarize themselves with the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative loopholes and present these issues to the court they are litigating over. One other good idea is that they present to the court the statistical realities of child abduction return, including whether a country that appears to be a likely inbound country is a member of the Hague Convention, and whether or not they are a complying country. Of course, that's not all that should be presented to the court. A few other important issues include the potential for severe abuse to the child; and, the severe abuse to the targeted parent, the cost to litigate; and, the ability for the taking parent to disappear abroad, including departing the country they initially 'landed' in, and travel to another country; and finally, the likelihood that a child will be returned.

I invite you to read Summer Vacations and International Parental Child Abduction and to visit the official website of the U.S. Department of State, I CARE Foundation and Chasing The Cyclone for more information about abduction.

One little word of advice: the majority of parents who have had their child abducted never saw it coming. Do not stick your head in the ground and think this cannot happen to you. Educate yourself.

And for anyone who is thinking of either illegally removing an American child-citizen from the United States or who is planning on wrongfully detaining a child abroad, remember, international parental child abduction is a federal crime called kidnapping. Click here to read more about the International Parental Kidnapping Crimes Act.

- Peter Thomas Senese -
- Executive Director-
- The I CARE Foundation-


 

 

 

Friday, August 23, 2013

International Child Abduction and The Prevent Departure Program

Earlier this summer I had shared an article that I had written on Summer Vacations and International Child Abduction Warning Signs.  The article explained in detail some of the possible scenarios and techniques that a potential abductor may use in order to wrongfully remove a child from their home country of jurisdiction.  Even though that article was focused on the time of summer vacations, a time where approximately 85% to 95% of all parental abductions occur in the United States or abroad, even though summer is almost over international parental child abduction still poses a very serious threat for many families.

As always, the I CARE Foundation works toward the goal of preventing international child abductions.  One of the major keys to protecting innocent children from abduction is raising awareness of the realities of international abduction with the hope that our messages about the risks and warning signs that a kidnapping is being planned may allow a parent or other stakeholders the opportunity to prevent abduction.  Historically, the U.S. rate of reported cases of outbound abduction has declined by approximately 15% during the fiscal years 2011 and 2012, and that is after nearly 30 years of reported growth.  This tells us that abduction prevention efforts are working.

Now one of the most concerning risk factors that will lead to international child abduction is the use of a would-be taking parent to use a secondary passport not issued by the United States government in order to depart the country as shared in detail in the article published on behalf of the I CARE Foundation titled Summer Vacation. Child Abduction. Dual Citizenship. Two Passports. How To Prevent Abduction


I urge any parent who believes they are at risk of abduction to read both articles that I have listed.

One of the most effective tools available for at-risk parents trying to prevent abduction is the Prevent Departure Program, which is a secure screening program that lists any individual considered by the courts or law enforcement to be a high-risk child abductor.  In order to be placed on the Prevent Departure Program, there are certain requirements, one of which presently includes that the person cannot be a citizen of the United States of America.  Thus, only aliens residents (or non-residents) physically located in the United States may be put on the Prevent Departure Program at the request of the Department of State to the Department of Homeland Security.

Unfortunately, the caveat is that in order for a person to be considered a candidate for the Prevent Departure Program they are not American citizens, which presents a problem since individuals who possess dual citizenship, including American citizenship, cannot be placed on the Prevent Departure Program list.  Hopefully, there will be a modification in policy so that American citizens who are considered to be high-risk child abductors can be placed on a secure screening list.  The following press release provides details of the need to have the Prevent Departure Program policy modified:  Peter Thomas Senese & The CARE Foundation Supports GAO Recommendation to Create Departure Screening List for High-Risk U.S. Citizens Considered High-Risk Child Abductors.

So what is the Prevent Departure Program and how can it be applied?

Case Study 

Lets begin by suggesting Parent A is a citizen of another country but lives in the United States with Parent B. Parent B is a United States citizen. Parent A need not be married to Parent B.

During the course of A and B’s relationship, a child is born in the United States. When this occurs, the child is automatically a United States Citizen by birth.

In all likelihood, the child also will retain automatic citizenship to the nation that Parent A is a national of.

Let us assume both parents enjoy a right of custody to the child either through marriage, or, in cases where there is no marriage, either by state statue or by court orders.

During the course of time, Parent A decides to end the relationship and desires to return to their nation of origin with the child.

Now, Parent B, having great concern that Parent A intends to take the child and flee the United States and go to another country, obtains court orders forbidding Parent A from taking the child out of the country. The court orders for Parent A to turn over to the court the child’s US passport if one has been issued, and further directs the child’s name to be registered with the Children’s Passport Issuance Alert Program, thus essentially removing the potential abducting parent from being able to remove the child from the United States using an American passport issued in the child’s name.

In addition, Parent B successfully requests that the court notify the embassy of the country Parent A is a citizen of, whereas, the court informs the embassy that a child custody dispute is alive and well in the jurisdiction of the child’s country of habitual residency, and the court requests for that foreign embassy not to issue a passport in the child’s name, thus securing the inability of the child from departing until the court proceedings are finalized.

Problem solved? No

In many circumstances, a pending departure is already well planned before the targeted parent becomes aware of it. Parent A may already have in their possession a passport issued by their nation of origin for the child. If this is the case, it is very difficult for the US court to seize the foreign passport of the child, particularly if it is not known whether a passport has been issued in the child’s name.

If a passport has not been issued in the child’s name, then in all likelihood, Parent A will attempt to obtain one regardless if the child’s passport application requires Parent B’s signature or not. In fact, certain countries do not require the signature of the mother of a child, only the father.

In addition, each nation obtains a sovereign right to oversee their own citizens, and since the child may be considered a citizen of the country of Parent A too, the embassy is not required or obligated to follow the U.S. court’s orders. They have every right and may issue a passport in the child’s name despite requests not to do so. And make no mistake about this, in more cases than not, particularly if Parent A is very persuasive when communicating with someone from their own embassy, they will successfully obtain the passport.

If Parent A has possession of a non-US passport for their child, they very well may be able to physically leave the country with the child and illegally abduct the child. What is perhaps even more troubling is the fact that Parent B has no way or right to know if a passport was issued from the native country of Parent A in the name of the child.

A disaster waiting to happen? You bet it is.

But there is hope for those parents who find themselves in a scenario where Parent A is not an American citizen living in the United States with their child and, Parent A possess a foreign passport for the child of the relationship.

Since 2003, United States citizens have had available a very effective international child abduction prevention tool called ‘The Prevent Departure Program’. Unfortunately, many parents at risk of having their child internationally abducted are not aware that this incredibly useful tool is available to them.

In the aftermath of 911, the Department of Homeland Security’s ‘Prevent Departure Program’ was created to stop non-U.S. citizens from departing the country. The program applies to non-US citizens physically located in America considered individuals at risk of child abduction. The Customs and Border Protection (CBP) oversees this program and it is monitored 24 hours a day.

What the ‘Prevent Departure Program’ does is provide immediate information to the transportation industry, including all air, land, and sea channels a single point of contact at Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and provides a comprehensive database of individuals the United States believes may immediately depart to a foreign country.

The program only applies to aliens, and is not available to stop U.S. citizens or dual U.S./foreign citizens from leaving the country.

Under Section 215 of the ‘Immigration and Nationality Act’ (8 U.S.C. 1185) and it’s implementing regulations (8 CFR Part 215 and 22 CFR Part 46), it authorizes departure-control officers to prevent an alien’s departure from the United States if the alien’s departure would be prejudicial to the interests of the United States. These regulations include would-be abductions of U.S. citizens in accordance to court orders originating from the child’s court of habitual residency.

If the abductor and child are identified, they will be denied boarding. In order to detain them after boarding is denied, there must be a court order prohibiting the child’s removal or providing for the child’s pick-up, or a warrant for the abductor.

In order for an at risk parent to participate in the program, all of the following must be demonstrated:

  1. Subject may NOT be a US citizen; and,
  2. The nomination must include a law enforcement agency contact with 24/7 coverage; and,
  3. There must be a court order showing which parent has been awarded custody or shows that the Subject is restrained from removing his/her minor child from certain counties, the state or the U.S.; and,
  4. The Subject must be in the US; and,
  5. There must be some likelihood that the Subject will attempt to depart in the immediate future.
With respect to the established guidelines listed above, note that in order to request the listing of the other parent, that person must be an alien of the United States. The program does not apply to US citizens at risk of leaving the country.

The second mandate states a request to place an individual’s name on the Prevent Departure Program must include support by a law enforcement agency or from the Department of State’s Office of Children’s Issues, which has the authority of requesting for the Department of Homeland Security to list a suspected child abductor on the ‘Prevent Departure Program’.

The third criteria: possessing a custodial order, is essential. Regardless if the other parent has joint custody or rights of visitation, critically, you must make sure that there are injunction orders in place prohibiting the child from being removed from the jurisdiction of habitual residency. Unfortunately, many international parental child abductions are well planned out in advance of the actual abduction, and the targeted parent has no idea that an abduction is in progress until it is too late. This is why it is essential for parents in partnership with non-nationals to be fully aware of the warning signs associated with a potential international child abduction.

The fourth criteria states the obvious: in order to prevent an alien-parent suspected of abducting a child on U.S. soil, that parent must be on U.S. soil.

The fifth criteria requests that the applying parent demonstrate that the alien-parent has demonstrated the likelihood of abducting the child across international borders in the immediate future. Remember – you need to document and record as much evidence as possible.

For many parents who face the risk of having their child abducted and removed across international borders, the nightmare that both targeted parent and victimized child face is unbearable. 

The Prevent Departure Program is not for everyone and should not be abused; however, in situations where an abduction threat is real and the targeting parent intent on abducting a child is a non-US citizen possessing the capacity to breach court orders and abduct a child of a relationship, the Prevent Departure Program may be a useful tool.

For more information on the ‘Prevent Departure Program’, please visit the U.S. Department of State’s website or contact the Office of Children’s Issues.

Finally, the Department of State's Office Of Children's Issues Abduction Prevention Division is in charge of requesting that an individual be considered a candidate to be listed on the Prevent Departure Program.  From our experience, it is critically important that a court order be issued stating that a specific person be listed on the Prevent Departure Program, and that person is restrained from traveling outside of the United States with the specified children of the partnership considered by the court to be at risk of possible abduction.  

For more information on international parental child abduction please visit the I CARE Foundation.  Some of you may be interested in also visiting the official website of my deeply inspired novel about abduction titled CHASING THE CYCLONE, which contains a great amount of information on abduction.

Kindest regards to all -

Sunday, December 30, 2012

Peter Thomas Senese: The I CARE Foundation 2012 Year In Review

The I CARE Foundation's 2012 Year In Review

What began with a personal promise I made during the time I was Chasing The Cyclone of international child abduction to one day make a difference for children and their families targeted for severe abuse in the form of the inhumane act of international parental child kidnapping (IPCA) came to reality in 2012 with the commencement of the non-profit International Child Abduction Research & Enlightenment Foundations, Inc's (the I CARE Foundation) extensive, measurable operations working to prevent abduction and trafficking, and along the way, becoming heroes to children by creating more than a few miracles.

In reflection of all the positive things the I CARE Foundation has accomplished, the reality is that IPCA is spreading rapidly, hundreds of thousands of children each year are targeted for cross-border kidnapping each year, the majority of children who are abducted never come home, and tragically the vast majority of all children of abduction face serious short-term and long-term problems, including the threat of filicide (parental child-murder) and post-abduction suicide. These conditions prevail despite IPCA being a criminal act of kidnapping in accordance to federal laws. To put it mildly, we must do more.  Considerably more. Still, the I CARE Foundation's first full year of operations has had a significant positive impact on many as shared below. And on this note, I would like to express on behalf of the foundation my sincere thanks to all the incredible individuals who assisted  in our stewardship and organizational mission.
It is not easy to think about nor write about a young child being murdered, nor is it easy to think about an emotionally battered and abused adult who was once a child-victim of abduction committing suicide because of post-abduction side effects, but it is a reality, and undeniably, it is a reality of IPCA. 
International parental child abduction is simply not a criminal act of kidnapping and abuse, but a malicious act that could lead to a targeted child victim's death. IPCA's malignant tentacles target's innocence's life.
I know I speak for everyone at the I CARE Foundation when I say fighting to protect that innocent child is worth everything. And that includes the occasion threats and attacks received by kidnappers.
In my capacity as the Founding Director of the I CARE Foundation, I and the foundation's directors, advisers, friends, and supporters join other advocates and organizations who act as steward-advocates sharing the message that IPCA is a serious, highly abusive, and inhumane crime against innocent children that leads to the destruction of life.
Reality is that each American and Canadian citizen is only three degrees of separation from knowing a child who has been kidnapped. 
How big of an epidemic is it?
Consider this: in the United States it is measurably forecast that there will be between 100,000 and 125,000 American children internationally kidnapped by one parent from another.  In Canada this number ranges from 15,000 to 20,000 children.  Mexico is expected to see approximately 45,000 to 60,000 children abducted.   That's between 160,000 and 205,000 innocent children in North America who will be criminally abducted abroad, and who are at risk of a fate of no-return.
The number of children being returned to their country of original jurisdiction - their home - is glaringly low and is measurably forecast at roughly 10%.  The 10% return number could actually be considerably lower because, in contrast to the U.S. Department of State's reported return numbers, the I CARE Foundation contests that the DOS numbers are extraordinarily inaccurate with respect to the overall picture of IPCA because their reported cases of abduction and reported return numbers do not consider the number of unreported cases of abduction, nor the reality that there is a projected 0% return of abducted children who are not reported to the DOS's Office of Children's Issues.  With respect to unreported cases of IPCA, the extensive, highly distributed report written by Carolyn Vlk and me titled 'Crisis In America' measurably forecasts the number of unreported cases of IPCA in America appear to range from 100% to 125% of all reported cases of IPCA to the DOS. Due to the immigration influx in Canada, unreported cases of IPCA appear to be on par with the U.S. forecast.
Similar to North America, European and South American IPCA is dramatically on the rise and appears to be on par with North America. 
In addition, in Asia cases of child abduction and human trafficking remain a glaring and unthinkable issue as exemplified by China's outrageous reality of child slavery and trafficking in that country as illustrated by the December 24th, 2012 arrest of 355 traffickers, including a large number of police officers who ran child abduction rings in that country.  In fact, over the past 3 years China has reunited over 50,000 trafficked children with their parents.  An impressive reunification number at first glance, but in truth one that pales in comparison to the number of children brought into the dark world of abduction and slavery.   China is not alone, as this problem is widespread in most Asian countries.
Speaking of Asia, Japan, one of the West's biggest trading partners and allies remains a black hole of international parental child abduction.  Here is the reality of the West's biggest alley: children who are abducted to Japan by a Japanese national do not ever come home.  And today, there are hundreds of American and Canadian children who are illegally held in Japan by a parent who has kidnapped them.
With keen eyes focused on how we may protect children from a nightmarish fate of IPCA, the I CARE Foundation has launched a series of research studies and legislative initiatives, while voluntarily working where possible to help families in crisis.
What Needs To Be Done
Several noticeable issues going into 2013 need to be prioritized.  They include but are not limited to:
  1. Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction inbound member-state signatories need to adhere to the spirit of the international treaty and act to expeditiously decide on litigation concerning the return of the child.
  2. Courts in signatory member-states must act fairly and without bias so the international treaty is upheld.
  3. Judges in courts all over the world who preside over IPCA cases must be well-trained on all matters of IPCA, including the reality that abduction is a severe and abusive crime against a child that enables an abductor to further abuse a child during the time litigation brought by a targeted parent occurs. Furthermore, courts and their judges must act to counter-balance any stall tactics implemented by an abductor or their legal counsel as such activity is often implemented to strategically financially break the chasing parent due to the extreme cost chasing parents face when trying to reunite with their kidnapped child.  Of course, the courts must enforce the universally recognized notion amongst signatory nations that IPCA is extreme abuse, and extreme abuse is not in the best interest of any child.
  4. Sanctions by Hague member-nations against non-complying Hague member-nations must simply not be discussed but enacted.  The collateral damage of innocent children in lieu of other foreign policy issues should not be acceptable under any circumstance.
  5. The international community must continue to put diplomatic pressure on non-Hague signatories to become complying parties to the convention.  This includes countries such as Japan, Saudi Arabia, India, and Russia (most countries in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East are not members of the Hague Convention).
  6. New state and federal laws (in Canada, provincial and national laws) geared toward child abduction and child trafficking must be created and upheld by both law enforcement and courts.
  7. In the United States, the Senate passed SR 543, which resolved that the American government and all agencies charged with a role in preventing or reuniting internationally kidnapped children use all legal remedies available to them under law to help children, including consideration of criminal prosecution of abductors and those who have aided or abetted in a kidnappers activity.  It is imperative that individuals who conspire to or actually abduct or aid in an abduction of a child are prosecuted.
  8. IPCA is a criminal act of kidnapping under the International Kidnapping Crimes Act.  The act of kidnapping of any form is an inhumane act.  Kidnappers who flee to another country must be extradited back to the country where the abduction took place.  Thus, it is critical that new agreements are created between many countries that allow for extradition of parents who kidnap, which unfortunately does not exist today.
  9. Parents everywhere must be aware that IPCA is real, growing, and could potentially impact their lives, particularly in an ever-growing multi-cultural global society where individuals from different nations create relationships that result in the birth of a child, and, the prevalence of divorce in society.
  10. Hague Central Authorities and government agencies in each member-state need to have their operation's reviewed and clearly provided with greater resources necessary to support the much-needed expansion of operations required by families in crisis of abduction.  On December 14th, 2013 by virtue of U.S. Senate Resolution 543, Congress called for a full review of the U.S. Office of Children's Issues (OCI) , which has oversight for all reported cases of inbound and outbound IPCA in the United States.  Undeniably, as both knowledge and understanding of the severity and danger of IPCA has increased, and, as the number of IPCA cases has also dramatically increased, the Department of State's Office of Children's Issues  that Congress created when it affirmed to annex the Hague Convention faces exponentially more severe, diverse, and a greater number of international kidnapping cases entering into and exiting the United States.  OCI must be completely overhauled to keep up with the crisis in America that is IPCA.
  11. Continued research in the area of IPCA must be conducted.
  12. Child abduction prevention measures must be created, implemented and upheld at both the local and national level.
Clearly, there are many serious challenges ahead of us as a global-nation of concerned global-citizen advocates of children.

The work of every individual associated with the I CARE Foundation is done on a volunteer basis.

On a personal level, it is both my privilege and honor to have been able to provide much-needed resources to the I CARE Foundation, including but surely not limited to donating 100% of revenue I earned to the foundation as a best-selling author of geopolitical thrillers.



When I look back at my own personal journey racing into the storms of international parental child kidnapping, and my life as an author, I am pleased that writing Chasing The Cyclone has led to the creation of the I CARE Foundation and the many miracles that have been created when a group of individuals act selflessly, in kindness, and act by standing up for what is right: and in this case what is right in trying our best to help protect children.

As a writer, I am humbled that my work writing the deeply inspired story that is Chasing The Cyclone has been called by others in the media as 'Creating Miracles Through A Book'.

There is no question there is a great amount of work that needs to be done to help children of IPCA.  We are reminded each day of the great need to educate, reform, and assist where we can.  The accomplishments of the I CARE Foundation drive us to build upon what we have achieved, while reminding us that there is a whole lot of work ahead of us on the horizon. The following is a partial list of the I CARE Foundation's 2012 achievements.

The Accomplishments Of The I CARE Foundation
  1.  The I CARE Foundation has significantly assisted families in crisis who are located around the world and who are dealing with abduction, including playing key roles in the legal rescue and reunification of many internationally kidnapped children, including children abducted to Asia, Africa, the Middle East, Europe, South America, and North America. 
  2. The I CARE Foundation has significantly assisted numerous targeted parents prevent the criminal abduction of their child or children, while creating legal precedents in numerous courts during litigation in hope and anticipation that other children and families will be protected.
  3. The I CARE Foundation launched a successful national campaign to build an attorney network of lawyers willing to assist at-risk of abducted children, including an extensive campaign to assist recruit the U.S. Department of State build the 'Hague Convention Attorney Network'.
  4. The I CARE Foundation launched or participated in numerous legislative initiatives geared to protect children including advocating for the support of Senate Resolution 543, as well as working diligently on new laws and policy modifications associated to modifying the existing Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, and, creating a Secondary Prevent Departure Program applicable for individuals who possess U.S. Citizenship.
  5. The I CARE Foundation launched a national campaign of international parental child abduction awareness in order to raise awareness amongst parents.
  6. The I CARE Foundation continued to ensure use of the Prevent Departure Program to aid at-risk parents of abduction.
  7. The I CARE Foundation continues to build an international case law data base IPCA cases.
  8. The I CARE Foundation continues to conduct significant research and publish our findings connected with IPCA on a wide area of topics.
  9. The I CARE Foundation participated in the Department of State's International Visitor Leadership Program held at the United Nations.
  10. The I CARE Foundation's internal fund-raising activity has ensured strong and progressive advocacy for 2013.
The I CARE Foundation's accomplishments have been made possible because a group of individuals cared enough to attempt to make a difference in the lives of others. 

I will be the first to admit that despite the many dozens of families who we have successfully assisted by either reuniting them with their abducted child or by assisting in preventing their child's abduction, the reality is that there are many individuals and families we have attempted to assist but have not yet been able to achieve what we have hoped for.  The truth is the complexity of IPCA is significant.

Overall, the key to stopping child abduction, child slavery, child trafficking, and child abuse is to prevent any and all of it from happening in the first place. 

The reality is that when it comes to IPCA, children who are stolen should never be viewed as being with their other parent, but instead they must be viewed as being held by a kidnapper who, as stated by numerous government agencies including the U.S. Department of Justice as likely a person who has serious and dangerous sociopathic tendencies.

Of particular note, the I CARE Foundation assisted numerous families in crisis because a group of incredible parenting writers/bloggers got involved and helped raise awareness.  On behalf of the foundation's board and advisory board, I would like to express my sincere thanks and deep appreciation.  The reality is the information shared will reach many more parents than any of us know, and more than likely will help many families we will never know or meet.  Still, you made a difference and in this, you made the world a better place.

The parents who have had a child kidnapped face undue and incredible hardship.  Few parents of abduction are reunited with their children.  However, the tide is turning, and advocates such as those associated with the I CARE Foundation and elsewhere are committed to this change. 

For those of you who have been reunited with your child, I hope that you do not walk away from this fight for children of abduction.  It is in your wisdom that you will be able to help those who continue to chase.
 And for those parents who still chase the cyclone of abduction, never give up hope and alwasy embrace your faith.  Know patience, and never think your child does not know you love them no matter how severe the parental alienation is because even though your child is a hostage of abduction, they are made of you. And as I said, the mountain of abduction is moving because parents who care are mobilizing, governments are realizing the inhumanity of IPCA and acting, and society as a whole is realizing that IPCA is a severe and dangerous act of kidnapping.

2012 was a very good first year for the I CARE Foundation organizationally.  We will be expanding our operations significantly, continue our dedicated efforts to conduct research and guide legislation and new policy that may protect children, assist families in crisis as much as possible, and continue our stewardship of raising social awarenss of IPCA in hope children and their parents will be protected.

To all of you who supported the I CARE Foundation's activity, and to all of you who we have worked with, or who we may work with in the future, we wish you great success in all of your endeavors in the coming 2013 New Year.

On behalf of everyone here at the I CARE Foundation, I wish you God's Blessings for a Happy, Healthy, and Peaceful 2013 New Year.

Sincerely,

Peter Thomas Senese
Founding Director
The I CARE Foundation