The goal of ABP World Group international child recovery services is to locate, negotiate and recover your missing child.
We can dispatch personnel to most locations in the world; we specialize in locating missing children up to ages 18.
A Place To Start
A Place to Start, consults with parents of parentally abducted children and assists in making choices to help bring your child home while protecting your financial future from fraud.
ABP World Group Ltd. Web site
We are aware that parental child abduction can be difficult to resolve, but through the use of professional operatives with the skills and expertise necessary we work to find a resolution. We are here to help you.
Child Recovery Services
Our intelligence and investigative capabilities combined with our ability to dispatch personnel to most locations in the world offer a safe and strategic solution to protecting what is most important to you : your child.
Forum for menn og omsorg
Tema vedr. fedres rettsstilling, foreldrepermisjon og ulike barnelovsspørsmål
The Japan Children`s Rights Network
Our Mission is to to disseminate information to help change attitudes and laws in Japan in order to assure all children of frequent, meaningful and continuing contact with both natural parents, regardless of citizenship, marital status or gender.
Time is a very important factor if a child is missing / Abducted
Immediate access to current information about the missing child is critical.
Although nobody hopes to be in such a situation where this information is needed, parents have to keep in mind that child abduction can occur anytime, anywhere, to any child. Therefore, parents must have the resources and knowledge about their children ready, so they can take action if their children become missing.
The goal of ABP World Group international child recovery services is to locate, negotiate and recover your missing child. We can dispatch personnel to most locations in the world; we specialize in locating missing children up to ages 18.
Areas of expertise: Parental abduction, Missing children, Kidnappings,
Runaway children and Counselling.
Unfortunately in this day and time parental kidnapping happens and we are here to help you trough this difficult time.
We are aware parental child abduction can be difficult to resolve, but we use professional operatives with the skills and expertise to help find a resolution.
Abdutor Motives and Popular Assumption Regarding Family Abduction.
Through out my story I have came across many different people from which I sought the help or they were designated to my case. I’d like to thank you the high level experts and their commitment to the preventing abduction. However I faced also some front line “specialists” who meant to be trained in such cases to support effectively however they seemed to be rather sharing the below assumption.
A lot of people are convinced that a child is not in danger if the child has been abducted by a family member.
That is incorrect assumption which results in taking the problem too easy and risking the child’s safety.
Vast majority of parental abductions are not based on motive of love to a child.
Parental Kidnapping is closely associated with the Divorce. During separation the parents battles over child custody is a common place.
Child abduction can take place at any time: during, after, or even before divorce. For example there are known cases where one parent took the child to his/her home country for vacation never to return. Once far away these parents proceeded to file for divorce.
The fury and vengeance towards the other parent are reasons for most parental abductions.
The experts list the following motives for the parental kidnapping:
To force an agreement or carry on the contact between themselves and the left-behind parent
To get revenge or punish the other parent
Fear of losing custody or contacts rights
Frustration and allienation by the legislation with the custody order or other court proceedings
Rarely, to keep safe the kid from a parent who is perceived to molest, abuse or neglect the child
THIS Christmas Moises Garcia, a Nicaraguan living in America, got the gift he had spent almost four years and $350,000 fighting for: the return of his nine-year-old daughter. In 2008 Karina was whisked away to Japan by her Japanese mother. He set about fighting in the Japanese courts for the right to see her. During that period, he met her only three times. Their longest meeting lasted for only two hours.
Then he had a stroke of luck. Last April Karina’s mother travelled to Hawaii to renew her green card. She was arrested at the airport and charged with violating Karina’s custody agreement. As part of a plea bargain, the mother relinquished Karina, who became the first child seized by a Japanese parent to be returned to America via the courts. (Feel sorry for Karina, in the middle of this tug-of-love.)
Because of such cases, America is one of many countries that has pressed Japan to honour its promise to join the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Japan proposes to do so this year. The convention sets rules for the prompt return to their normal country of residence of children under 16 who have been abducted by one of their parents. The State Department says Japan has about 100 such cases involving children of Americans. There are scores from other countries, too.
But for one category of parents—those living in Japan without access to their children—the Hague convention changes nothing. When parents separate, Japan’s legal system does not recognise the joint custody of children common in other jurisdictions. Instead, children are put into the custody of a single parent after divorce. The family courts usually grant custody to the parent, most often the mother, who at that particular moment is in possession of the child—even if the parent has abducted him. The courts rarely enforce the stingy visitation rights of the “left-behind” parent. And so many fathers, in particular, vanish altogether from their children’s lives. Every year as many as 150,000 divorced parents in Japan lose contact with their children, according to estimates gleaned from official data. Some do so of their own accord, but most have no say in the matter.
One such father, an ex-deputy mayor, describes the system as a conjugal version of the prisoner’s dilemma. He says that when a marriage starts to break down, the unspoken question is: who will seize the child first, the mum or the dad? In his case, she did. For two years he has had no contact with his four-year-old daughter—even his presents are returned unopened—and all with the blessing of the family court. When he reminded the judge that the civil code had been changed to encourage visitation rights, the judge silenced him.
Satsuki Eda, who as justice minister last year pushed through the change in the civil code, says he hopes it will lead to more generous visitation rights. It may, he also hopes, one day lead to a serious consideration of joint custody. But, he cautions, judges are conservative, finding it “very difficult to change their minds”. And so, in a cruel twist, a country that has long sought redress for the past abduction of a few dozen citizens by the North Korean state tacitly supports vast numbers of abductions each year at home. “Many people in my situation commit suicide,” the estranged father says. “I can understand the feeling.”
SEAN’S saga ticks all the boxes. There’s romance and heartache to rival anything served up by Hugh Grant, espionage worthy of a John Le Carre novel and a daring rescue that Sly Stallone would be proud of.
The book of Sean Felton’s mission to save then three-year-old Jobe, entitled Scared of the Dark, is to be released on both sides of the Atlantic next month.
But already Hollywood moguls are now vying to turn the tale into a cinema success.
Sean wants the financial rewards of a best-seller, not for himself but for the anonymous businessman who ploughed a small fortune into the £80,000 cost of getting Jobe back into Britain.
“I won’t reveal his name,” said the 40-year-old, “but he has been like a father to me. I can never repay him, but, hopefully, this will go some way towards it.”
Sean’s world fell apart on March 26, 2010, when he returned to his neat Norton Canes home in Staffordshire to discover wife Kim – married after a whirlwind romance in Thailand – and Jobe had vanished. A laughing Kim called three days later to inform him she’d spirited their child to Thailand.
The painter and decorator succeeded, where CID, his own MP, Interpol and even the Foreign Office had failed, in tracking them down by posing as an American playboy.
Kim, 31, was wooed on Facebook by the fictitious ‘Matt Young’, pictures of his Ferrari and promises of cash.
Sean had to grease palms and brave bandits before confronting the pair in the squalid village of Chiang Rai, close to the Vietnamese border and at the heart of the narcotics freeway known as the Golden Triangle, where poppy crops, not English pounds, are the currency that counts.
Kim handed back the traumatised child for £1,000, ownership of a parcel of land in Thailand that Sean has purchased for more than £6,000, a laptop and agreement by the British Embassy she wouldn’t face prosecution in this country.
Watching the child yesterday playing boisterously with his Christmas presents – doting Dad beaming in the background – it’s hard to comprehend the ordeal he endured during six months hidden in the depths of a Thai jungle.
When Sean located Jobe, he was cowering in the corner of a hut on stilts, gnawing hungrily on an apple.
“I will never forget it,” recalled Sean, clearly shaken by the painful memory. “He had no eyes – they were, like, soulless. He was undernourished. His thumbnails had been ripped off and his teeth were chipped. I picked him up. He couldn’t speak. He was scared to death.
“He didn’t speak English – he had been that traumatised, it was just gibberish. You’ve got to remember, this is a child who had been spoilt to death. For him to be picked up and taken to Thailand – a totally different culture, totally different food – must have been devastating.
“For the first three months when I brought him back we slept together on the settee. He was scared of the monsters, he was scared of everything.
“He does still remember and we talk about his mother. We’ve got to the stage where we can talk about the difficult questions.”
Sean’s story is a salutary lesson to Englishmen of a certain age whose heads are turned by the fluttering lashes and pouts of beautiful Thai women half their age. Some of those bar girls are looking for something – and, more often than not, it isn’t love. Sean admits: “I was a fool – my own MP called me a fool. She conned me from the beginning. I think I was a customer in her eyes. She looked on the whole situation as a business. I thought I was being smart. The courtship was brilliant, it was one-in-a-million and I will probably never experience anything like it again.
“She copped me at the bar, next thing we were married, which was my doing. It was just a means of getting full British citizenship.”
He is adamant, however, that he didn’t travel to Thailand for the first time in 2004 looking for love.
Unlike mates who wanted to down lager at the bar, Sean wanted to visit tourist hotspots – and Kim, a stunning bar-worker at the Pattaya hotel, was more than willing to help. “It was the best holiday I ever had and, obviously, I had feelings for her.”
Sean was so smitten he returned three weeks later. “We went to Samui Island. That was paradise and as cheap as chips. I was living a life of luxury for next to nothing. At the end of the three weeks I proposed.
“People may say it happened too quickly, but it happens every day all over the world. If you meet someone you want to be with you do pop the question.”
The couple married on New Year’s Day, 2006, in Kim’s ramshackle village of Udon Thani.
Romance was painfully short. The doting Thai bride became moody and detached soon after arriving in Britain four months later. “She changed so much from the holiday romance to reality.”
And the scattered jigsaw pieces of her past slowly came together. Sean said: “Kim was crying in the bathroom, I thought she was homesick. She said she had something to show me. A finger on her right hand had been cut off from the knuckle. She said it was an accident while operating a rice machine, but the injury wasn’t new – she must’ve kept it from me. I found that frightening and found out later that can be the Thai punishment for stealing.”
He claims she later confessed to links with the burgeoning sex industry in her own country.
Sean tried to win back his wife with cash. Kim, now pregnant, protested their apartment was too small, so they rented a property while Sean purchased and renovated a Norton Canes home.
She wanted him to buy three-and-a-half acres in Thailand. He did. She spent nights out with fellow Thai brides. “No matter what you did for Kim, she was not happy,” he shrugged. “I would come, in there would be a houseful of Thai girls all eating. I always got the impression it was them and me. I was kidding myself, trying to still be the happy family. I had gone through a divorce before, when I was a kid, and didn’t want that.
“2009 was a hell of a year. She kept going out and was coming back at all hours. It was an unreal situation. She could be nice one minute and turn on you with the flip of a coin. She wouldn’t speak but, really, the only time she showed her temper was when I told her I wanted a divorce.
“She wanted me to pay for British citizenship and I said, ‘no way’. I was wiped out.”
It was then, Sean believes, his wife hatched the plot to take their child.
And he almost lost the lad forever.
With weeks gone and assorted agencies plus a private detective drawing a blank, Sean tripped by chance on to Kim’s Facebook account.
He posed as a rich American and became cyber friends with two Frenchmen she was pictured embracing. They gave away her location.
Thai police, bolstered by promises of booze and food, helped Sean find his family in Chiang Rai.
Sean has heard nothing from Kim since returning with their son – and that’s they way he wants it. “Yes, I am bitter. We’re still not divorced – I can’t afford it. I’m a full-time dad which is very, very hard financially.”
The holiday dream that turned into hell on earth cost Sean a successful business, his wealth and almost his sanity. But he has his precious son back.
He’s working on a second book, chronicling Jobe’s rehabilitation, and setting up a charity helping parents enduring the same plight – Abducted Angels.
Sean is also a lot wiser after learning a painful and costly lesson. To borrow from a well worn Trading Standards motto: if a tourist’s whirlwind romance in Thailand seems too good to be true… it probably is.
Prevention of Parental Abduction | Recognizing the Red Flags
Families are under so much stress in today’s society–financial and relationship stress–that parentalabduction of the children may become an issue in any given family. I have often been contacted in the past year by a parent who says his/her spouse has taken the children and moved to another state. I advise them of their rights under the UCCJEA, and of the importance of protecting home state jurisdiction by seeking return of the children to their home state before six months have elapsed, after which the new state may become the “home state” of the children where a custody battle would have to be waged. [A later post will discuss the concept of "extended home state jurisdiction."]
Abduction prevention and recovery of abducted children has become a major part of my practice. Because the effects of abduction on children can be very serious [See Part I of this series], it is important for parents to put preventative measures in place. The purpose of today’s post is to provide parents with information to help them assess whether they should be concerned about parental abduction.
Red flags” identified by the Department of State.The Department of State identifies the following “red flags” or warning signs of risk. [See “A Family Resource Guide on International Parental Kidnapping” [From the Office of Juvenile Justice and Deliquency Prevention] at pages 4-5.] The Resource Guide also discusses profiles common to abducting or “taking parents.” While most parents don’t have to worry about a parent taking the child or children to a foreign country, the warning signs for interstate kidnapping are generally about the same as those for international kidnapping.According to the OJJDP, although there are no foolproof warning signs or psychological profiles for abduction risk, there are some indicators that should not be ignored. Parents are urged to be alert to the warning signs that an international kidnapping may be in the offing.
It may be a “red flag” if a parent has:
• Previously abducted or threatened to abduct the child. Some threats are unmistakable,
such as when an angry or vindictive parent verbally threatens to kidnap the child so
that “you will never see the child again.” Others are less direct. For instance, you
may learn about the other parent’s plans through casual conversation with your child.
• Citizenship in another country and strong emotional or cultural ties to the country of origin. [For interestate kidnapping, the obvious red flag is--family ties and friends in other states, with none in the state where the children are living with both parents.
• Friends or family living in another country (or, in some cases another state).
• No strong ties to the child’s home state.
• A strong support network.
• No financial reason to stay in the area (e.g., the parent is unemployed, able to work
anywhere, or is financially independent).
• Engaged in planning activities, such as quitting a job; selling a home; terminating a lease; closing a bank account or liquidating other assets; hiding or destroying documents; or securing a passport, a birth certificate, or school or medical records.
• A history of marital instability, lack of cooperation with the other parent, domestic violence, or child abuse.
• Reacted jealously to or felt threatened by the other parent’s remarriage or new romantic involvement.
• A criminal record.
Are there personality profiles of parents who may pose an abduction risk?
OJJDP has identified six personality profiles that may be helpful in predicting which parents may pose a risk of abduction, using the identifications presented by Girdner and Johnston in their research report Prevention of Family Abduction Through Early Identification of Risk Factors. That report is listed in the “Recommended Reading” section at the end of the OJJDP guide. OJJDP cautions that while these profiles may be helpful in predicting which parents may pose a risk of abduction, they do not guarantee that parents who fit a particular profile will abduct or that parents who do not fit a profile will not.
The six profiles are:
• Profile l: Parents who have threatened to abduct or have abducted previously.
• Profile 2: Parents who are suspicious or distrustful because of their belief that abuse has occurred and who have social support for their belief.
• Profile 3: Parents who are paranoid.
• Profile 4: Parents who are sociopathic.
• Profile 5: Parents who have strong ties to another country and are ending a mixed-culture marriage. [For interstate abductions, this may be strong ties to another state and/or strong family ties to a dysfunctional family.]
• Profile 6: Parents who feel disenfranchised from the legal system (e.g., those who are poor, a minority, or victims of abuse) and have family and social support.
According to the OJJDP Guide, taking parents across the six personality profiles share many common characteristics.
They are likely to deny or dismiss the value of the other parent to the child.
They believe they know what is best for the child, and they cannot see how or why they should share parenting with the other parent.
They are likely to have very young children who are easy to transport and conceal and who are unlikely to protest verbally or tell others of their plight.
With the exception of the paranoid profile, abducting parents are apt to have the financial and moral support of a network of family, friends, and/or cultural, community, or underground groups.
Many abductors do not consider their actions illegal or morally wrong.
Finally, according to the Guide, mothers and fathers are equally likely to abduct, although at different times—fathers before a court order, mothers after an order has been made.
Parents who fit profile 5—those who are citizens of another country (or who have dual citizenship with the United States) and who also have strong ties to their extended family in their country of origin—have long been recognized as those who might engage in international parental abduction. The risk is especially acute at the time of parental separation and divorce, when the parent feels cast adrift from a mixed-culture marriage and a need to return to ethnic or religious roots for emotional support and to reconstitute a shaken self-identity. Often, in reaction to being rendered helpless or to the insult of feeling rejected and discarded by the ex-spouse, a parent may try to take unilateral action by returning with the child to his or her family of origin. This is a way of insisting that one cultural identity be given preeminent status over the other in the child’s upbringing. Often the parent will have idealized his or her own culture, childhood, and family of origin.
(646) 502-7443 United States
069 2547 2471 Germany
020 3239 0013 United Kingdom
01 442 9322 Ireland
031-753 83 77 Sweden
