Goldman Act bolsters fight for return of abducted children

August 5, 2014

Source: The Hub

Capt. Paul Toland (from left), whose daughter was kidnapped in Japan; Bindu Philips, of Plainsboro, whose two sons were abducted to India; and David Goldman, whose son was abducted to Brazil and returned after a five-year ordeal, joined Rep. Chris Smith in calling for passage of the Goldman Act to help families who have been victimized by international abductions.

A bill empowering the U.S. State Department to aggressively pursue the return of internationally abducted children is headed to the president’s desk after being approved by Congress.

The Sean and David Goldman International Child Abduction Prevention and Return Act, the fourth bill of its kind introduced by U.S. Rep. Chris Smith (R-4), was drafted after Smith became involved with David Goldman’s fight to be reunited with his son, Sean.

According to Jeff Sagnip, the congressman’s press secretary, Goldman’s wife absconded with Sean from the family’s Tinton Falls home in June 2004, bringing him to Brazil when he was 4 years old without seeking custody of Sean or legally divorcing Goldman in a U.S. court.

She subsequently died in childbirth, Sagnip said, and the Brazilian government held that her partner at the time of her death should maintain custody of Sean.

Brazil is a signatory of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, but chose to ignore the policies outlined by the international agreement, Sagnip said.

“Previously, the State Department would say ‘… There’s nothing that we can do,” Sagnip said. “[For a parent] trying to get a foreign court to award custody, it’s very difficult and returns are rare.”

The Sean and David Goldman Act (H.R. 3212) would allow U.S. embassies to apply pressure in incremental phases to dissuade governments from ignoring international law and sheltering abductors.

“[This bill] provides a series of tools which vary in their severity, from mild to strong,” Sagnip said. “The State Department is able to start with a little pressure and then build the pressure [on foreign governments refusing to return abducted American children to their homes.]”

Those tools include a private diplomatic protest called a demarche, a public condemnation of the foreign government, the withholding of economic aid and, eventually, demands for the extradition of the abductor.

Goldman, who was reunited with his son after five years of heavy investment both financial and emotional, said the passage of the bill provides hope for parents facing the same struggle he did.

“It was a long road, nearly five years, thanks to a tremendous effort of Congressman Smith and his staff,” Goldman said. “It was a great thing to do. It was the right thing to do. It’s another step closer to reuniting families. Next step: the White House.”

For victims of international child abduction and their parents, Smith said the Sean and David Goldman Act represents a shift in U.S. policy that will benefit separated family members.

“Many children and parents have tragically lost years separated from each other in violation of U.S. and international law,” Smith said. “They have missed birthdays, holidays, and family time that they can never get back. H.R. 3212 ensures that they will now receive significant help from the U.S. government in their fight to recover their children.”

According to Sagnip, the bill allows the State Department to use the leverage already at its disposal in international abduction cases — leverage that is invaluable to an individual parent who only has so many resources to expend.

“How can a parent in Rutherford, New Jersey … fight a battle that’s halfway across the world? How do they pay for it?” Sagnip said. “It’s a tremendous expense, it’s a tremendous undertaking, and this [bill] puts the State Department in their corner.”

For more information, visit our web site: www.abpworld.com

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

ABP World Group Risk Management

Contact us here: Mail 

Skype: abpworld

NOTE: We are always available 24/7

Parental Child Abduction – International Child Recovery Services

ABP World Group International Child Recovery Service

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 Counseling.

Unfortunately in this day and time parental kidnapping happens and we are here to help you trough this difficult period. 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.

We also provide:

• Executive protection
• Close protection high or low profile
• Surveillance
• Investigation
• Security consulting
• Medical services
• Anti kidnap logistics and planning
• Abducted and missing children recovery
• Missing person investigations
• Panic room / Safe room construction
• Risk Management

For more information, visit our web site: www.abpworld.com

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

ABP World Group Risk Management

Contact us here: Mail 

Skype: abpworld

NOTE: We are always available 24/7

 

UK-Russia child abduction still a problem but new law may help

August 1 , 2014

Source: spearswms.com

 

 

With more and more Russians heading to the UK, it’s important to take into account the newly amended Hague Convention on international child abduction. But the UK government still fails to do enough for aggrieved parents

 

 The wheels of international law turn slowly. On 1 October 2011, Russia became the 86th signatory of the Hague Convention of October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. However, it was only in June last year that the UK recognised Russia’s accession under its own domestic legislation.

With a significant Russian presence in the UK and with an increasing trend of Russian parents placing their children in UK schools, it is important for Russians either coming to the UK or returning to Russia to understand the effect of this recent development.

Research conducted by the Foreign Office suggests that half the UK population think that when a child is abducted it is the responsibility of the government of the country where the child lived to seek and return the child. The stark reality is that little government help is provided and it is up to the parent, at a time of great emotional distress, to instruct a lawyer and pursue recourse via a private application through the court system.

Pictured above: Gentlemen about to discuss the first Hague Convention in 1899, which regulated conduct during warfare.

The convention harmonises the resources from country to country to ensure that children who have been removed from one signatory country to another can be located, apprehended and returned to their parent or guardian in their country of habitual residence, to minimise distress and harm to the child.

Without the convention and the reciprocal legal framework it provides between countries, the return of children can prove more time consuming, costly and ultimately distressing for the child.

Article 3 of the convention states that a child is abducted where:

A) The child habitually resides a country that is a signatory to the convention. The actual nationality of the child or parents is unlikely to be significant in most abduction cases.

B) The child is removed abroad or is being detained there without the permission of their legal guardian in breach of that person’s custody rights.

C) The child is under sixteen years old.

The reality is that harmonising international law is seldom straightforward and the convention is no different. One such difficulty is that the implementation of the convention from state to state can differ in significant ways. Indeed, Hague can conflict with domestic laws.

For example, in Russia, children can be taken abroad by one parent without written permission from the other but that would be considered a crime in many signatory countries of the convention.

Thus a paradox may be created where a child could be taken from Russia to England by one parent without the consent of the other, but as Russia is now a signatory to the convention, a child who is habitually resident in England but who is taken without consent to Russia would be required to be returned by the Russian authorities to the UK.

It is uncontroversial to say that some signatories are more willing to deploy resources to a child abduction incident that others. Russia, has not fared particularly well in this regard historically.

Last year the European Court of Human Rights decreed that Russia had breached a mother’s human rights under Article 8 (which includes a right for a parent to have measures taken by national authorities to reunite them with their children from whom they have been separated) because it took the authorities three years to reunite the boy with his mother.

Conversely, the first British/Russian convention case was settled in November last year; the Russian courts ordered the return of five- and seven-year old boys to their habitual residence in England after they were taken on holiday to Russia by their Russian father, who then failed to return with them.

The complexities that can arise in child abduction cases, combined with public ignorance of the law regarding the removal of children from a country, and the increasing international demography of the UK, particularly London, makes for a combustible mix of factors.

It is stating the obvious to say that foresight is preferable to an international child abduction battle which can and probably will be emotionally distressing and possibly damaging for the child or children involved. Communication between parents, possibly with legal assistance to clarify parental rights, will be effective to prevent a situation arising where the convention needs to be invoked.

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

Visit our website here: www.abpworld.com

ABP World Group Risk Management

Contact us here: Mail 

Skype: abpworld

NOTE: We are always available 24/7

Missing Mother, Daughter Found in Virginia; Mother Charged with Parental Child Abduction

February 20, 2014

Source: daggerpress.com

Harford County Sheriff’s detectives have now located the mother and 5 year-old daughter, the subject of an earlier news release, who left their home together on or about January 10, 2014 without telling anyone where they were going causing family members to report the disappearance to police describing the mother’s behavior as “out of character”.

Amanda Deeann Mitchell, 29, of the 2900 block of Siwanoy Drive in Edgewood, was taken into custody without incident by the Fairfax County (VA) Police Department who advised Harford County Sheriff’s detectives they had also located the child at a local elementary school. Sanaa Bailey, 5, was evaluated and found to be in good health. There were no signs of abuse or neglect. The child will be returned to her biological father. Mitchell has been charged with one count of parental child abduction. She is currently incarcerated in Fairfax County pending an extradition hearing.

Detectives say Mitchell failed to drop the child off for scheduled visitation with the father on January 17th. Family members told police that Amanda has been known to stay in homeless shelters from time to time but her failure to allow visitation with the child’s biological father was atypical behavior. Mitchell has shared custody with the child’s father, Aaron Chester Bailey of Baltimore.

Sheriff’s Detective Tom Walsh said, “She [Amanda] had left the family home with the bare essentials and had taken the child with her”. He further explained that while police fully understood she is a custodial parent, her behavior was out of the norm for how people described her. Walsh would not go into detail as to how Fairfax County PD came to locate Mitchell suffice it to say detectives ran down numerous leads and shared information about Mitchell throughout the region.

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

Visit our website here: www.abpworld.com

ABP World Group Risk Management

Contact us here: Mail 

Skype: abpworld

NOTE: We are always available 24/7

Europe: +44 020 3239 8020 – 24 / 7

AUSTRALIA: +61 (02) 6100 7730 – 24 / 7

USA: +1 (805) CHILD 11 (+18052445311)

+1 (310) 795 – 1089 – 24 / 7 emergency line

Clear, fair rules needed for international divorces

February 11, 2014

Source: Asahi.com

Globalization does not always bring about happy endings.

When an internationally married couple is going through a contentious divorce, in which country’s court of law should the dispute be resolved?

Currently, there is no clear rule on this matter. All the courts can do is to decide the jurisdiction depending on the case. This situation has long caused huge headaches for those involved.

Belatedly, Japan’s Justice Ministry has asked its advisory body, the Legislative Council, to come up with proposals on the issue. We hope the council will swiftly put together a set of easy-to-understand rules.

According to a survey by the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, there were 16,000 divorces in Japan in 2012 involving a non-Japanese spouse. This is twice the figure of 20 years ago, and accounts for 7 percent of all divorces.

In the case of international divorces, the question of which country to seek legal recourse in is an important matter. Going through the legal process in a country with a foreign language and a foreign legal system is grueling work.

Even if the plaintiff is Japanese, there is no guarantee that the arbitration or trial can be held in Japan if the spouse resides in a foreign country. This is because consideration should be given to the spouse who would be the defendant in the case.

In Japan’s current legal system, the tentative basic rule is that court proceedings should be undertaken in the country of the defending spouse’s residence. There have been exceptions, however, when the defending foreign spouse is missing, for example. Japanese courts deal with such cases even if the defendant does not reside in Japan.

In some previous cases when the defendant was not in Japan, Japanese courts went ahead with legal proceedings on the grounds that the divorce approved by a court in the spouse’s country was invalid in Japan.

The individual situations of each divorce are so varied that setting uniform standards is a difficult process. This has long been considered an international conundrum since countries and cultures have different acceptance levels when it comes to divorce.

Unlike in Japan, where many couples divorce by agreement, divorce by trial is the usual procedure in a number of countries. Some countries basically do not allow divorce.

Given these factors, it would be inappropriate to create a system based only on Japan’s situation. A broad international perspective is necessary.

In recent years, parts of the European Union have attempted to establish common rules about jurisdiction of divorce court proceedings. Under these proposals, initial jurisdiction would be in the hands of the couple’s current country of residence, second jurisdiction would be in the country where the couple most recently lived together, and so on.

We need deeper discourse to decide what rules are appropriate for Japan. We would also have to contemplate sharing those rules with some countries.

The important thing is to establish standards that are as comprehensible and fair as possible to lighten the load of the parties involved and smooth their paths toward restarting their lives after divorce.

This is a cumbersome business, but the number of cross-border marriages and divorces will continue to grow. The endeavors of the legal system must not be left behind by changes in the real world.

Visit our website here: www.abpworld.com

ABP World Group Risk Management

Contact us here: Mail 

Skype: abpworld

NOTE: We are always available 24/7

Europe: +44 020 3239 8020 – 24 / 7

AUSTRALIA: +61 (02) 6100 7730 – 24 / 7

USA: +1 (805) CHILD 11 (+18052445311)

+1 (310) 795 – 1089 – 24 / 7 emergency line

US law plans penalties for refusing to return American children abducted by parents

January 6 , 2014

Source: economictimes.indiatimes.com

A law that is in the making in the US has the potential to further strain India-America ties that are already hit by a row over the arrest of Indian diplomat Devyani Khobragade in New York.

The Senate is set to consider a Bill that seeks to empower the US president to impose tough penalties on any country that refuses to return American children “abducted” by their own parents. The legislation that has already passed the House of Representatives covers cases where one of the parents  takes his or her child away from the US and relocates to a foreign country, sources in the US government said.

India is among the top 10 destinations of “parental abduction of children”. The number of such “abducted” American children in India was 95 at the end of 2012. These cases originate from marital discords in Indian-American families and involve one parent relocating to India with the children to pre-empt legal actions by the other parent in the US.

The provisions in the Sean and David Goldman International Child Abduction Prevention and Return Bill could trigger legal battles between India and the US.

Under the proposed law, the US president could take action against India and other countries which either have not signed the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction or do not have any agreements with the US for the repatriation of children subjected to global “parental abductions”. The steps the US president could take include limiting security assistance, withdrawal of development assistance and using diplomatic tools to block loans from the World Bank and the IMF, apart from imposing visa restrictions, sources said.

As many as 90 countries including the US, Russia and China are signatories to the Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. It provides for expeditious return of a child abducted internationally by a parent from one member country to another with the interventions of the two governments. Except Sri Lanka, no other South Asian country has signed the Convention.

India’s Ministry of Law and Justice is of the view that if India signs the pact, it would put Indian women married to non-resident Indians or foreign nationals to disadvantage in cases of divorces and legal battles over the custody of children, Indian government sources said. This is also one of the reasons why India has not signed a bilateral agreement with the US for cooperation in such cases, they said.

The Law Commission of India, however, had recommended in 2009 that India should accede to the Hague Convention. New Delhi is currently analyzing the implications of the Bill passed by the House of Representatives, sources said.

 

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

Visit our website here: www.abpworld.com

ABP World Group Risk Management

Contact us here: Mail 

Skype: abpworld

NOTE: We are always available 24/7

1-800-847-2315 US Toll free Number
0-808-189-0066 UK Toll Free Number
800-11-618        Norway Toll Free Number

Worldwide International Number: +31-208112223

Worldwide 24/7 Emergency Number: +34 633 374 629

28 children taken to Ireland from UK in parental abduction cases

30 December 2013

Source: TheJournal.ie

BRITISH GOVERNMENT FIGURES show there were 28 cases in the past year involving children who were abducted from a parent or guardian in the UK and taken to Ireland.

Total figures for parental child abduction and international custody cases have been revealed by authorities in Britain as they seek to raise awareness of the problem ahead of an expected spike in cases after Christmas.

They relate to cases whereby a child was taken out of the UK against the stipulation of a court order or against the will of one parent.

The number of cases involving the Foreign Office has more than doubled in the last decade, from 272 in 2003-2004 to 580 in the past year. Cases involving children taken to Ireland accounted for the fourth largest number of such incidents; Pakistan accounted for 35 cases, followed by the US (32) and Poland (29).

Contrary to the belief that fathers are most often to blame, mothers are responsible for 70 percent of the abductions, the Foreign Office said. Charities involved in child abduction said there was a spike in cases just after Christmas last year, and again in September following the summer holidays.

Figures from the Department of Justice here show there were 83 cases of suspected abduction in in 2012 relating to attempts to bring children out of the country. The Department also dealt with 64 cases involving children entering the state.

Speaking earlier this year upon the release of the Irish figures, Justice Minister Alan Shatter said that parental-child abductions remained a “worrying problem”.

The UK Foreign Office has produced this video aimed at encouraging parents to consider the consequences of taking a child out of the country without permission…

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

Visit our website here: www.abpworld.com

ABP World Group Risk Management

Contact us here: Mail 

Skype: abpworld

NOTE: We are always available 24/7

1-800-847-2315 US Toll free Number
0-808-189-0066 UK Toll Free Number
800-11-618        Norway Toll Free Number

Worldwide International Number: +31-208112223

Worldwide 24/7 Emergency Number: +34 633 374 629

 

New FCO figures show parental child abduction cases on the rise

December 17 , 2013

Source: www.gov.uk

The number of parental child abduction and custody cases has more than doubled over the last decade *, with almost two children being abducted abroad each day, according to new figures released today by the Foreign & Commonwealth Office (FCO) and charity, Reunite.

The FCO has launched a hard-hitting film, Caught in the middle, to highlight the issues and encourage parents to think of the consequences before doing something that could do lasting damage to the children and families involved.

In 2003/04 the FCO was involved in 272 new parental child abduction and international custody cases. In 2012/13 that figure rose to 580, the second highest figure ever recorded.

This year alone**, Reunite – a charity that provides advice and support to parents involved in parental child abduction cases – has dealt with 447 new cases involving 616 children. It reported a particular spike in cases after Christmas 2012 and again in September this year following the summer holidays.

Mark Simmonds, Minister for Consular Affairs, said:

I was very concerned to see an increase in child abduction cases. Parental child abduction has a devastating emotional impact on the child as well as the taking parent and the parent left behind. It can do lasting damage to a child’s relationship with both parents and their happiness. These are often distressing cases for everyone involved and there are no easy fixes, but our staff around the world work hard to assist those parents left behind.

We are launching this awareness campaign in the lead up to Christmas to try to prevent parents from doing something that would cause significant distress to themselves, their family and most importantly to the child. We also encourage parents to look for warning signs that their partner may be considering this. Once children are taken overseas it can be extremely difficult to secure their return to the UK. Many parents are not aware that by abducting their child, they may be committing a crime.

Alison Shalaby, Chief Executive of Reunite, said:

Parental child abduction is not faith or country specific – we see cases involving a range of countries from France and Poland to Thailand, Pakistan and Australia. The holidays can be a particularly stressful time for families, especially if the relationship between parents has broken down. However, there is help available if you think that your partner may be considering abducting your children. Last year we helped to prevent 412 cases involving 586 children which demonstrates something can be done to prevent it from happening to you.

Parental child abduction cases can take years to resolve, with significant impact on the child or children involved. There is a very real possibility that the child may never be returned. Even when cases are resolved it can take up to 10 years, with a devastating impact on the child, parents and families involved.

There is no typical ‘abducting parent’ – although abductions are more likely to take place where families have links to more than one country and, contrary to popular opinion, it is more likely to be the mother who abducts than the father (approximately 70% of abducting parents are mothers).

It is also much harder to return a child from a country that has not signed the 1980 Hague Convention, an international agreement between certain countries which aims to ensure the return of a child who has been abducted by a parent. The table below illustrates the most common Hague and non-Hague countries that children are abducted to.

As well as emotional distress, both parents may often face severe financial difficulties as they fight for custody of their child through foreign courts. Legal costs overseas and in the UK may continue to mount up for parents, who must bear responsibility for the cost of any legal action taken, even after the child is returned to this country.

The FCO is working with Mumsnet and the charity, Families Need Fathers (FNF) to answer questions parents might have about this issue via their web pages Families Need Fathers and Mumsnet.

Top 10 Hague countries children have been abducted to***	Number of cases 2012/13	Top 10 countries children have been abducted to where Hague returns aren’t available	Number of cases 2012/13
USA	32	Pakistan	35
Poland	29	Thailand	17
Ireland	28	India	16
Germany	18	Japan	11
France	12	Morocco	10
Canada	11	Egypt	8
South Africa	10	United Arab Emirates	8
Spain	10	Philippines	7
Australia	9	Oman	5
Turkey	8	Afghanistan	5

Where to go for help

There are lots of free sources of advice and support to help parents through difficult periods, including if you think your child is at risk of being abducted or has already been taken. You can call the Reunite helpline on 01162 556 234. You can also call social services and speak to a specialist solicitor. Counselling and support is available through Relate and the Samaritans.

Alternatively, you can contact the Foreign & Commonwealth Office on 020 7008 1500, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, visit our Child Abduction page for more information or read our advice leaflet.

You can also email childabduction@fco.gov.uk

Further information

For further information or to arrange media interviews please contact: 0207 478 7840

The 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction is a multi-lateral international treaty, the aim of which is the return of a child who has been wrongfully removed or wrongfully retained away from the country where he or she normally lives, so that issues of residence (which parent a child should live with), relocation (which country a child should live in) and contact (access) can be decided by the courts of that country. All cases that come under the Hague Convention are dealt with by one of the three Central Authorities in the UK (the International Child Abduction and Contact Unit covers England and Wales and there are two separate bodies for Scotland and Northern Ireland). To find out which countries are part of this Convention, visit the HccH website

Visit our Child Abduction page for further information on parental child abduction, or the Reunite website

*Taken from 2003-2013 data held by the FCO. The FCO dealt with 580 new child abduction and custody cases in 2012/13, a 113% increase on the 272 new child abduction and custody cases it dealt with in 2003/04

**Reunite figures, January 2013 – October 2013

***Based on figures provided by the 1980 Hague Central Authority for England and Wales, Scottish 1980 Hague Central Authority and the 1980 Hague Central Authority in Northern Ireland.

Also read: Christmas holiday is the high season for International parental child kidnapping

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

Visit our website here: www.abpworld.com

ABP World Group Risk Management

Contact us here: Mail 

Skype: abpworld

NOTE: We are always available 24/7

1-800-847-2315 US Toll free Number
0-808-189-0066 UK Toll Free Number
800-11-618        Norway Toll Free Number

Worldwide International Number: +31-208112223

Worldwide 24/7 Emergency Number: +34 633 374 629

UK arranged marriages: Kidnapping, rape and murder in the name of family honour

November 26 , 2013

Source: ABP News

“We have kidnappings, abductions, assaults, sexual offences. Anything that you can imagine could happen, does happen, in the name of honour,” says Nazir Afzal, Crown Prosecutor for the north-west of England.

And murder – 10 to 12 cases a year. Yet as the hyper-active, smartly dressed lawyer concedes in his Manchester office, violence invoked in the name of family honour, mostly by citizens of South Asian and Middle Eastern origin, is often hidden and unreported.

Mr Afzal knows about honour, having grown up in Birmingham in a Pakistani Muslim household.

Honour, he says, can be a good thing, helping bind families and communities together.

But, “at the moment in so many communities, in so many families, it is merely used to suppress women, to oppress women. So, if they misbehave in some way, or make their own choice, they have dishonoured the family. If men do the same, well it’s men – you know they do what they want. Regrettably too often it’s used to control women.”

After World War II, Britain received waves of migrants from its former colonies in India, Pakistan and later Bangladesh.

Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs and others came, some for higher education, but mostly to work in the factories around London and in the Midlands and north of England.

In England, generations who self-identify as Asian now number more than 4 million, 8 per cent of the English population.

‘In the name of the father, the son, and the male members of the family’

Arranged marriages are a still a feature of migrant communities, with parents agreeing that their children will marry, particularly first cousins. But for teenagers growing up in the United Kingdom, torn between the strictures of home and the freedoms of 21st century Britain, arranged marriages too often become forced marriages.

“There are probably between 8,000 to 10,000 forced marriages or threats of forced marriages in the United Kingdom every year,” Mr Afzal says.

“We prosecuted more than 200 cases last year of honour-based violence. What we have here are crimes in the name of the father, the son and the blessed male members of the family.”

Currently there is no law against forced marriage in the United Kingdom. That will change early next year, with new legislation similar to that introduced this year in Australia.

Hundreds of young girls disappear from British schools every year

Britain’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office has a unit devoted to trying to prevent young people, mostly girls and women but also boys and men, being compelled to travel abroad to marry someone whom in many cases they have never met.

The Forced Marriage Unit handled 1,485 cases last year, 35 per cent of them involving teenagers aged 17 or younger. One of its biggest problems is trying to track down people who travel to South Asia and never return.

Mr Afzal says a British government survey of school pupils highlighted the problem.

“They discovered hundreds and hundreds of young girls, and by that I mean 11, 12, 13-year-olds, who would just disappear off the school rolls.”

While it is illegal in the United Kingdom for anyone to marry under the age of 16, marriages involving children still happen in South Asia and the Middle East.

Sometimes girls do not return to Britain until they are pregnant, the theory being that this may assist the process by which the husband seeks residency in the United Kingdom.

Girl told to ‘put a spoon in your knickers’ at airport to avoid being sent abroad

Jasvinder Sanghera, who escaped a forced marriage by running away from her Sikh family home in Derby at the age of 15, formed Karma Nirvana 20 years ago to help people in trouble.

She says the Leeds-based charity has received more than 30,000 calls since 2008.

“To me that’s a drop in the ocean … it could be quadrupled,” she said.

Photo: 17-year-old Shafilea Ahmed was smothered by her parents after rejecting an arranged marriage in Pakistan (AFP: supplied)

 

Ms Sanghera recalls an occasion when a girl feared she was being taken abroad against her will.

“The call handler said, ‘Put a spoon in your knickers. When you go through security it will go off and at that point you’re going to be stopped by a security guard and say I’m being forced to marry’. Which is exactly what she did, and it saved her life.”

Campaigning on the issues of forced marriages has given Ms Sanghera a high profile, an MBE, a meeting with prime minister David Cameron and with countless senior police and other government officials. And yet she believes schools, police and communities are not taking forced marriages and honour-based violence seriously enough.

“If you are Asian and missing from education, the same questions are not asked as [of their] white counterparts here in Britain,” she said.

“And that has not changed because we know there are hundreds going missing off our school rolls. Maybe they’re not being forced into marriage, but the point is, ask the question and look into it. They’re not even doing that.”

As for police: “There are some police forces which are doing sterling work now and trying to get it right. On the ground it’s a different story. There are 43 police forces across the UK and I would refer to potentially four [getting it right]. You know, it’s very much dependent on the person you get on the day.”

British police have been severely criticised for their failures in a series of high-profile honour killings:

• Banaz Mahmud, 20, strangled on the orders of her father and uncle
• Surjit Athwal, 27, murdered on the orders of her mother-in-law and brother-in-law
• Shafilea Ahmed, 17, suffocated by her parents.

In each case, police initially, and in some cases repeatedly, failed to comprehend the seriousness of the threat.

As Ms Sanghera tells trainee detectives in Birmingham, relating the Banaz Mahmud case: “She told police her family was planning to kill her because she’d left an abusive marriage and was seen kissing a man outside a Tube station. And she was not believed. She was dealt with as being melodramatic, fantasising.”

Just a month later she’d been raped and garrotted, her body packed in a suitcase and buried in a garden.

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

Visit our website here: www.abpworld.com

ABP World Group Risk Management

Contact us here: Mail 

Skype: abpworld

NOTE: We are always available 24/7

1-800-847-2315 US Toll free Number
0-808-189-0066 UK Toll Free Number
800-11-618        Norway Toll Free Number

Worldwide International Number: +31-208112223

Worldwide 24/7 Emergency Number: +34 633 374 629

Daughter’s abductions haunt writer

October 15, 2013

Source: wkcurrent.com

For the average parent, it would be unfathomable for their child to be kidnapped. West Kerr County resident Rosalie Hollingsworth underwent such a nightmare, not just once — but twice.

Now she tells about the saga of her losses and recovery in a poignant, honest and riveting book, “Destruction of Innocence, A True Story of Child Abduction.”

The book is intended to convey not only a message and a warning, but also rays of hope. Written in the style of a memoir, the chapters do not always follow the sequence of events in chronological order, but the unraveling of details takes on the feeling of a complex James Bond thriller.

West Kerr County resident Rosalie Hollingsworth lovingly holds a photograph of her daughter Triana, then 7 years old, who was kidnapped twice. Triana’s first abduction by Hollingsworth’s estranged husband lasted eight months; the second, four agonizing years. The ordeal of her return each time is documented in the new book written by Hollingsworth, “Destruction of Innocence, A True Story of Child Abduction.” Photo by Irene Van Winkle.

Writing the book was an ordeal in itself for her, Hollingsworth said, and she has laid out the story bluntly.

In addition to her daughter’s abductions, Rosalie reveals her own sad childhood, of betrayal and abuse that left her both vulnerable and determined.

As an adult, Hollingsworth suddenly found herself trying to cope with the twisted manipulations of her first husband, Franco. He swept her off her feet like a prince in a fairy tale, only to snatch away the one thing she loved the most.

In the book’s introduction, Hollingsworth details the cold and frightening statistics about child abduction:

“One child is reported missing every 40 seconds. … Of millions of children, an appalling 80 percent are parental kidnapping victims. Angry, jealous, fearful and, in some cases, deranged parents defy the law, stealing their children and disappearing. In the wake of each kidnapping are untold stories of despair and agony. After one year, over 50 percent of these cases will remain forever unsolved. This is the story of my daughter, Triana, who was twice taken from me. In the first abduction, my estranged Italian husband took our one year old baby and fled to Italy … Six years later, he kidnapped her again, disappearing with her into the remote jungles of South America.”

The book is filled with details of how Triana was dragged from one country to another, as her father changed identities like a chameleon, and the dangers she endured from predators of every ilk and shape.

Retelling her story still hits a raw nerve with Hollingsworth, even though Triana’s second abduction ended more than 25 years ago. It may be that some of her emotions will never be totally resolved, but perhaps become less jagged.

Asked why she finally decided to write the book, Hollingsworth said, “I was angry at myself for being naive, for having trusted this man who took my child. I was angry at Franco, Carmen (his mother), Kitty (his second wife) and the government — at every person who had not helped me locate my child or stood in my way of finding her. I needed to deal with this anger and writing helped me deal with most of it. I don’t know if I can ever forgive Franco for what he subjected my daughter to — it is just too painful to this day.”

Hollingsworth wrote at night when the house was quiet, but often found herself walking away from it when the thoughts and memories became too painful.

When she first met her husband, Franco, he appeared seemingly out of the blue, Hollingsworth said, and “I was dazzled by his devotion. He was diabolically charming and proposed to me after just six weeks.”

Franco, who came of age during WWII in war-torn Italy, was spoiled by his old-world Italian mother, who had tolerated his father’s debauchery. But he was also polished and well-educated, and to someone of his practiced cunning, Hollingsworth was easy prey.

What Hollingsworth found out only too late was that he had a temper that raged often and unexpectedly with jealousy, creating a constant firestorm in their relationship.

When Triana was only a year old, she was spirited away from their home in California by her conniving father and taken to Italy.

After eight agonizing months, using her own ruses and subterfuge, Hollingsworth was able to bring Triana back. For years, Hollingsworth parried with Franco over custody, and then, when she least expected it, the nightmare that had haunted her once again repeated itself.

The second time around, her ordeal took four years, scouring through the wilds of South America, as authorities and even church figures were not only ineffective, but also blocked her path.

Every time Hollingsworth tried to enlist the help of others, it seemed to fall mostly on deaf ears. It was only through her own courageous perseverence, and the help of several “guardian angels,” that Triana was eventually brought home.

During the intervening years, Hollingsworth met and married another man, Stan. He brought his own sons into the picture, adding a layer of complication. The couple then had another child. It was while she was pregnant with Tisha that the final drama unfolded, making it even more precarious and volatile.

The debris left behind in the wake of traumatic events to Triana, Hollingsworth and other members of the family is immeasurable and will never be completely tidied up.

Triana is left coping with low self-esteem. Over time and with counseling, she has made progress, Hollingsworth said, but she is still left with difficult challenges.

However, Triana has brought her mother a wonderful gift in the form of a son, on whom Hollingsworth dotes, as she does all her grandchildren.

Younger sister, Tisha, has three of her own boys and stays in touch, as do some of Stan’s sons.

Reflecting on the aftermath, Hollingsworth said, “Someone asked me out of all the things that happened, what did I learn? All I can say is that none of it was worth the loss of my child and what she went through. To me, true knowledge comes from good things, and this wasn’t a good thing.”

For children who are rescued, her advice is for them not to blame themselves for trusting the parent who abducted them.

Today, Hollingsworth’s greatest consolation are the children and grandchildren who beam back at her from the many photographs she has placed around her home. They are her next generation of treasures, and she joyfully basks in their glow.

Hollingsworth said she wrote the book to bring greater attention to the issue of child abduction. In the 1970s, the government was of little help, but, she added, “Today we have the government getting involved, along with all kind of alerts and publicity to kidnappings and child abductions.”

The other, and more important part of her message, she said, was to parents of abducted children.

“Do not give up the search. Do what you have to do to locate your child. Use every resource you can possibly find. Contact every person you know who could help. Don’t give up.”

For more information about Hollingsworth’s book and child stealing, visit http://www.destructionofinnocence.com. Reviews can be found at amazon.com and at barnesandnoble.com.

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

Visit our website here: www.abpworld.com

ABP World Group Risk Management

Contact us here: Mail 

Skype: abpworld

NOTE: We are always available 24/7

1-800-847-2315 US Toll free Number
0-808-189-0066 UK Toll Free Number
800-11-618        Norway Toll Free Number

Worldwide International Number: +31-208112223

Worldwide 24/7 Emergency Number: +34 633 374 629