Murder and Death: Dangers Left Behind Parents Face Attempting To Reunite With Victims Of International Child Abduction

Left behind parents of international child abduction face extreme and at times deadly risks when they attempt to reunite with their internationally kidnapped child under the auspices of a court order or when a legal arm of justice has no reach due to diluted, contradictory, or non-existent international law dealing with international child abduction.  In less than one month's time, the community of left behind parents lost two more parents (fathers) who were in the process of reuniting with their abducted children. The I CARE Foundation would like to express our deepest sympathies to families and friends of both fathers after such terrible tragedies.

The deaths of these fathers - one a murder and one an accident - should not have happened and would not have occurred if their children had not been abducted.  Responsibility in great part of these two tragic events undeniably falls on the international legal community at large that does not expedite the severity of international child abduction, and as demonstrated in the tragedy of Mr. Mattoni - countries such as the Philippines still have not acted responsibly and joined the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention. Let me make this clear - the deaths of Mr. Exposito Moreno and Mr. Mattoni should not have occurred. But there is more - the reality is that so many left behind parents who have their children kidnapped abroad have their lives threatened. These threats are not rare but are actually the norm. As a society we must not accept either a child's international abduction or the very real threats aimed at targeted parents of abduction. This is an outrage!

The gravity of the hardships chasing parents face in the wake of their child's parental abduction are far from isolated incidences. Left behind parents are at often victims of murder, death threats (including threats to family members), tragic accidents, assaults, false allegations of abuse and/or assault, identity theft, slander, financial theft, and anything else that will assist the parental child kidnapper in getting away with their act of kidnapping.  The reality is left behind parents not only have to deal with the fact that their child has been internationally kidnapped, but that their life is under attack by their child's other parent - the child's kidnapper.

The I CARE Foundation has repeatedly stated there are typically two victims when it comes to international parental child abduction: the victimized, kidnapped child and the left behind parent.

Rightfully, society's primary attention focuses on the kidnapped child; however, for too long we have not addressed the real dangers that left behind parents, chasing into the darkest storms face in the wake of their child's abduction.

Make no mistake, the journey that chasing parents, left in the wake of their son's or daughter's international child kidnapping face, are extreme in every possible sense.

On June 25, 2014 Domingo Exposito Moreno, age 32 and a resident of Spain's Andalusian town of Fuengirola was shot five times by a hooded gunman while sitting in a car awaiting his attorney's arrival in the southern Argentina's Patagonian City of Comodoro. Domingo Exposito Moreno was a left-behind parent who endured a prolonged four years international child abduction litigation case under the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention. 

The Argentinian court had ordered he would be able to bring his six-year old daughter home after she had been abducted by her mother and taken from Spain to Argentina. Previous to his murder, Domingo Exposito Moreno had made complained to Argentinian authorities that he had been receiving death threats via social media forums. Tragically, local law enforcement failed to act on his complaints. More than likely law enforcement did not take his concerns seriously and more than likely wrongfully viewed his concerns as a banter commonly associated with divorce and child custody cases as opposed to the reality that his case was in fact a child kidnapping case.  An expected march is scheduled for July 25th, 2014 in Comodoro to commemorate Domingo's murder and remind the world that international parental child abduction is a dangerous crime against both child and targeted parent.

July 12, 2014 New York City resident Frank Mattoni died after being involved in a motorcycle accident while in the Philippines while attempting to reunite with his internationally kidnapped daughter Kayla. Having seen numerous court documents and exhibits that were presented to the New York State Supreme Court, Frank Mattoni claimed the child's mother Sheila Digon Castillo had taken the child to the Philippines right after the child's birth nearly 10 years ago. The court documents Frank Mattoni presented to the New York State court stated that once he ended the relationship with Sheila Digon Castillo, Ms. Castillo never informed him that she was pregnant, nor, did she inform him until several years later that he was a father.

Instead of sharing with Frank Mattoni that she was pregnant, Ms. Castillo decided it would be better for the child not to have a relationship with her father (Frank), and as Ms. Castillo was focused on advancing her career as a nurse in New York City, she decided to bring the child to the Philippines so she could be raised by her relatives.  These details were unknown to Frank as he did not know he had a daughter born and raised for the first three months of her life on Manhattan's Upper East Side. According to Frank Mattoni (and extensive court documents and evidence presented into New York State's Supreme Court), Sheila Digon Castillo contacted Frank on his birthday several years ago after not contacting him since Frank ended his relationship with Sheila (in court documents presented by both parties, there were no claims of abuse made against Frank) and told him that she and his daughter wish him a happy birthday. He was told that his daughter's name was Kayla (who looks so much like Frank), and that she was living in the Philippines.

That day was the first time Frank ever knew he had a daughter.  Frank was a wonderful man and this news, about having a daughter, clearly brought such incredible joy to his life.

Soon after, Frank arranged for Sheila to travel to the Philippines and pick up Kayla in order to bring her back to the United States.  So Frank eventually got to meet his beautiful daughter, and with that he quickly stepped into the role of being a proud father, which was evidenced by the hours and hours of videos and pictures I personally viewed.

Obviously and rightfully so, Frank had serious trust issues concerning Sheila - how could he not when this was a person who would deny their child the love of their father, especially since Frank was a good man.  So one day, and unknown to Sheila, Frank took Kayla to the hospital to have both of their DNA tested.  Sure enough, Kayla was indeed Frank's daughter. And as he told me, "It was one of the greatest days of my life ... just knowing. The greatest day was when I looked at my daughter for the first time: I knew she was my daughter."

During the near month that Kayla was in the United States, Frank welcomed Sheila and Kayla into his extended family.  The pictures and videos I have witnessed showed a young girl ... finally coming home ... and a father who simply loved her and was willing to do anything possible in a cooperative, co-parenting way for Kayla's sake.

In order to have a voice in Kayla's life, Frank knew that he needed to seek the assistance of the courts. As he told me, he had some real concerns that Sheila was perhaps not telling him the truth when it came to co-parenting Kayla. So he sought relief and assistance from the New York State Supreme Court which at the time had jurisdiction over Kayla while she was in New York.

Unfortunately, Frank was unable to serve Sheila with his court papers before she whisked the child back to the Philippines and out of the reach of the New York State Supreme Court.  New York state no longer had jurisdiction because Kayla was no longer living in New York, nor had she been there for the required period of time that would have allowed the state's courts long-arm reach regarding jurisdiction... all this despite the fact that Ms. Castillo lived in New York and only one mile away from Frank!

Even with the DNA evidence that Frank had, proving that Kayla was his daughter, this evidence meant nothing in New York. Frank put forth real efforts, which revolved solely around the best interest of his daughter in a co-parenting light, to resolve this matter.  However, I witnessed on many occasions the telephone calls, emails, etc from Frank that went unanswered. Eventually, Frank left New York and went to the Philippines in an effort to reunite with his daughter, Kayla, who truly meant everything in the world to him. And I do mean, everything.

Tragically, during his efforts to reunite with his daughter, he passed away after being involved in a motorcycle accident. His death will be felt by so many individuals that knew and cared for Frank. Sadly, his daughter Kayla will only know a part of the loving father he was.

And should one day Kayla Castillo Mattoni ever read this, Kayla I hope you know just how much your father loved you.  You brought such joy and happiness to his life.  One day I hope you are able to obtain the United States of America flag that was flown over the United States Capitol in your father's honor, along with the accompanying citation in your name, that I presented to him.

Once again, the hard reality that the Philippines is not a member of the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention further demonstrates, as in Frank Mattoni's case, how a loving parent has limited options available to them outside of traveling to the foreign country and attempting to reunite with the child overseas. The challenges Frank faced trying to reunite with his daughter are not uncommon.

Sadly, even the best of efforts to reunite a child with their left behind parent can often fail.  The hard truth is that international parental child abduction law is complex - and growing more complicated with each day as exemplified by a widened acceptance of Article 13(1) defenses under the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention.

To put it as simple as possible - the vast majority of children around the world do not come home because the systems we use do not work effectively, or the systems we expect to exist to help children and parents of abduction simply do not exist.

The tragic deaths of Domingo Exposito Moreno and Frank Mattoni - though different - exemplify the risks left behind parents face. These tragedies are not uncommon, nor are the real death threats and other formidable acts left behind parents have to face.

Today, I am happy to share that the U.S. Senate passed Senate Resolution 2509. This is a very big deal in the fight to protect American children and their targeted parents from abduction.

With approximately 20% of American children abducted to Hague signatory countries being court ordered to be returned home, and approximately 11% of American children abducted to non-Hague signatory countries being court ordered by a foreign court to be returned to the United States, it is imperative that judges everywhere realize that the reality is that the most left behind parents will never reunite with their abducted child. In the meantime, the risks and peril they face are extreme.

The key to protecting children from international parental child abduction is to prevent it from happening. Since the I CARE Foundation's inception, the U.S. child abduction rate has declined over the past four years by 38.06%.

May God look over the souls of Domingo Exposito Moreno and Frank Mattoni while also protecting the lives of these two fathers' daughters.

On behalf of The I CARE Foundation,

Peter Thomas Senese 

Click here to read articles about International Parental Child Abduction

   

Murder -The Reality of International Parental Child Abduction For Left-Behind Parents and Abducted Children

A left-behind Spanish father was assassinated gangland style in Argentina while in route to legally recover his young daughter, who had previously been internationally kidnapped by her mother. Mr. Domingo Exposito Moreno, age 32  and a resident of Spain's Andalusian town of Fuengirola was shot five times by a hooded gunman while sitting in a car awaiting his attorney's arrival in the southern Argentina's Patagonian City of Comodoro. Domingo Exposito Moreno was a left-behind parent who endured a prolonged four years international child abduction litigation case under the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention. The Argentinian court had ordered he would be able to bring his six-year old daughter home after she had been abducted by her mother and taken from Spain to Argentina. Comodoro is located 1,800 kilometers south of Buenos Aries. 

Previous to his murder, Domingo Exposito Moreno had made complained to Argentinian authorities that he had been receiving death threats via social media forums. However, it appears local law enforcement failed to act on his complaints. More than likely law enforcement did not take his concerns seriously and more than likely wrongfully viewed his concerns as a banter commonly associated with divorce and child custody cases as opposed to the reality that his case was in fact a child kidnapping case. 

Domingo Exposito Moreno was expected to fly back to Spain from Argentina with his daughter. Now that is not possible. However, an investigation is under way focusing on the child's mother. 

Mr. Domingo Exposito Moreno's last Facebook posting was made on May 31st, 2014. He wrote, "Today is 3 months since I have seen you. I miss your kisses, your hugs, your smile. I miss you so much daughter that my life is going out every minute that I know nothing about you. Every night I look at the star and send you a message of love and strength as I look forward to the day we meet again and embrace each other. Know that your Dad is always by your side and you will never be abandoned. I will continue to fight for justice."

The Reality of Murder When A Parent Internationally Abducts A Child

The singular most harmful omission made in the world of international parental child abduction is the downgrade of the horrific act of child abduction that targets both the child and the left-behind parent as a child custody dispute. It is not a child custody dispute. International parental child abduction is kidnapping - and children who are kidnapped by one parent from another are placed in extremely dangerous situations. So too are the targeted left-behind parents as exemplified by the murder of Domingo Exposito Moreno.

There is no question children-victims of parental child abduction are placed into intolerable, highly abusive physical, spiritual, and emotional situations.  In fact, in June of 2013, the United States Department of State issued a report stating that children of parental abduction face severe abuse including extreme violence and risk of murder. Truth is filicide: parental child murder is a cruel reality that takes away hundreds of innocent American child-citizens lives each year. Parents murdering their children is not an anomaly. It happens abundantly in each country around the world. Look at India with over 3,000 Honor Killings (really, 'honor'? Seriously?). 

In fact, in June, 2013 the Department of Justice issued a report warning that children of parental abduction face extreme violence and possible murder. 

Tragically, the risk of murder for child victims of abduction does not end when their physical parental abduction ends. Far from it. In the Fall of 2014 the I CARE Foundation will publish our 2 year study detailing the correlation between suicide and children who previously experienced parental child abduction.

For those stakeholders who are deeply familiar with international parental child abduction, it is commonly understood that Left-Behind Parents are in fact near-equal victims of extreme abuse. And as the fallen life of Mr. Domingo Exposito Moreno demonstrates, threats and acts of murder are realities. In fact, threats of murder are abundant in international parental child abduction cases as the abducting parent and their support system often are willing to do whatever is necessary to put fear and intimidation into the life of the targeted parent.

The fact is the vast majority of child abducting parents are not liberating parents. They are sociopaths who believe that they can use a child's life to cause great harm and destroy the very fabric of the child's other parent.  Sadly, some parents believe that if they can't have sole possession of their child, then the other parent should not either. And tragically, that scenario does end with murder.

Left Behind Parents and Death Threats

Several years ago the I CARE Foundation reunited an American parent with their child who had been kidnapped to a dangerous and unstable African country (one of many reunifications we were responsible for dealing with Africa). In this particular case, the left-behind parent (who possessed a court order for the child's return) was told that should they ever enter the country where the child was being wrongfully held, that he and his family would be murdered. He knew the threats were real. As I said - the I CARE Foundation brought the child home. But the threat of murder was real. This father was not alone in fearing for his life.

In fact, threats of murder are a rather consistent theme in international parental child abduction cases.

In another case the I CARE Foundation was involved with, a mother (who possessed a court order for the child's return) had her child abducted to an unstable, politically polarized Middle East country. She too was told that if she attempted to recover her child that she would never leave the country alive. Today, both mother and child are home and excelling, but the death threats were real.

Neither parent I mention above is alone. Truth it, death threats and the realities of murder and extreme violence against both child and targeted parent of abduction are real and rampant.

Of course, left-behind parents face threats outside of having their life permanently taken. For example, in many cases, the abducting parent launches their abduction plan well in advance of their act of kidnapping. Part of their scheme is to bring about false charges such as domestic violence and abuse against the other parent (and this happens amongst men and women near equally: it is gender equal).in order to put the targeted parent in jail (often with intent to leave the country while the child's other parent is detained) while also creating evidence in hope that the inbound court where they abduct the child to will sanction their act of kidnapping (In Hague Convention signatory countries abducting parents will rely on Article 13 b 'the best interest clause' of the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention). Truth is, it is not difficult to fabricate a domestic violence claim.

A Message To The Courts And Law Practitioners Who Handle Abduction Cases

When we deal with an international parental child abduction case, the first view we must always keep in mind is that we're not here to determine jurisdiction or custody, but we are here to prevent murder and extreme violence. That's the threshold that every case should begin with. And with this initial step - urgency must always prevail.

This Is Outrageous: 91 of 92 Signatory Countries To The 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention Do Not Report The Number of Outbound Or Inbound Abduction Cases

In my capacity as the Executive Director of the I CARE Foundation, the topic of global abduction statistics often comes up in conversation.  The truth is NOBODY knows what the international parental child abduction rate is. NOBODY!

One of the shameful reasons as to why this is the case is because 91 of the 92 signatory countries to the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention DO NOT report the abduction rate. So in this sense, we applaud the United States Department of State and Congress for their continued transparency. 

But really, how hard can it possibly be to sit in a room and count the folders of each case application that is filed with a Central Authority? Seriously - each Central Authority knows their own inbound and outbound case load - or at least has the ability of counting each folder file.

And for those of us who understand the operations of the Hague Conference, the Permanent Bureau has created INCADAT (the International Child Abduction Database). However, the vast majority of signatory countries and their Central Authorities do not provide to the Hague details of each case. In essence, they do not report their cases to the Permanent Bureau.

Now - there is no mandate to do so. But really?  We're talking about tens of thousands of victims - not thousands - but tens of thousands of child abduction victims kidnapped each year.

If you're wondering why I have stated 'Tens of Thousands' of international cases while no country other than the U.S. is reporting their statistics, it is because of the I CARE Foundation's own research in this area. For example, it is our strong belief that the number of unreported cases of IPCA in the United States is 100% to 125% of the reported cases of abduction due in part to a large population of undocumented immigrants not realizing they have the right to report abduction without fear of deportation, the failure to report abduction cases by targeted parents of children abducted to Non-Hague countries, limited knowledge on who to turn to by left-behind parents, failure of law enforcement to view this act as abduction as opposed to a child custody case, and a sense of hopelessness due to low return rates and high costs associated with international kidnapping recovery.  So, in the United States, the 2013 Department of State report to Congress stated there were 1,044 reported outbound cases of parental abduction. Thus, if the unreported cases is only 100% of the reported cases, the U.S. should have had at least 2,100 outbound cases of abduction in 2013.

Consequences Of Not Reporting: The Abduction Pandemic Grows

It is inconceivable that the overwhelming countries that are signatory members of the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention do not report the inbound and outbound international parental child abduction rate. It is beyond unacceptable to know that the vast majority of Central Authorities do not uphold their responsibility and update the Hague's INCADAT database.

It is simply not acceptable that the majority of countries are purposefully concealing their international parental child abduction rates.  We're not talking about a difficult task: each parent who petitions for legal relief under the Hague Convention alone files a Hague Petition. How hard could it be for each country's Central Authority to count the petitions that are filed by either their own citizens (outbound) or petitioned to them by another Central Authority (Inbound).

The world needs to know just how severe this pandemic is. Failure for the leaders of each Central Authority to begin reporting accurately the number of international child kidnappings is immoral. Failures to report have minimized the severe problem at hand and have greatly marginalized the need for help parents like Domingo Exposito Moreno desperately need as they attempt to protect their innocent children.

Our children need more from us. We can all do better. Let the life of Domingo Exposito Moreno and all those victims of international parental child abduction who have come before Domingo and who will come after him be not only a reminder of the deadly reality of parental child abduction, but let it be a call-to-arms for greater transparency and action to protect our children.

On a personal note, I would like to extend my deepest sympathy to the family of Domingo Exposito Moreno. If anyone is aware of an educational trust being established for his daughter, I welcome any information that may be provided. The email address to write to is: legal@theicarefoundation.org.

On behalf of The I CARE Foundation,

Peter Thomas Senese

AS A REMINDER, IF A CHILD IS TRAVELING ABROAD THIS SUMMER, PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU USE THE I CARE FOUNDATION'S INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL CHILD CONSENT FORM

FBI States Risks Of A Child Victim Of International Parental Child Abduction: Murder

“Unfortunately, the threat of violence—and death—in these cases is all too real,” said Ashli-Jade Douglas, an FBI analyst in our Violent Crimes Against Children Intelligence Unit who specializes in child abduction matters.  "Most non-custodial parental abductors want retaliation. They feel that if they can’t have the child full time—or any amount of time—then the other parent shouldn’t have the child, either.”

The I CARE Foundation has, for some time now, been sharing the fact that children of international parental child abduction are at risk of murder. The above statement, from the U.S. Department of Justice website, shows that children who are targeted and become victims of parental child abduction are subjected to brutal crimes - and that includes murder. No child should be subjected to such crimes of violence - ever - and society should be very concerned that this is happening.  At the hands of an abducting parent, children are put in grave risk.  A parental child abductor is willing to break the laws, ignore the orders of a court, and they have no concern with perjury or contempt.  Parental child abductors kidnap children in order to cause the targeted parent hurt and suffering.

Children of Parental Abduction are Prisoners

We must remember that children who are abducted by a parent are prisoners forced to comply with the will of their hostage-taker.

Dr. Wagner, a leading child psychologist, used the word "compliance" while discussing the reason of why hostages may not be able during their imprisonment speak-up and free themselves.

Compliance.

It hit me like a ton of bricks falling off a ten-story building.

You see, in the the world of international parental child abduction, and in this world's post-abduction reunification when both the targeted parent and the abductor may by court-order need to exist in the world of the victimized child, courts often do not realize that when they allow the kidnapper to remain bonded with the child-victim, not only does this create a sense of uncertainty for the child, but it wrongfully sends a message to the child that there was validity to their kidnapping.

Now it is imperative to remember that during the time of a child's international abduction, these children are in fact hostages. They are manipulated. They are brainwashed. They are taught to fear. And in the kidnapper's need to have that child sanction their kidnapping, kidnappers teach that failure to comply will be met with grave consequences.

Sadly, during many post-abduction reunification's, the abductor's intent to cause pain and suffering to the target parent continues via manipulation of a child.

Since the child cannot break free from the bindings of their kidnapper despite the efforts of the targeted parent, many of these children still live in fear, and are forced to live in spiritually and mentally bound ways.

They are still prisoners.

They must comply with the ever-present abductor's will.

And this must end.

Child Services Need To Heavily Consider Any Claims Made By A Parent Abductor

It is imperative that every social services program, every child welfare organization and every family protective service agency charged with investigating any claims of child abuse carefully analyze any allegations of abuse. Critically, these organizations must carefully scrutinize any claims made by a parent who was previously charged with child abduction, especially if a court determined that parent had committed a criminal act of child kidnapping, or in Hague cases during international parental child abduction that uses a civil procedure for the return of a child despite the federal act of kidnapping being committed, it is imperative that all social service personnel charged with investigating any claims of abuse or neglect made by a child abductor against their previous targeted parent be cautiously examined. 

Critically, all social service agencies acting on a complaint against a child made by a parent child abductor must commence their investigation with the hard reality that the child was a victim of kidnapping along with other forms of serious abuse, and carefully review the sociopath tendencies of abductors.As published on the United States Department of State's website, "When non-custodial parents resort to kidnapping, they believe they are acting in the best interests of their children. Although a minority of parental kidnappers may actually save their children by taking them out of the reach of the other parent, the motives of most parents who steal their children are not at all altruistic.

Parents find a myriad of reasons or self-justification for stealing a child from another parent Some abductors will find fault with the other parent for nonsensical transgressions; others will steal a child for revenge."

Profile of a Parental Child Abductor: Narcistic Sociopaths

The State Department's report includes, "[A] profile [of] the parent who shows signs of flagrant paranoid beliefs or psychotic delusions. In this situation, the intervention must focus on the child and his or her safety and well-being . . . Unfortunately, the other parent and the child must be informed about a safety plan at all times."  Continuing, the Department of State's report specifically states, "[The] profile [of an international parental child abductor] is the sociopathic personality."

Again, nobody wants to think about a parent killing their child.

However, we must take into heavy consideration the statement by the United States Department of Justice's Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP)  concerning the sociopathic behavior of abductors. Grave concern was expressed, "As with paranoid and delusional parents, sociopathic parents are unable to perceive their children as having separate needs or rights. Consequently, they often use their children blatantly as instruments of revenge or punishment or as trophies in their fight with the ex-partner. Hence, the sociopathic parent believes that domestic violence and child abduction can be perpetrated with impunity. Like paranoia, a diagnosis of severe sociopathy is rare (4 percent of the studies’ samples).

Parents Murder Their Children

Filicide is not a term that I like to talk about, but the reality is, we need to talk about it more.  For those that are not aware, the term filicide refers to the deliberate act of a parent killing his or her own child.  In the United States, hundreds of children are murdered by their parents each and every year. Proportionately, filicide occurs everywhere. It is not a phenomenon isolated within American borders: parents do kill children. And we can't put our head in the sand and think this does not exist.

According to a recent statement released by the FBI, there is a trend that I find incredibly disturbing coming from non-custodial parents - and that is the rate in which they are abducting and threatening to harm their own children... all with the intent of retaliation against the parent who has been given legal custody.


Now, with a large number of American children being born to unwed parents, along with the high rate of marriages ending in divorce, the reality is that there is an increasing number of cases where a single parent is going to have custody of the child. The FBI's statistics show that between the years 2010 and 2012 there was an increase of 41% in child abduction cases that involved custody matters.  So if we add that to the increased number of those parents seeking retaliation through harming their own child - do we need to be concerned?  You bet we do!

In the FBI statement there were some recent cases of filicide that occurred at the hands of non-custodial parents:

• In 2009, a non-custodial mother abducted her 8-month-old son from his custodial father in Texas. She told the father she killed the boy to prevent the father from employing his custodial rights and in retaliation for his alleged involvement with other women.
• In 2011, a 2-year-old girl was abducted by her non-custodial father in California. A week later, both were found dead. The father committed suicide after shooting his daughter.
• In 2012, a non-custodial father in Utah abducted and killed his 7- and 5-year-old sons and then committed suicide. He was angry over not being afforded sole custody of the children.

Ashli-Jade Douglas offers up this advice to help keep children safe:  “Custodial parents should inform schools, after-care facilities, babysitters, and others who may at times be responsible for their children about what custody agreements are in place so that kids are not mistakenly released to non-custodial parents.”

The common misconception that parental abductions are considered a family matter has to end.

Parental child abduction is a serious crime. The act of abduction leads to ongoing forms of abuse toward a child. When a child is abducted they should immediately be considered to be in great danger!

Law enforcement agencies need to act quickly to ensure that these innocent children are not going to be harmed.  The sociopathic behaviors that a kidnapping parent exhibits has them believing in their own mind what they are doing is in the best interest of the child.  When we think again about the fact that many of these cases revolve around revenge or retaliation, you can see it’s not out of the question to have the ultimate revenge be at the expense of the innocent child… with the act of filicide.


This is all very disconcerting, but one thing is for certain:  raising awareness and stewarding the message about the warning signs of international parental child abduction is the key.  This awareness has played a role in reducing the number of reported outbound child kidnapping cases originating in the United States by 15% during the last two consecutive years after nearly 30 years of continued growth.

If I may ask you to please share the warning signs of international abduction – you may very well be getting this information out to a family that needs it… ultimately possibly saving the life of an innocent child.  It is that desire, that is so ingrained in me, that I continue my fight each and every day!

Together we can, and are, making a difference.

- The I CARE Foundation -