• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer navigation
  • Washington, D.C.
  • melissa@mkfamily.law
  • (202) 713-5165
  • mkfamily.law
Family Law Across Borders

Family Law Across Borders

International Family Law Resources

  • About MKFL
  • Websites
  • Blog
  • FAQ
  • Articles
  • Books
  • Videos
  • Events
  • Contact

Case Update (18 March 2022): Liebetreu v. Liebetreu; child abduction prevention; abuse of discretion on appeal

Case Update (18 March 2022): Liebetreu v. Liebetreu; child abduction prevention; abuse of discretion on appeal

April 12, 2022

Gehlen (Father) and Sandra (Mother) were married in 2014 in Germany, as Father was a U.S. military member serving overseas. In 2015, the parents moved to the United States, first to Ohio where their two children were born, and then to Tennessee in March 2019, where their marriage, unfortunately, broke down. On May 7, 2019, the Mother and children traveled to Germany to visit her family, with a return date of August 17, 2019. On August 14, 2019, Father traveled to Germany to help with the return of the Mother and children, but the Mother refused to return and would not let the children leave Germany. Father initiated a Hague Abduction return petition in the German courts, and secured a return order, affirmed on appeal. Eventually, Mother relinquished the children to Father, so he could return to Tennessee. In November 2019, Father had also started a divorce and custody proceeding in Tennessee, where he was ultimately granted primary residential custody. He asked for abduction prevention measures, and the Court gave Mother two months of unsupervised visitation in Germany, in exchange for her posting a bond of $50,000. She was also ordered to surrender the children’s German passports and never apply for replacements. Father appealed. The Appellate court rejected the Father’s arguments, and found that the abduction prevention measures that were ordered by the trial judge were not an abuse of discretion, even though they were of a less restrictive nature than what the Father was requesting (i.e., supervised visitation in the United States).

As a note, Tennessee is one of more than a dozen U.S. states that have enacted the Uniform Child Abduction Prevention Act. UCAPA requires a consideration of a variety of factors that relate to child abduction risk and provides a variety of prevention measures that a court can employ based on the level of risk that the court deems exists. UCAPA includes, as a key risk factor, whether a parent has previously abducted a child. The Comments to Section 8 of UCAPA indicate, “Ideally the court will choose the least
restrictive measures and conditions to maximize opportunities for continued parental contact while minimizing the opportunities for abduction. The most restrictive measures should be used when there have been prior custody violations and overt threats to take the child; when the child
faces substantial potential harm from an abducting parent who may have serious mental or personality disorder, history of abuse or violence or no prior relationship with the child; or when the obstacles to recovering the child are formidable due to countries not cooperating and enforcing orders from the United States, not being signatories to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction or non-compliant.” The New York State Bar Association produced a webinar on the features of UCAPA that can be found by clicking here.

Category iconabduction,  abduction prevention,  Hague Abduction Convention

Primary Sidebar

Subscribe

Join 108 others, and get a notification to our new posts right on your inbox.

We promise we’ll never spam! Only notifications of new posts.

Check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

The use of the name MK Family Law is protected as are the logo and content of this website. The information is provided by MK Family Law and while we endeavour to keep the information up to date and correct, we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to the website or the information, products, services, or related graphics contained on the website for any purpose. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.

© 2023 · MK Family Law · All Rights Reserved · Developed by RDK

  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • Attorney Advertising