United States Legal Analysis Of The Hague Convention

This amicus brief reflects the balance between psychology and law by applying them both to decide which is the best option for child placement. The law states that the child should be place with a relative when possible. However, the attorneys are also reaching out to see what effect this could have on the child psychologically. They are using them together to decide what location would be the best for Arnes. The law does state that they should place with a relative when available, while also referring to the fact that a preexisting attachment to a family could also be the same. They refer to what type of damage could occur, if it is short term or would cause long term complications. The law itself is written to allow for interpretation

Today, the subject about children custody is commonly discussed about. Children are often left to the hands of those who are thought to be “better.” A child’s environment and the care he/she receives is a major point in deciding where the custody of the child land. Many parents lose their children due to their “inability” to raise their child. A good amount of kids are torn away from their parent’s love and affection due to the parent’s financial status or other devastating reasons.

Millions of children are abused, affected by maltreatment, and neglected all over the world every day. However, a lot of these cases are not reported to the proper authorities. Kim, Mennen, and Trickett (2016) state that, “all the forms of abuse and neglect frequently result in adverse effects on children and adolescents over many domains including physical, psychological, behavioral and social functioning.” In some circumstances, the definition of abuse can be questionable. A lot of parents do not have all the necessities and resources needed to take care of their families. This creates situations in which children are taken from their parents and are placed under the control of the state. These kids are sent to foster or group

It is important to examine where the laws come from and why they are in place. Generally, the laws are defined as a parent or guardian’s inability to protect his/her children from witnessing domestic violence or being abused by another person (Goodmark, 2004). When a child is exposed to domestic violence that can be considered a form of child neglect, even if the child is not harmed. This includes seeing, hearing, or simply witnessing the aftereffects of violence, such as an injured victim (Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2012). While this is a large part of the laws, they are mainly in place to protect children from experiencing firsthand abuse. The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) was enacted in 1974 and designed to give a clear definition of child abuse, which failure to protect laws use as a basis to determine if a woman should be charged with abuse or neglect. CAPTA defines abuse as “any recent act or failure to act on the part of a parent or caretaker, which results in death, serious physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse or exploitation, or an act or failure to act which presents an imminent risk of serious harm” (“The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act,” 2003). Failure to protect laws use the aspect of CAPTA that considers “failure to act” a part of child abuse. Because women fail to act in protecting their children or stopping the abuser, they can be charged.

After watching these different cases, the way they affected me is that it’s very difficult for social workers to decide to remove the child or let them go back to their house and live with their parents. For them it’s a very difficult and important decision because basically child’s life and future depends on the social worker’s decision. If they say it’s safe for the child to go back to live with his/her parents and if the abuse and neglect still continues, they put the child’s life on risk. I think the 10-year-old Matthew case stand out more than others because even though the dad was physically abusing the child, Matthew still wanted to go back to his house and live with his dad. It’s interesting that the way they were acting it felt like

The article begins with former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, head of the Global Citizenship Commission, proposing to the UN that a court should be set up to assess crimes that have been committed against children. The current refugee crisis has created a dire need for a court to investigate child labor, slavery, and marriage. The court would be able to take charge of cases petitioned by children and issue irrevocable rulings. Since so many children’s rights have been violated, someone needs to speak up on their behalf. The U.N. Children’s Fund has recently addressed the issue of the lack of protection in Europe from human traffickers. The Global Citizenship Commission includes very qualified individuals that have not only suggested for a children’s court, but they also have advocated for reform in U.N. refugee aid and veto processes.

In the FLA, section 60CC provides a list of considerations that court must take into account and the list operates as guidance to the courts dealing with family disputes concerning children. The list includes two tiers of considerations: primary considerations and additional considerations. Courts are obliged to consider, for primary considerations, the benefit to the child of having a meaningful relationship with both parents and the need for protection of the child from harm. Where child safety is concerned or where there is any inconsistency in applying the primary considerations, courts are required to consider protecting the child from harm as the priority consideration. Thus in this situation, the court is to give greater weight to the need of the child’s protection from physical or psychological

Japan has agreed to sign a treaty that settles international child custody disputes. Japan’s G8 members have not signed the Hague Convention on international child abduction. The Hague Convention on International Child Abduction aims to protect both parents' rights and abide by custody laws of the country where the child first lived (Jazeera, 2011). However, opposition to joint custody is strong in Japan. The treaty is Its substantive provisions are Articles 3, 12, and 13. It provides that children under 16 shall be returned to their country of habitual residence "forthwith" if they have been "wrongfully removed or retained," unless they were abducted more than a year before the petition was filed. These defenses are usually very narrowly construed. Burdens of proof for them, as well as for the prima facie case, are set out in the U.S. implementing legislation—the federal International Child Abduction

This paper will clearly lay out the Unites States concerns with the International Criminal Court and will attempt to resolve them. I will then argue that no country has the right to be above international law, including the United States and that it is in the best interest of America and the world community for the united states to join the efforts of the ICC and sign the Rome Statute.

According to a study that was published in the Behavioral Science and the Law academic journal titled “Psychological Effects of Custody Disputes on Children”, both adults and child involved in the child custody process are affected by custody process and “that symptoms of the psychological sequelae can persist for years, with sufficient severity to require psychotherapy or medical treatment” (Wolman & Taylor, 1991, p. 406). Thus, the importance of a good custody evaluation arises, as it will determine the future of the children and the parents. In order to produce a relevant evaluation, the evaluators need to follow The American Association (APA) ethical guidelines and instructional suggestions (Horvath et al., 2002, p.557). Evaluators

Child maltreatment is a widespread issue that affects thousands of children every year. There are four common types of child maltreatment; sexual abuse, physical abuse, emotional abuse and neglect. All of these types of abuse are very serious and can have many consequences for the children and families. The most common consequence of severe child maltreatment is the removal of that child from their home (Benbenishty, Segev, Surkis, and Elias, 2002). Most social workers trying to determine the likelihood of removal evaluate the type and severity of abuse, as well as the child’s relationship with their parents (Benbenishty et al., 2002). When children are removed from their homes there are many options of alternative housing. The

The term ‘prisoner of war’ has traditionally been used to describe persons captured or interned by an opposing force during conflict. They have been afforded varying degrees of treatment and since 1949 have been attributed various rights as specified in the Third Geneva Convention, specifically Article 13, the Humane Treatment of Prisoners of War. This paper will explore Article 13 in terms of its moral and strategic dimensions. It will investigate how Article 13 relates to other articles of the Geneva Conventions, and examine the implied terms of the article and additional protections afforded to prisoners of war.

The authors also reference a case in Tennessee, where a father was able to gain custody of his children, and then attempted to turn them against their mother. During the case, the court decided not recognize Parental Alienation Syndrome and gave custody to the father. The ruling was reversed “because the father failed to demonstrate a proper ground for modification of the prior parenting arrangement and because the proof shows that the mother is more inclined than the father to encourage the child’s relationship with the other parent.” The authors conclude, “While the use of testimony pertaining to PAS may be far from firmly entrenched in our legal system, Dr. Gardner’s findings are at the very least, useful for making sense of the family dynamics in some of the most antagonistic custody proceedings. While the legal battle will end, the effect it can have on children caught in the middle will have long-lasting

One of the foundations of arbitration is that awards rendered are final and not subject to appeal before the courts. In this respect, Article 5 of the UNCITRAL Model Law provides for minimal intervention, and says, “In matters governed by this Law, no court shall intervene except where so provided in this Law“. As a result, the grounds upon which a court may set aside an award or refuse to recognize and enforce the same are limited. Article 34 of the Model Law and Article V of the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards provide the restrictive grounds for such relief.

The 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention provided the method of securing the prompt return of children to the State of their habitual residence in cases of abduction. The Convention assumes that return of the children to the State of their habitual residence immediately prior to their abduction is in their best interests. However, it also provides a few exceptions for the non-return of the child. In case of an establishment of the exception, ‘the courts of place where the child is present after abduction generally have a discretion as to whether to return the child to the State of the habitual residence of the child.’