PARENTAL KIDNAPPING: PROFILE OF THE KIDNAPPER AND STEPS FOR PREVENTION by Laurie K. Williams, L.M.F.C.C. and Daria A. Hilton, B.A. Between 230,000 and 751,000 children are victims of parental kidnapping each year and, by all indications, these numbers are increasing.1 Further, though hard data is scarce, Agopian notes that the recovery rate for victims of parental kidnapping is less than 50 percent.2 Despite the pervasiveness of this social problem, research in this area is sorely lacking and little practical information has been published about it. It is the intent of this paper then to establish at least general guidelines for dealing with this issue in a comprehensive manner. These guidelines are based upon my experience with families who have suffered the ills of parental kidnapping and on my firm belief that the best interests of the children involved in the trauma of parental kidnapping should always be served. The specific areas I will address are identifying potential child stealers, suggesting methods of deterring an actual theft and dealing effectively with the psychological problems that arise once a child has been returned. Though one cannot draw a specific profile of a potential or even an actual child stealer, it has been my experience that parents who opt to steal their children are invariably members of a high conflict family. That is to say, the relationship between the mother and father is marked by an inordinate amount of prolonged and sustained conflict. This conflict may take many forms, (ie- physical, sexual or verbal abuse) but it is the conflict itself that defines such relationships, not its specific manifestation. It is also typical for such couples to involve their children in the conflict. One must distinguish here between a couple who is suffering the typical conflict that a divorce invokes and a couple whose entire relationship is marked by conflict. The threat of stealing a child or the actual theft in these cases is simply a continuation of established patterns of behavior. This general pattern serves mainly as a warning signal to be alert for the following signposts, which often indicate that a volatile situation is in danger of being exacerbated by a child stealing. One should be wary if: -------------------- 1. Dorothy Huntington, PhD.: Parental Kidnapping: A New Form of Child Abuse 2. Michael Agopian: Parental Child-Stealing (Lexington: D.C. Heath and Co., 1981) 67. Page 2 1. A parent suspects their ex-spouse may try to steal the child. While this is often a legitimate concern, the parent may be projecting their own desire. 2. Either parent has had their child stolen in the past. 3. There has been a molest or an occurrence of domestic violence or accusations of these things and the parent expresses the belief that the system is not providing their child with the proper protection against such harm. 4. There is any history of a paranoid type of psychosis in either parent. A typical pattern would be a paranoid person, who is hyper-aware of their environment and has abundant energy available to them. It is to be noted that a person who is clinically depressed is not a likely candidate for child abduction as they do not have the necessary emotional energy. 5. A parent complains of being "cheated" by the legal system and/or has been in and out of the court numerous times, eg, court actions every six months to a year. In one case, I had a couple that was involved in custody litigation for ten years. 6. A parent, in discussing the issues that surround the divorce, rarely makes specific references to their child. If any or all of the above six factors is present, then you might also look for the following factors, which are not given in any particular order: A. There are strong family or other connections in other parts of your own country or the world. B. Look for access to large amounts of money. C. The potential kidnaper has a sense of not belonging in the local area. This is complement of A above. D. The parents can not separate themselves from their children nor can they separate their needs from the needs of their children. E. There may be a sense of alienation from everything or everyone except the children. This is usually coupled with a high degree of dependency on the children and the feeling that the adult cannot live without the children. I have observed that this may show up as a child who is "parenting" the adult. Be aware that this is not unusual for a period of time in many divorce situations. Page 3 It is important to note that either parent in a high conflict family is generally capable of stealing the children. To illustrate, when speaking before a women's support group titled "Women Without Custody, Inc.," all of the women who had had their children stolen regretted not having committed the theft first. Although it may appear to you that one parent plays no part in the conflict, it does take two. For instance, it may seem at first blush that one parent is the sweet innocent victim of an aggressive, controlling former partner; be aware that in terms of family systems, a controlling person can only control a willing partner. One must understand that these people come in matched pairs, eg, your client is not Joan of Arc nor is the other side Giles De Rais (Bluebeard). There are, of course, limited exceptions to the rule of matched pairs, such as the person who becomes psychotic after the relationship is in progress for a period of time. Having recognized the potential for a child stealing, one should take steps to defuse the situation, keeping in mind that, because of the nature of these types of families, preventative measures may fail. Beyond counseling a client on the illegality and psychologically damaging effects of child stealing, a comprehensive therapy program should be initiated. This should include individual counseling for all involved, family therapy and mediation, all of which is conducted by therapists who are not allowed to testify in court on behalf of either parent as this tends to place the counselor or mediator in the position of judge and not intermediary. Mediation is perhaps the one real chance a couple of this sort has of avoiding the commission of rash acts, especially, but not limited too, child stealing. The drawback of mediation is that because couples who have a history of conflict are not likely to change their modes of behavior over night or even after extensive counseling and mediation, it often fails. These couples are fettered in mutual thoughts of revenge, fear and hostility and, worse, they have little or no concept of the damage they are doing to their children. The couples I have worked with invariably believed that keeping their children away from their ex-spouse was in fact in the best interest of their children. None had any idea that a separation of this sort is tremendously traumatic to a child. Page 4 Though ideologically this is a no win situation, there is an option for a settlement of sorts that has hitherto been avoided because it violates the public policy that a parent should not be rewarded for irrational and antagonistic behavior. Namely, one of the parents can be convinced to walk away from the situation entirely, forfeiting (in the practical, not legal, sense) custodial and visitation rights and thus allowing the child to live a comparatively normal life. Unquestionably, this is not the ideal solution. And, in my experience, it is also generally the parent who seems least likely to steal the child who may be convinced to "Walk Away." Thus, the most responsible and the "better parent" may wind up not being a parent at all. It is unrealistic, however, to believe that even the most earnest efforts of the legal and psychological systems can always effect ideologically sound solutions when confronted by couples who are as tenaciously irrational as those that I have encountered. Two points need to be stressed here. First, all authorities agree that a child thrives when in a stable environment, eg, home, school, peers, relatives and other normal and usual support systems. And second, all studies concerning children of divorce show that the most significant negative impact on the children results from extreme parental conflict.3 It seems self evident then that it is vital to both maintain a stable environment and reduce conflict as much as possible. Both of these goals can be accomplished by convincing the "Better Parent" to "Walk Away." It must be stressed that this option should be used with great reluctance and only in those instances where there is no possibility of resolving the extreme conflict between the parents. In these limited circumstances, removing one parent from the situation and thus ending, or at least muting, the conflict and greatly reducing the chance that the remaining parent will resort to stealing the child is in the child's best interest. -------------------- 3. A recent review of this was presented by Joan P. Kelly, Ph.D., and Rosemary Bolen, LCSW at the State Bar of California Family Law Section symposium entitled: PSYCHOLOGICAL AND FAMILY ISSUES AFFECTING PARENTS AND CHILDREN OF DIVORCE (San Francisco, Jan 1990) Page 5 The alternative is hauntingly disturbing. Forced into a custodial/visitation arrangement that invariably neither parent is satisfied with, these parents are likely to escalate hostility and conflict, often to the detriment of the children. If one or the other does decide to run off with the children, the results can be incalculably harmful. Kidnaped children are immediately and without warning, removed from a familiar and generally nurturing environment, as well as being isolated from the other parent. Schetky and Haller (1983) have noted the special conflicts which parental kidnapping create for the child. Even though the child knows the kidnapping parent, the act of child snatching undermines the child's trust in that parent and jeopardizes their future relationship. The child might blame the other parent for failing to protect against the kidnapping and for not being there. The child may be traumatized by the kidnapping parent's irrational behavior during and after the event and by any threats that parent might make. The child may feel unprotected as he or she observes the kidnapping parent's disregard for the law. This child may be forced to assume different identities in different cities and towns, to lie to people, and to move frequently in order to avoid detection by authorities.4 These children are often clouded with feelings of guilt and confusion and can and do suffer irreparable psychological harm. If a child is stolen and subsequently returned, there remain many unresolved practical, legal and psychological difficulties. As professionals dealing with these problems, we need to be extremely aware of the needs of the returned children. Barring the parent who perpetrated the kidnap from seeing their children, for instance, might well add to the trauma of the child's return. In a case I handled, the child was returned to his father at the age of 12 after a nine year absence. He was denied contact with his mother and step-father, the only family he had ever truly known, for an entire year. This was clearly distressing to him and served only to add to his already overwhelming anger and discontent. In the five years that I counseled this boy, he never adjusted to his new living situation and continues to have emotional problems related to the trauma he suffered. -------------------- 4. Stephen P. Herman, M.D.: Special Issues in Child Custody Evaluations, J. Am. Acad. Child Psychiatry, 1990, 29, ^:969-974, 973; Schetky, D.H. & Haller, L.H. (1983): Parental Kidnapping, J.Am Acad. Child Psychiatry, 22:279-285. Page 6 Even if the absence is less extreme and the child snatching parent is allowed contact upon return, the children often suffer measurable psychological harm. In an illustrative case, a psychotic mother Kidnaped her 8 year old son and two year old daughter, convincing them that "bad people" were trying to hurt them and that they had to move, choose new names, and could not contact their father. The children spent a month in an unheated beach house in the winter, subject not only to their mother's lies, but to all of the erratic and incomprehensible behavior that accompanies a life on the run. When the mother returned with the children, and was stabilized on medication, a joint custody arrangement was put into effect. Great effort was made to help the children readjust, especially the older boy as he was obviously more aware of and thus more traumatized by the dilemma he had been through. He had trouble in school right away and did not trust anybody. It took him 8 months to adjust to his new living arrangement. There are many variables to be considered here, the length of the absence, the health of relationships between the children and both of their parents, and more. Whatever the circumstances, it is essential that any program designed to reintegrate children into new and often completely foreign family structures be comprehensive. Counseling should again include all of the family members, including the custodial parent and new spouse if any, the parent who stole the child and their new spouse if any, as well as the child's siblings and step-siblings. This is a complex undertaking but dealing with the aftermath of a child stealing is, by nature, a complex process and one that needs to be scrutinized carefully from beginning to end to minimize additional trauma to the children involved. One must exercise caution when choosing a therapist who can deal effectively with these families and be forewarned that such therapists may be few and far between. In my experience, there are very few therapists who can work with these children. The therapist must not only have significant training and experience in working with high conflict families, but must also have sufficient information and experience with the local legal system. Many therapists steer away from high conflict families because it is so draining and often unrewarding both emotionally in terms of personal satisfaction and financially in terms of uncollectible fees. In my practice in Northern California, I have found only one other therapist who has dealt with child abduction cases. Nevertheless, with diligence, an appropriate therapist can be found, in fact, needs to be found, as settling on an underqualified therapist could add tension to an already tense situation and increase the chance of a "resnatching." Page 7 In dealing with this issue, the main principles to keep in mind are that the children's needs should always come first and that one needs to be flexible and creative in designing effective solutions. No one solution will work for every case and rigid guidelines deny the complexity of individual situations. An equitable arrangement that allows both parents equal access and input into their children's lives remains the ideal to strive for, but the reality of a situation must be precisely scrutinized and dealt with in a practical manner. This means trying, by every means possible, to end adversarial conflicts over custody and visitation, encouraging mediation and counseling and other nonadversarial methods to settle parental disputes and help eliminate hostility. It also means creating nonconventional solutions when conventional methods have failed. The bottom line is and always should be that the children's needs are first and foremost and need to be not only recognized but met. Page 8 BIBLIOGRAPHY Abrahms, Sally. Children in the Crossfire. New York: Atheneum, 1984. Agopian, Michael. Parental Child-Stealing. Lexington: D.C. Heath and Co., 1981. Back, Susan: What We Know and Don't Know About Child Stealing. Presented at Symposium: Research and Legal Issues in the Prevention of Child Snatching. Los Angeles: APA Annual Meeting, 27 August, 1981. Bolen, Rosemary and Kelly Joan, presenters. Psychological and Family Issues Affecting Parents and Children in Divorce. San Francisco: Symposium of The State Bar of California Family Law Section, Jan 1990. Herman, Stephen P. M.D.: Special Issues in Child Custody Evaluations, J. Am. Acad. Child Psychiatry, 1990, 29:969-974, 973; Schetky, D.H. & Haller, L.H. (1983), Parental kidnapping, J.Am Acad. Child Psychiatry, 22:279-285. Huntington, Dorothy, Ph.D: Parental Kidnapping: A New Form of Child Abuse. Included in the materials for the California District Attorneys Association Child Abduction Prosecution Seminar 21 Mar 1990, Irvine, California. Lindauer, Barbara. Research Issues and Methodology in the Study of Child Snatching. Presented at Symposium: Research and Legal Issues in the Prevention of Child Snatching. Los Angeles: APA Annual Meeting, 27 August, 1981. Ringler-White, Meredith. Child Snatching: A Preventive Educational Approach. Presented at Symposium: Research and Legal Issues in the Prevention of Child Snatching. Los Angeles: APA Annual Meeting, 27 August, 1981. Page 9