Although more "technical" than usual, I enjoyed our discussion today. As always, here are some links to some materials that you might find useful. To begin with, here is the English version of Thomson v. Thomson (the paragraphs I read in class are number 66 and 67). Here you can find D.S. v. V.W., the other Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction case decided by the Supreme Court of Canada I mentioned in class.In terms of the application of the Hague Convention in Canada, here is a document, titled "International Child Abduction: A Manual for Parents", prepared by Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, that contains some useful information about the way the Convention works in practice, as well as of some of the issues involved in using the criminal justice system as a means to secure the return of abducted children.
Our topic for next week is "The Intersection between Religion and the Dissolution of Marriage". The readings can be accessed here. See you then!
Hello Class! This is my first ever blog posting, so I hope I get it right! Please forgive me if I do not follow correct protocol as I am not a blogger.
ReplyDeleteFirst, my sincere apologies for missing 2 classes in a row.
Second, I wanted to comment on the International Child Abduction class. Generally, I found the articles and case very interesting. Before I can accurately comment, I must say that I only had access to the French version of the Thomson case as I downloaded it prior to my leaving, and as I’m playing catch-up, I haven’t had the opportunity to go back and read it. I did however, read both articles and the Ibrahim case.
In terms of my exposure to international abduction, this was more of a learning experience for me, as I have not looked extensively at the topic prior to this course. I do, however, support the theory of ‘Best Interest of the Child’ and its embodiment in the Internationl Convention. I do think, however, the ‘best interest of the child’ is often an incredibly difficult concept to apply, especially in terms of divorce and perhaps is exacerbated by the international component of uprooting. I believe the best interest of the child would be served by growing up in a two-parent happy household, though we all know this is often an impossibility. That being said, perhaps each child in any custody case ought to have a lawyer representing strictly the child’s interest, after an examination/interview with an expert. Ontario’s Office of the Children’s Lawyer would be such an example, but less restrictions on which children qualify and instead a more open concept where all children are provided with a representative of their interests. It seems to me in almost every case parents forget the best interest of their children when engaged in both divorce and custody battles and focus only on their own needs and desires.
I do, however, have some serious questions regarding the immediate return orders under the convention which may have been addressed in class as I was not there. My concern is the return of children to a country where a custody order has been granted to one parent despite the best interest of the child based on religious beliefs, custom or for other reasons. That is to say, many countries enact legislation (ie: best interest of the child) but in such a country, best interest of a child might simply mean being raised by the father because under religious tenets this is what should be done for a child, regardless of whether or not the father is the better parent.
In short, these are my comments and concerns and again, I’m very sorry for having missed the class – I’m sure it was an excellent and informative discussion I have missed.
Emiliee Whetung
Thanks for this Emiliee, you raise many interesting points. We actually had a nice discussion about the place of BIC considerations with respect to the Hague Convention on International Abduction. While the defenses contained in the Convention can be argued to open the way for BIC considerations, the main objective of the Convention seems to be securing the prompt return of the abducted child to his/her place of habitual residence (without engaging in a BIC analysis). After this happens, the courts in the child's country of habitual residence would be the ones to decide on any disputes between the parents regarding custody, and that is where BIC considerations would come into play.
ReplyDeleteYour point about the interplay between BIC and culture is a very interesting one, and will probably be discussed by Nigel in his presentation.