The Hague Convention and the Kramer v. Kramer style divorce

I was reading the New York Times and was linked to an article on the Economist which I found very intriguing, if not slightly complex. It had to do with the transnational divorces of the high net worth set, and the complications it poses where, among other things, issues such as child custody are concerned.
The table below appears in the Article from the Economist, Money in Misery, that basically details what it means to “split” in various jurisdictions around the world – well, specifically four G7 countries, England, Germany, France and America:

But. So. Custody. Kramer v. Kramer. How will one fare with this around the world according to the report? Well, certainly, with globalization creating more “mixed marriages” most countries have seen an increase in child abduction cases in spite of the fact that most industrialized nations (and developing countries too) have signed on to the Hague Convention – “a treaty which requires countries to send abducted children back to the jurisdiction where they have been living previously.” But don’t hold your breath that just because the country where your children have been taken is a “signatory” of the Hague, means you will get your children back or that the laws will be enforced.  You may already be absolutely petrified that your spouse will take your kids and you won’t be able to get them back. I did this post a few months back:, and you have cause to worry. I will once again quote liberally from the Economist article which says, “‘The annual State Department report to Congress on observance of the Hague Convention lists Honduras as ‘non-compliant’ and nine other countries (Brazil, Bulgaria, Chile, Ecuador, Germany, Greece, Mexico, Poland and Venezuela) as showing ‘patterns of non-compliance’. Anyone in a wobbly marriage with a citizen of these countries might bear that in mind before agreeing to let the children go on holiday there.'”
Whether you will get the kid depends on whether your divorce is filed in a “man friendly” jurisdiction; or a “mum friendly” jurisdiction. What that means is that the parent who does not get custody usually resorts to simply kidnapping the child.  According to the article, up to 68% of child abduction cases involve the mother who kidnaps the child.
So, what is the takeaway? Well, prior to entering a transnational marriage (certainly one to a male citizen of a Muslim country read this post: pull a Nadya Suleman. Have your kids without a biological father (read our Nadya posts here:
Then get married and remain living here in the U.S. I hate to say it but it seems you need to avoid having kids outside the United States with someone who is a citizen of another country. It can be very difficult, and is a huge risk as far as your custody rights and visitation goes. That’s why I wrote that post about Brad and Angelina, btw. I see issues and problems there if those two ever broke up. Check out these related posts:
And also, this one:
The article in the Economist which this post is based on might be worth reading. It is called Money in Misery. You can find it here:
OMG I was so attacked on the Economist!!! I made some comment about American women needing to be careful about who they have kids with in terms of custody, Hague, and abduction, whatever. And some guy, Kempe just absolutely annihilated me! I even got blamed for Madoff!!! I guess I deserved that because I did all these Madoff posts. It’s my karma, my penance. But I just want to say this: Kempe is wrong about me. I do not bash men on Divorce Saloon and I believe in BOTH parents having equal access to their children. I believe the children a sacrosanct and should be kept of out divorce. I have a dad and still need my dad so much even though I am a grown woman. I wish a dad for every single child in the world. So if you read Kempe’s bashing of me and all American lawyers, do not believe a word he says. Oh, and if I offended anyone by what I said in my comment on the Economist, I apologize. Cause, my big thing in my life right now? Is spreading love.