Japan says it will join child abduction treaty

signing it is great, but whether they actually enforce it or not is another issue.

A step in the right direction either way.

I agree. Good for Japan

Japanese critics of the Hague convention have previously argued that the country needs to protect women from potentially abusive foreign men.

Yeah, it is not possible that it is the foreign ment that need protecting from their abusive Japanese wives, is it? Whether Japan joins the Hague or not has little relevance as Japan has NO domestic laws as to joint custody and child support. If the woman 'says' he is abusive and doesn't him to see his kids that is what the ruling is. And, if she says he has to pay 1,000 bucks a month to support them (even without visitation) that is what the ruling is. When I got divorced my ex-wife said I had to pay 3,000 per hour per child of visitation and the court supported her. WTF!!! But, that was not the real kick in the balls. The biggest kick was when I found out that if she dies her parents get custody of my kids. Therefor, even if Japan does join the Hague, once the kids get back to Japan she only has to say "he is abusive" and the courts will do nothing about visitation for the father. It should also be no surprise that Japan will refuse to acknowledge any oc the 120 previous cases of child abduction cos they are not gonna acknowledge any future cases either.

It's a mess. I believe if Japan is to sign the treat it should apply to previous cases as well and reunite the parents that lost access to their children, but I suspect Japan signing it is just a sugar coating that masks a sour pastry underneath. Who will enforce the ruling of another country when a international arrest warrant is put on the offending parent ?? We'll see a bunch of parents that fly over here with the legal rights to their children still get arrested for kidnapping if they try to collect their loved ones. Courts here won't respect it, police won't respect it and families will stand behind their children and insist the so called "abusive" parent should be arrested for trying to collect his/her children.

They'll sign it but it won't change sh*^ and only give suffering parents false hope.

Japanese critics of the Hague convention have previously argued that the country needs to protect women from potentially abusive foreign men.

Rubbish! I know more guys that get frying pans over the head from and parental right abuse here from her! And that is just the guys that can't afford to pay them off... Don't even get me started on how the Japanese guys treat the ladies...

Good news, but.... signing it is one thing, enforcing it is another.

CrazedinJapan - "We'll see a bunch of parents that fly over here with the legal rights to their children still get arrested for kidnapping if they try to collect their loved ones. Courts here won't respect..."

This is one thing that I don't understand.  Why should Japanese courts respect the rulings of foreign courts? This is Japan, not America/UK/Mexico/Australia/Sri Lanka, etc....

If you - the general reader - think this should happen, then do you also agree that a Japanese with a Japanese court order could come to your country and expect to have that court order automatically enforced?

If not, why not? It's the same thing

I've heard this before. It's bureaucratic torture. Lets start 2013 by giving false hope. They know exactly where we log in to read our news.

Stop talking and do something. Why don't they just sign it and surprise us the next day.

No, sorry, folks. From my living room to yours, don't get your hopes up. Wouldn't be surprised if someone like Ishihara or even him throws a monkey wrench in there. Japan loves it's loop holes and they're sure to put one in there big enough for a semi-truck.

Sorry people, FPSRussia is pessimistic as hell. I've been there though. Walked and marched with them. Made big colorful placards and held it high Through the streets of Shibuya. The stories are extremely painful.

We'll see. Just wait. This song and dance is all too familiar. You all know how fast Prime Ministers change in Japan. Expect them to flip the script as soon as they change administrations. Then start all over again.

I've read many a story here on JT about some of you guys' experience in these matters with horror and amazement.

This is, at least, a step in the right direction. Lets hope it leads to legislation that levels the playing field for all.

Great that they've signed it but will the respect it? As stated, joint custody isn't done here so I doubt they'll go for it for foreigners.

And yes, protect wives from horrible abusive foreign husbands but ignore the huge problem with Japanese abusive husbands - or wives.

Japanese court gives the child rearing responsibility to the mother in almost all occasion in Japan, Japanese or not. When the child turns 18 he/she can choose.

Only took 33 years for Japan to get with the program.

This is one thing that I don't understand. Why should Japanese courts respect the rulings of foreign courts? This is Japan, not America/UK/Mexico/Australia/Sri Lanka, etc....

Because its an INTERNATIONAL treaty. And yes, it also works the other way if someone kidnaps a child to their home country. Although theyd probably feel less inclined to if the family laws werent so archaic here in the first place.

But I agree with the other posters - it remains to be seen whether this will even be enforced and meanwhile my heart aches for those already in the middle of this who will gain nothing from it whatsoever.

Miki, if the mother doesn't allow the father to keep in contact with the Chie there is no choice. Many divorces happen when the kids are young and can't keep in touch with their dads. Add in the possessiveness and jealousy, not to mention the poisoning if minds... Dads here are victims if divorce and to view it as simple as choosing later it wrong.

why does foreigner even wanna have kids with japanese women in japan? maybe they should read the law before jumping in bed. have to be prepared when all turns sour in future!!! and for all men who wanna make a baby there get a laywer and write up a contract before you do!!!

true

When the child turns 18 he/she can choose.

Yeah, they can choose after years of being estranged and brainwashed. It's pretty obvious how that will turn out, isn't it? I live 4klm away from my kids and have to fight to see them. Gawd help anybody that lives in another country.

maybe they should read the law before jumping in bed.

Yeah right, because the FIRST thing that occured to me before sleeping with my J boyfriend at the time was "must check out my legal rights".

why does foreigner even wanna have kids with japanese women in japan?

For the same reason that foreign women want to have kids with their Japanese husband - love. But sometimes good people make bad choices, and sometimes bad people hoodwink good people until its too late. Dont blame the victim, blame the person causing all the trouble - the parent that wont let a good parent see his (or her) children.

SushiSake3Jan. 19, 2013 - 08:33AM JST

This is one thing that I don't understand. Why should Japanese courts respect the rulings of foreign courts? This is Japan, not America/UK/Mexico/Australia/Sri Lanka, etc.... If you - the general reader - think this should happen, then do you also agree that a Japanese with a Japanese court order could come to your country and expect to have that court order automatically enforced?

Because the case was under the jurisdiction of that foreign court, either through domicile or place of signature in the case of contract law.

It's not a case of an American or European court coming to Japan and ruling on a custody case where the contesting parties and child have been resident in Japan. Under such circumstances the Japanese court and Japanese law would have exclusive jurisdiction on such a case.

Was that difficult to understand?

Nothing will come of Japan signing this treaty. Afterall Japan signed the treaty against racial discrimination in the 1990's and I still see and occasionally hear 'gaijin damme'.

For the same reason that foreign women want to have kids with their Japanese husband - love. But sometimes good people make bad choices, and sometimes bad people hoodwink good people until its too late.

Very true...

What would help a great deal is having the US military better educate the personnel on foreign countries, customs and laws. Before sending them to a foreign country and having restricter restrictions on the right to marry a foreign national while in the military. The divorce rate for the military is high for Americans, it is even much higher for military married to a foreign national. US tax payers eventually pay a part of the cost of the divorce in one form or another. From my own experience the US military encourages international marriages with literature, groups and staffed professionals for this main purpose. It should be the opposite way around.

Please stay on topic. This is not a U.S. military issue.

H'mmmmmmmmmmmm sounds good, BUT considering Japan is 90% appearance & 10% substance if that on most things, I will wait to see positive actions, reasonable, workable decisions before heaping any praise.

However I can do so very soon, but I aint betting on that pony.

@Disillusioned

Tragic. Ifeel your pain -- and for every one of the many non-Japanese spouses of a Japanese national in your tragic position, there are countless others on the verge of suffering your same plight, living in constant fear of having their children abducted to Japan and left with absolutely no recourse.

Any non-Japanese person thinking of having children with a Japanese national would be wise to hold off until Japan passes The Hague Convention, and until the nation is seen acting in good faith honoring its agreement while respecting the rights of children and the international community, even when that means Japanese judges ruling against a Japanese national in favor of a foreigner.

Sigh .... the so-called rightist government of Mr Abe, the guy nobody on this site ever gives any credit to, is finally willing to stand up and do something about a terrible miscarriage of justice and 80% of the posts are skeptical if not downright negative. How about giving a little credit where credit is due. Well done Mr Abe.

80% of the posts are skeptical if not downright negative

Welcome to JT

The thing I dont really understand, while I do feel sympathetic for the foreign dads, is why they think Japan is going to change for them, when they don't even let Japanese MEN see their own full Japanese kids?

In Japan, when a couple divorce only one of them gets custody and one of them gets guardianship (usually, as mentioned before, the mother gets both.) There are a hundred or so foreign fathers fighting to see their children, but what about the tens of thousands of Japanese men?

The thing is - these men just don't care. They are often very happy that when they divorce they dont have to pay child support, or see their children anymore.If enough Japanese guys were demanding joint custody, it would already exist by now. If these men DID care, and were regularly dragging their ex-wives to court to see their own kids, then this would be a whole lot easier for these foreign Dads too.

Lets face it - the majority of these men are married to their job. Their wife and family came in a very distant second. We can't really blame the wives for doing everything concerning child-rearing alone after divorce, as they did before?

I speak from experience - when I divorced I had a child with my ex husband, and from that day forward my ex has never seen the child, nor paid a drop of maintence. The last I heard from him was that as I had remarried, he therefore was resolved of all responsibility, and it was MY choice to do this. I admit, that if he came back tomorrow and asked to see my child I would refuse - it would probably mess up the child in the long run, and the kid has no idea who this person is. And "real" fathers would never abandon their child so easily.

Luckily my child has a fantastic stepfather who treats my child like his own. Most other kids are not so lucky.

@hidingout

How about giving a little credit where credit is due

Contrary to the skeptical tone in my previous comment, I agree with you. I am pleasantly surprised to see the Abe administration address this issue. This comes to me as a completely unexpected and positive sign, which bodes well for Japan's international community.

Hopefully this will at some point translate to positive change for families and Japan's international community and help soften hard feelings caused by Japan's currently xenophobic policies.

the so-called rightist government of Mr Abe, the guy nobody on this site ever gives any credit to, is finally willing to stand up and do something about a terrible miscarriage of justice

He is only echoing what was started by the previous government. However, you are right about one thing, they are a rightist government and their refusal to acknowledge any previous cases of abduction just proves it. The only reason the Abe gov (and previous gov) is 'contemplating' joining the Hague is to appease 'big brother' (the US). You can bet your genitals that Japan will include their own clauses and use any loopholes they can to defy any part of the Hague that does not conform to Japan-Inc's anti-foreigner views.

SushiSake: This is one thing that I don't understand. Why should Japanese courts respect the rulings of foreign courts? This is Japan, not America/UK/Mexico/Australia/Sri Lanka, etc.

Your comment suggests you either didn't read the article or have no comprehension in regards to the concept of an international convention. Perhaps considering educating yourself before you make such inane comments.

http://www.hcch.net/index_en.php?act=text.display&tid=21

kimuzukashiiiiiJAN. 19, 2013 - 11:59AM JST The thing I dont really understand, while I do feel sympathetic for the foreign dads, is why they think Japan is going to change for them, when they don't even let Japanese MEN see their own full Japanese kids?

I'm trying to understand your point but the bottom line is that the nationality of the parent should not matter, not in terms of their rights to have relationships with their children, nor in terms of your sympathy. It shouldn't be a matter of whether or not "even" Japanese parents don't get to see their own "full" Japanese kids. Japanese men and women who want to see their children - and have not been found guilty of abuse - should legally be allowed to, as should non-Japanese parents. The problem for a non-Japanese parent is that the courts nearly always side with the Japanese parent, even in cases of abduction. Were Japanese courts more fair in their custody decisions, signing the Hague Convention wouldn't be such an issue.

This is purely symbolic and lip service until they change domestic laws as well to deal with people getting access to their children if they want it. As it is, men (and it IS almost all men, since the mothers get custody in most cases) in Japan can't even see their own children, so I find it hard to believe foreign men will suddenly have access to children who have been spirited away by their mothers.

It's a start, but again, only symbolic, and they need to get on changing domestic laws to fit the convention immediately.

Perhaps consider

@ Sensato

Contrary to the skeptical tone in my previous comment, I agree with you. I am pleasantly surprised to see the Abe administration address this issue. This comes to me as a completely unexpected and positive sign, which bodes well for Japan's international community.

Thanks for saying so. That's my take as well.

this while good news, it will open a whole new can of worms, when foreign fathers start getting the Japanese courts to act in getting access to there kids in Japan due to it being a international agreement, youll also have Japanese fathers say well what about us!? we want access to our children as well. hopefully it will force change which as another said is 33years late

Great and fantastic news. Obviously, I know this will not be a comfort for the (largely) fathers who have had their children abducted to japan in the past.... and the domestic family court laws still need revision AND the Japanese government will find a way to weasel out of their ethical commitment... But hey! It is a start!

@mikihouse:

Japanese court gives the child rearing responsibility to the mother in almost all occasion in Japan, Japanese or not. When the child turns 18 he/she can choose.

Now that's just crazy & ridiculous. Not all women are good mothers to their children. All children need fathers in their lives as well, divorced or not.

Some laws like this in Japan definitely needs fixing.

The government may sign the treaty, but they will make no laws to enforce it. Thus, the whole process will be a deceptive charade.

It is time that Japan move forward!!!

kimuzukashiiiiiJan. 19, 2013 - 11:59AM JST

The thing I dont really understand, while I do feel sympathetic for the foreign dads, is why they think Japan is going to change for them, when they don't even let Japanese MEN see their own full Japanese kids?

Gender discrimination is one aspect of a previous UN Treaty they signed and failed to uphold, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (which while not covering the child abduction specifics, does lay the basis for the treaty). In fact, several cases where mothers here have replaced a child's nationality without the consent of the father are in direct violation of that treaty in addition to the new one.

http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/human/civil_ccpr2.pdf

You can see just how this signing will do absolutely nothing considering that a 30 year old treaty isn't even being upheld in the least bit. Sure we'll see more lawsuits in Japanese courts, but short of using "evacuation" techniques to recover children (using armed forces intervention after bringing it up at the UN), which won't happen, this is just more tatemae.

This isn't intended to be insulting to SushiSake3, but to address the kind of statement he/ she made here:

"This is one thing that I don't understand. Why should Japanese courts respect the rulings of foreign courts? This is Japan, not America/UK/Mexico/Australia/Sri Lanka, etc.... If you - the general reader - think this should happen, then do you also agree that a Japanese with a Japanese court order could come to your country and expect to have that court order automatically enforced?"

The Japanese government is lying to you in very significant ways about this; and the first and most important is that it wants you, the Japanese citizen, to see this as a treaty and issue about custody disputes. It is not! It is child abduction. The reason that the children have been taken to Japan (as in my wife's case) is not because they couldn't share custody in countries like the United States, etc. It's because a parent is under no obligation to put her/ his child first and share custody in Japan. If Machiko Terauchi, a Japanese child abductor, had litigated custody in the United States, she would have had 50% of that custody, without fail, shared with our son's father, me. But she knew she could get away with kidnapping him to Japan because she would have the power of the Japanese state - police, courts, etc. - allowing and protecting her from prosecution for this crime against her son and her husband. AND, she also knew that BECAUSE Japan has no joint custody and supports abduction, she would be in danger of not being able to travel back and forth to see her Japanese family with her son as she was until then accustomed to do. So the reason that abductions happen is BECAUSE no other country can, nor should they, trust a parent to take any child to Japan, because the danger of abduction and no return is too great. If Japan had joint custody and respected the mutual rights of children to BOTH of their parents, then there would be no problem with Japanese and non-Japanese sharing custody after divorce. But the Japanese people and their family courts violate fundamental human rights daily, and force non-Japanese courts that know about the issue to put restraining orders on Japanese parents living abroad, in order to protect the children from being abducted. The CULTURE and HABIT of abduction flows easily from the lack of child protection practiced by Japanese family courts, and all related government agencies. So, protect children from this, and the abductions can cease, and the children of Japanese divorce will have at least a CHANCE at recovering their lost mental health in a generation or two.

There is a reason I am still in Japan after so many years...

Sushisake, have a look at the recent case of an Australian woman who got her kids back from Italy, our Family Court deemed the father over there to have rightful custody and sent the kids back. It was quite a controversial case. I guess it depends on where the kids are being raised.

As someone else mentioned, it is an international treaty.

A good thing Japan finally got with the program..

All I got to say is .... It took Japan 33 years to get on board with the rest of the world...

It hasn't happened yet , meanwhile a lot of children have reached adulthood and there's more on the way to adulthood . The left behind parent who has had no contact or involvement in their education has nothing in common with them and in many cases have a language barrier keeping them further apart.

brianpragerJan. 19, 2013 - 04:29PM JST

I know the pain man

Ambrosia...

I'm trying to understand your point but the bottom line is that the nationality of the parent should not matter, not in terms of their rights to have relationships with their children, nor in terms of your sympathy. It shouldn't be a matter of whether or not "even" Japanese parents don't get to see their own "full" Japanese kids. Japanese men and women who want to see their children - and have not been found guilty of abuse - should legally be allowed to, as should non-Japanese parents. The problem for a non-Japanese parent is that the courts nearly always side with the Japanese parent, even in cases of abduction. Were Japanese courts more fair in their custody decisions, signing the Hague Convention wouldn't be such an issue.

I agree with everything you said. I agree that it SHOULD not matter, however, realistically it does.

My main point is, that not that many Japanese parents want to see their children after divorce. Or at least they don't want to fight to do it - they just say "Its sad, but Shoganai". Its hard to blame the judges and lawmakers for this, if there is no demand from the Japanese people to change the law then the law will never be changed.

Its a cultural thing - that after divorce its one child to one parent, and until this mindset changes amongst Japanese people and judges, there is little hope for the hague convention to affect people. Japanese people are fairly indifferent to signing it for the most part, because they believe its a GOOD thing that after divorce parents don't have joint custody.

Im not sure it is ever going to be possible to import the cultural "norms" (or co-parenting after divorce) of America, UK, Europe, or Australia into Japan. Changing the "law" is easy, but I think changing the cultural thinking is almost impossible... thats why I truly believe the whole international abduction issue is almost certainly doomed for failure.

I continue to believe that, even if the hague convention is signed, when those kids are actually in Japan, there is no way in heck they are getting back out. It is natural that Japan is protecting children of Japanese nationality. This is Japan we are talking about - one of the most Nationalistic and conservative countries in the world. Of course Japanese Judges are going to side with the Japanese parent, and sadly signing the hague convention is not going to change that.

Standard PR, complete BS, Japan releases the same statement every year for the past 6, they are not going to sign without more pressure. They dont even have local laws to enforce it so I cant see how they can sign.

Sushisake3 that's the whole point of signing the treaty ! So they do have to respect the rulings of another county. If a court orders legal custody of the child(ren) to one parent and the other skips to another country from where the ruling took place and the children were living ...then yes The Hague treat will for Japan Courts to honor said rulings.

It's a two way street . As there are two parents involved and its up to the professionals in the country to decide who has custody at the time of separation in the marriage or union.

kimuzukashiiiiiJan. 19, 2013 - 08:01PM JST

I continue to believe that, even if the hague convention is signed, when those kids are actually in Japan, there is no way in heck they are getting back out. It is natural that Japan is protecting children of Japanese nationality.

Most of those kids aren't legally Japanese though, all kids born in the USA are technically US citizens (similar laws apply elsewhere) who had their citizenship illegally stripped by the abductor with the Japanese government as an accomplice (for those with Japanese passports) despite several UN treaties Japan has signed. It's unnatural for them to abuse the human rights of half-Japanese children, much less call it protection.

This is nothing but a PR stunt by the new LDP-led J-government/Abe to look good to Obama since they can't deliver the two things that the U.S. cares most about -- the TPP and Futenma. And, Abe is likely to continue to push the islands issues with both China and SK, which isn't going to make the U.S. happy either. The odds of the Diet actually passing the required laws to give the treaty any teeth are slim and none, and slim just left town.

Hmm, the only word missing is "when". Anyone who has been in Japan for even a short time knows that "early concluson" can mean tomorrow, next year, or never.

I'll believe it when I see it.

Ordinary US citizens that marry Japanese or any other foreigner citizens made a decision to do so. When making a decision it should be an informed decision, knowing what the possibilities are. Do have made your decision and than want the government to step in and tell another country how their laws should be is just not right. America would not and does not accept anything from other countries in a court room without a ton of legal proof and verifying, I know this from my own experiences. And still reject it because they don't have access to the other countries records.

Americans have too much government int daily life now and now the people who made the decision to have an international marriage and children want the government to gain more control over personal choices made.

I don't care what country it is that an American marries a foreigner from. It was your choice to do this and you should have thought through the entire thing, good and bad, before saying I do. When it ends badly, than you want the other countries to conform to your standards and give you what your country does.

Maybe one day in the future all the world will be one big country with all the laws and everything the same, we will all belong to the World Nation of some sort. That day has not come and I hope it never does.

I wonder what would happen if a foreigner had kidnapped a Japanese national and returned home?

Something tells me it would be a very different story. I agree with previous statements that this is an issue over abduction not custody. Furthermore it isn't just Japan which favors the wife. In many abuse cases in the US which go to court. Juries tend to be sympathetic to the women in most these cases. It is very hard to prove abuse against the husband which does happen but is rare. If children are involved it is even more contentious. You have to prove that the wife is mentally unstable and therefore unfit as a parent.

There have been some fairly high profile cases where that decision was eventually left to the supreme court. So in contrast I have very little faith any treaty will do much if anything to change the current situation. To me it should go also without saying that we lift and support those we love in our lives and circumstances. Yet I find it so awkward and heartbreaking to see casual acquaintances ask the baby question of anyone and especially dear friends whose background I know. Why do we think it is our business at all?

One thing I find particularly troubling is that when you meet someone new. It's always easier to to ask him what he does for a living. We assume men work right, well usually. But it is so much harder when a women is asked the same question. That is in a broad enough way that we are not casting judgment or imposing a correct path by the wording of the question. What leads to these abductions I think we need to be asking ourselves the question on. In my case, with my wife we made sure both of us were crystal clear on what each other expected of one another.

It is also important how others such as family or friends have on their decisions. This might seem trivial but in Japanese society it can be the difference between you having a long lasting relationship or one that goes up in flames, kids or not. I guess the only real advise for anyone here is to know thy wife before having kids. Talk it over with them and how you plan on raising your kids and how much each expects one another to contribute. Well that's just my two cents.

for an advanced nation, they sure dawdled

Japan is already backtracking on this: http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/nn20130119b5.html

Also, as some posters have mentioned, it is largely meaningless as it doesn't address existing cases of abducted children AND Japan has not signaled any intention to update their family law system to actually protect children by providing for shared parenting and enforceable visitation.

Patrick .. we must never give up until all the kids are united with the left behind Parent.

Per the Japanese Consulate General in Chicago, the age that a child can decide which parent they want to live with is 21. 21!!! Returning the children has to be a joint effort with both countries as court orders do not cross borders. My 2 young boys have managed to get a few messages to me but I do not know their location. This is abuse in the most horrific way. This is the first glimmer of hope in years but it's almost too good to be true.

Disillusioned is right.

Japan and it's yes means no and no means yes loopholes system doesn't have our best interests in mind.

Doesn't care and will not protect the children and parents. The wife can say what ever she wants and they will protect her. Don't even think for one minute, they plan to help the foreigners with sincerity, it will be the same old Japanese smile and act like your doing the right thing. Then comes all the loopholes and delays in the system for all the fellow parents who have been denied rights and are in the waiting. It's mind boggling and completely absurd.

Tim Johnston japan