“Hannah left her violent partner in 2011 and nine years on, she and her 11-year-old daughter are homeless and destitute, relying on charities to survive. … Hannah and her daughter have been living in a women's refuge and then temporary housing in Sydney for nearly three years. … She is completely without options — she cannot claim government benefits or housing as she is on a temporary resident visa and does not meet the criteria for permanent residency. She is also unable to work because of illness.” Why is Hannah in this invidious situation? Hannah, like many other women around the world, is trapped in the country of her abuser by the 1980 Hague Convention on International Child Abduction.
The 1980 Hague Convention, which has been implemented by over 100 countries including the UK, enables the speedy return to the state of habitual residence of children under 16 who have been taken to another contracting state. It was intended to deal with non-resident parents (primarily fathers) who abduct their children across international borders without the other parent’s permission. In that regard, the Convention is highly effective. Now, however, around 75% of the parents who are brought before the courts are mothers with primary care of their children, many of whom are fleeing domestic abuse. There are very limited options for mothers to oppose orders for the return of their children and in most cases the courts decide that the child must return. This has a significant impact in the UK, because the courts in England and Wales receive the second highest number of return applications. Mothers are usually unaware of the existence of the Hague Convention until they find themselves facing a return application, and the speedy nature of the proceedings means that they have no time to prepare a defence or find representation. Mothers can also suffer inequality of arms – in many contracting states including England and Wales, legal aid is automatically available for left behind parents but not for ‘abducting’ parents.
Mothers like Hannah fleeing domestic abuse across borders are left in the invidious position of having to choose whether to return with their children or send their children back on their own. Most mothers return, and face continued or worse abuse, destitution, homelessness, isolation or even criminal proceedings. As Australian researcher, Gina Hope Masterton, explains: ‘Being Hagued invariably puts the mother back in the father’s country—frequently without familial, social, financial or legal support—providing a perfect context for continued violence.’
Hague Mothers is a FiliA legacy project that aims to end the injustices which arise from the implementation of the 1980 Hague Convention by: raising awareness of the Convention itself and of its potential impact on mothers fleeing domestic abuse; ensuring that the significance of domestic abuse is fully addressed in the implementation of the Convention; supporting research into the implementation and impact of the Convention; and, ultimately, campaigning for legislative and policy change at treaty and national level. The initial focus of the project is on the UK, USA, Australia and New Zealand.
Dr Adrienne Barnett, Reader in Law at Brunel Law School, leads the Hague Mothers’ UK Strategy Group. Hague Mothers and FiLiA are absolutely delighted that Brunel’s Institute of Communities and Society and Global Lives Research Centre, of which Dr Barnett is a member, endorses its important work.
‘Hague Mothers looks forward to a productive relationship with the Institute of Communities and Society and Global Lives Research Centre. We are delighted that Brunel University, with its eminent reputation for research excellence, recognises and endorses our international campaign.’
Ruth Dineen, Hague Mothers coordinator.