Court Opinion

ID: 9601451
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 01:43:55.072076+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:01:57.509624
License: Public Domain

NYGAARD, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
I join Judge Fisher’s excellent opinion for the court in its totality and write separately in order to shine a brief spotlight on the alarming absence of alternative dispute resolution practices under the Hague Convention. The concerns we have for children in domestic custody disputes are no different for children caught-up in litigation under the Hague Convention. Tragically, the difficulties parents and the courts face in protecting children from instability and unpredictability are magnified for children involved in Hague Convention litigation because of the cross-border nature of their parents’ dispute.
Globalization has lead to a dramatic increase in litigation of international family disputes. See Revised Brussels Regula*281tion II, Council of the European Union, http://europa.eu.inVeur-lex/pri/en/oj/daV 2003/1 — 338/1—33820031223en00010029.pdf; Nigel Lowe et al., A Statistical Analysis of Applications Made in 1999 Under the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction Preliminary Document No. 8 of March 2001 (revised version, Nov. 2001), Permanent Bureau of the Hague Conference, http://hcch.e-vision.nl/upload/ abd2001pd3e.pdf. I submit that such an increase calls for creating better mechanisms for settling international custody disputes. Of course, discussion of the importance of ADR in international custody dispute litigation is beyond the scope of this concurring opinion. I commend the following article to interested parties in the hope that at some point efforts will be undertaken to alleviate the tragic positions of children who, like Raeann Tsui, are trapped in long and destructive international custody battles: Radoslaw Pawlow-ski, Note, Alternative Dispute Resolution For Hague Convention Child Custody Disputes, 45 Fam. Ct. Rev. 302 (2007).