Thanks Cripple Creek.
There’s no ping list but I keep it updated and I post a link with the Michigan pings.
All the law requires is that a parent meet any ONE of the following ‘risk factors to be declared a ‘potential felon’.
Note that this determination is being made in CIVIL court, not in a CRIMINAL court.
See IN RE: SIGMAR for an application of this law by the Texas appeals court.
Note that the law makes much more sense when it is limited to it’s original intent of International abductions to Non-Hague treaty states. Such abductions end the custody game because there is no longer any recourse for the child’s return.
Note that this law is not needed within the State. The existing State custody laws adequately cover abductions within the State.
Note that this law is not needed between the States. The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Enforcement Act adequately covers abductions between the States.
Note that this law is not needed for abductions to Hague treaty abiding countries. The existing treaty is sufficient for such cases.
The only reason for this law, and the committees original scope before they twisted it, was to prevent abductions to non-Hague countries where the child cannot be returned home by any legal means.
Now, here are the risk factors. Many of them are inappropriate.
Sec. 7. (1) In determining whether there is a credible risk of abduction of a child, the court shall consider any evidence that the petitioner or respondent has done any of the following or that any of the following apply to the petitioner or respondent:
(a) Previously abducted or attempted to abduct the child.
(b) Threatened to abduct the child.
(c) Except for planning activities related to providing for
the safety of a party or the child while avoiding or attempting to avoid domestic violence, recently engaged in activities that may indicate a planned abduction, including any of the following:
(i) Abandoning employment.
(ii) Selling a primary residence.
(iii) Terminating a lease.
(iv) Closing bank or other financial management accounts, liquidating assets, hiding or destroying financial documents, or conducting any unusual financial activities.
(v) Applying for a passport or visa or obtaining travel
documents for the respondent, a family member, or the child.
(vi) Applying for or obtaining an enhanced driver license or enhanced official state personal identification card for the respondent, a family member, or the child.
(vii) Seeking to obtain the child’s birth certificate or school or medical records.
(d) Engaged in domestic violence, stalking, or child abuse or neglect.
(e) Refused to follow a child-custody determination.
(f) Lacks strong familial, financial, emotional, or cultural
ties to this state or the United States.
(g) Has strong familial, financial, emotional, or cultural
ties to another state or country.
(h) Is likely to take the child to a country to which any of
the following apply:
(i) The country is not a party to the Hague convention on the civil aspects of international child abduction and does not provide for the extradition of an abducting parent or for the return of an abducted child.
(ii) The country is a party to the Hague convention on the civil aspects of international child abduction but 1 or more of the following apply:
(A) The Hague convention on the civil aspects of international child abduction is not in force between the United States and the country.
(B) The country is noncompliant according to the most recent compliance report issued by the United States department of state.
(C) The country lacks legal mechanisms for immediately and effectively enforcing a return order under the Hague convention on the civil aspects of international child abduction.
(iii) The country poses a risk that the child’s physical or emotional health or safety would be endangered in the country because of specific circumstances relating to the child or because of human rights violations committed against children.
(iv) The country has laws or practices that would do 1 or more of the following:
(A) Enable the respondent, without due cause, to prevent the petitioner from contacting the child.
(B) Restrict the petitioner from freely traveling to or
exiting from the country because of the petitioner’s gender,
nationality, marital status, or religion.
(C) Restrict the child’s ability legally to leave the country after the child reaches the age of majority because of the child’s gender, nationality, or religion.
(v) The country is included by the United States department of state on a current list of state sponsors of terrorism.
(vi) The country does not have an official United States diplomatic presence in the country.
(vii) The country is engaged in active military action or war, including a civil war, to which the child may be exposed.
(i) Is undergoing a change in immigration or citizenship status that would adversely affect the respondent’s ability to remain in the United States legally.
(j) Has had an application for United States citizenship denied.
(k) Has forged or presented misleading or false evidence on government forms or supporting documents to obtain or attempt to obtain a passport, a visa, travel documents, a social security card, a driver license, or other government-issued identification card or has made a misrepresentation to the United States government.
(l) Has used multiple names to attempt to mislead or defraud.
(m) Has engaged in any other conduct the court considers relevant to the risk of abduction.