Tag: International Divorce

International Custody

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

The European Union is reporting that increasing rates of international divorces – and cross-border child abductions – have become a real problem in international custody cases. The same is true in the United States. There are some treaties to deal with international custody cases everyone should know about.

International Custody

Go Dutch

The emphasis within the EU is that laws on conflict resolution need to be improved. The ministers in the EU are proposing that EU law should further emphasize protecting the rights of the child, and that decisions on parental child abduction cases must be made by practicing and experienced family judges.

The EU proposes to strengthen the rights of children throughout the dispute resolution procedure between divorcing couples.

If a child is abducted to another EU country by one of their parents, the EU proposes that the matter must be dealt with by practicing and experienced family judges, to ensure the best interests of the child are prioritized.

Hague Child Abductions

I have written – and will be speaking in January – on international custody and child abduction cases under The Hague Convention. The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction is supposed to provide remedies for a “left-behind” parent, like Mr. Cook, to obtain the wrongfully removed or retained children to the country of their habitual residence.

When a child under 16 who was habitually residing in one signatory country is wrongfully removed to, or retained in, another signatory country, The Hague Convention provides that the other country: “order the return of the child forthwith” and “shall not decide on the merits of rights of custody.”

There are defenses though. For example, the court considered whether there is a grave risk that the child’s return would expose them to physical or psychological harm or otherwise place the child in an intolerable situation.

Dutch Oven

According to EU policy makers, the child is the weakest link in disputes between parents during international custody cases, and therefore needs all the protection the EU can give. Notably, the hearing of the child is a key issue which merits detailed provisions.

Ministers in the EU also want to improve information-sharing and cooperation between the member states for international custody and divorce cases. The Commission estimates that there are 16 million international families in the EU and sets the number of international divorces in the EU at around 140,000 per year. There are around 1,800 parental child abductions within the EU every year.

The Europa article is here.

 

Divorce Denied

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

Can you lose a divorce case? An English woman who wants to divorce her husband of 40 years actually lost! The British Supreme Court ruled she must stay married because her husband refuses to divorce. How does the recent British case compare with a Florida divorce?

Divorce Denied

Stuck

Five judges at Britain’s highest court unanimously upheld rulings by a family court and the court of appeal that Tini Owens, 68, cannot divorce, but must stay married to Hugh Owens, 80, despite her complaint that the marriage was loveless and had broken down.

“The appeal of Mrs. Owens must be dismissed. She must remain married to Mr. Owens for the time being,” the supreme court judge Lord Wilson said in the majority ruling. “Parliament may wish to consider whether to replace a law which denies to Mrs. Owens any present entitlement to a divorce in the above circumstances.”

Tini’s case has thrust Britain’s lack of provision for no-fault divorce into the spotlight. Even spouses mutually seeking to end a marriage must, unless they have been living apart, assign blame and make often damaging allegations that lawyers say inflame potentially amicable proceedings.

Florida No-Fault

I’ve written about no-fault divorce before. Historically in Florida, in order to obtain a divorce, one had to prove the existence of legal grounds such as adultery. This often-required additional expenses on behalf of the aggrieved party, only serving to make the divorce process more expensive and cumbersome than it already was.

In 1971, Florida passed its “no-fault” divorce law. The rationale behind no-fault laws was that requiring someone to prove legal grounds to dissolve the marriage was not serving any useful purpose.

In the years leading up to the enactment of “no-fault” divorce, courts often granted divorces on bases that were easier to prove, the most common being “mental cruelty.”

Over time, the “no-fault” movement expanded to other states, although interestingly it only reached the typically progressive state of New York in 2010.

Stiff Upper Lip

Back in Britain, Tini and Hugh Owens married in 1978. Tini first consulted solicitors about a divorce in 2012, but despite her having an affair the couple continued to live together until February 2015.

Tini asked for divorce because her husband prioritized work over home life, his lack love and affection, his moodiness, and they had grown apart. Her husband denied the allegations about his behavior, and still hoped his wife would change her mind and return to live with him.

The trial judge dismissed her divorce, ruling that her case was flimsy and exaggerated. The judge said that while Hugh was “somewhat old-school”, Tini was more sensitive than most wives.

She appealed, where it was again dismissed. The three appeal court judges said she had failed to establish, in the legal sense, that her marriage had irretrievably broken down, despite one saying she had reached her conclusion with “no enthusiasm whatsoever”.

The supreme court’s judgment on Wednesday morning was her last hope. They noted:

Tini would be able to divorce in 2020, when the couple will have been separated for five years and she will be eligible for a divorce without consent or evidence of fault.

In the U.K., keeping a stiff upper lip is an attribute of the British who stay resolute and unemotional in the face of adversity. Tini will just have to stick it out until 2020.

The Guardian article is here.

 

International Divorce and Custody

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, international marriages are on the rise. And that means an increase in relationships crossing borders. This has also created a glut of international divorce and custody disputes.

international divorce and custody

If you think that a parent or your partner could take your child out of the state or country, there are a few treaties, laws and statues you should be aware of to help you resolve an international divorce and custody battle in your favor.

International Cases

The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, also known as the Hague Convention, is an international treaty to help promptly return children wrongfully abducted.

The Hague Convention only applies between countries that have signed the Convention, and its reach is limited to children ages 16 and under.

The Convention’s central operating feature is the return remedy. When a child under the age of 16 has been wrongfully retained, the country to which the child has been brought must order the return of the child unless certain exceptions apply.

The Hague Convention also deters abductions. It does that by eliminating the primary motivation for abducting. Since the goal of the taking parent is to get rights of custody from another country, when a child is wrongfully removed, the other country must order the return of the child forthwith.

Foreign Courts

I’ve written on international divorce and custody before, especially as they relate to child custody issues and The Hague Convention on abduction.

In addition to the Hague Convention, you’ll need to know if there are cultural or religious beliefs that could impact your case. For example, some countries have a preference for granting sole physical custody mothers, and others to fathers.

Interstate Cases

International custody disputes are difficult to navigate, but so are interstate divorce and custody cases: meaning cases between parents living in two different U.S. states.

Generally, when two parents reside in Florida, Florida custody laws will apply. However, when one of the parents and the child move across state lines, you have an interstate custody problem.

To help with conflicts between different laws in different American states, the Uniform Law Commission is tasked with drafting laws on various subjects that attempt to bring uniformity across American state lines.

With respect to family law, different American states had adopted different approaches to issues related to interstate custody, visitation, and time-sharing. The results were that different states had conflicting resolutions to the same problems.

To seek harmony in this area, the Uniform Law Commission promulgated the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (the UCCJEA), which Florida and almost all U.S. states passed into law.

The most fundamental aspect of the UCCJEA is the approach to the jurisdiction needed to start a case. In part, the UCCJEA requires a court have some jurisdiction vis-a-vis the child. That jurisdiction is based on where the child is, and the significant connections the child has with the forum state, let’s say Florida for this example. The ultimate determining factor in a Florida case then, is what is the “home state” of the child.

The Census fact sheet on international marriage is here.

 

Can You Pass the Divorce Test?

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

As if fighting with your spouse wasn’t stressful enough, in China authorities require that you pass a quiz to divorce. Here’s the rub: the better you do on the test, the less likely the divorce will be approved.

Divorce Quizzes

According to the New York Times, the Chinese Divorce Test, which has been issued in at least two provinces since last year, follow the format of a typical three-part school exam: fill-in-the-blank, short answer, and an essay.

Questions include the mundane — “When is your anniversary?” — and the philosophical: “Have you fulfilled your responsibility to your family?”

The quizzes — 15 questions, scored on a scale of 100 points — were developed as a way to prevent “impulse divorces”.

Local news outlets reported that the authorities considered a score of 60 points or higher to mean “room for recovery,” and those couples were encouraged to work on their marriages.

Florida No Fault Divorce

Florida has made it much easier to divorce, which is a subject I’ve written about before. For example, we have abolished fault as grounds for filing a divorce. The only grounds you need to file for divorce in Florida is to prove your marriage is “irretrievably broken.”

No fault divorce laws exist in all 50 states to make it possible for one party to get a divorce without proving any bad behavior took place, and without getting the permission of the other spouse.

Before the no-fault divorce era in the United States, people who wanted to get divorce either had to reach agreement in advance with the other spouse that the marriage was over or prove wrongdoing.

No-fault laws are the result of trying to change the way divorces played out in court. No fault laws have reduced the number of feuding couples who felt the need to resort to distorted facts, lies, and the need to focus the trial on who did what to whom.

China is different. China is going through growing pains and dealing with modern problems like separation and divorce. The Chinese Divorce Test is a novel approach to dealing with rising divorce rates.

Chinese Water Torture?

According to the Times:

Through the guidance of the questions, couples can reminisce on the moments of their relationship and reflect on their familial roles and responsibilities. Nearly two million Chinese couples divorced in the first half of 2017, an 11 percent increase from the year before, according to state news media. About 3 percent of all married couples sought a divorce last year, up from fewer than 1 percent in 2002.

The quizzes were meant only to be a starting point, not the deciding factor in whether a couple can split up. But at least one couple’s high score resulted in the authorities’ preventing their divorce in another province last year.

A court in Yibin, a city in Sichuan Province, refused to grant the couple a divorce in September after citing their stellar test scores, according to local news outlets.

More than 70 percent of divorces filed in China last year were initiated by women, The South China Morning Post reported, citing the Supreme People’s Court. In most filings, incompatibility was given as the major reason; 15 percent cited domestic violence.

However, a smaller number of divorces appear to be shams resulting from a quirk in Chinese real estate law. Some cities limit the number of properties a married couple can own. By legally divorcing, a couple can buy more real estate in some of the world’s most expensive cities.

Experts said the state’s focus on preventing divorce stems from a Confucian belief that a stable society is made up of complete families. Some Chinese citizens criticize the quizzes for treating people like children.

So, if you remember your wedding anniversary you can’t divorce? Divorce isn’t a case of amnesia.

The New York Times article is here.

 

Danish Divorce

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

As one of the most wired countries in the world, Denmark offers hospital records, tax returns, and divorces online. But the skyrocketing divorce rate has caused the country to limit the ease of divorce. What are drawbacks to a quick, online divorce?

Quickie Divorces

The New York Times reports that a Danish divorce can be obtained in less than a week with only a short online form and a $60 fee. But the government has decided that breaking up should be a little a harder to do.

Under new rules set to go into effect next year, couples who have children and who decide to dissolve their marriage will be required to observe a three-month “reflection period” before the divorce takes effect, during which they will be offered free counseling.

The idea is to provide protection for children, who will also receive counseling during the waiting period. (The quick divorce is still available for childless couples and in cases of abuse.)

Florida Divorce

I’ve written frequently about divorce issues, especially the differences between international and Florida divorces.  Florida, like Denmark, has its own restrictions on divorcing, even if not everything is available online.

For instance, you have to be a resident of the state of Florida for at least six months before filing. Additionally, you must file a Petition for Dissolution of Marriage with the circuit court and the Respondent files an Answer and/or counter petition.

A final judgment ending the marriage may not be entered until at least 20 days after the date the Petition was filed, unless the court finds that an injustice would result from this delay.

This is Your Danish Divorce

The current Danish laws give divorcing parents only a few days to decide on arrangements for their children online, increasing the potential for conflict. Denmark wants to give parents space and not make decisions right away.

The changes are a rare step back in a country that has moved aggressively to move official interactions online.

More than 90% of Danes between 16 and 89 can use a government-issued digital ID to gain access to personal records or to communicate with the authorities.

The system is often efficient: 1.3 million people logged on to see their annual tax return within 24 hours of release this month. But the push to digitalize Denmark may have gone too far and doesn’t work in divorce and death.

Digital death certificates, required in Denmark since 2007, lead to the immediate cancellation of passports, driver’s licenses and digital IDs to prevent fraud.

Kirsten Margrethe Kristensen was mistakenly declared dead by a doctor this month. “Making mistakes is human,” she told DR, the national broadcaster. “It’s more that one, just by a click, is out of the system and gone.”

The quick divorce presents a similar problem, some officials said — particularly when children are involved.

Soren Sander, a psychologist who has studied the effects of divorce, said that children and adults alike suffer psychologically and physically from a breakup:

“There are indications that with intervention their well-being increases.”

That’s not to say that divorces in Denmark are leaving the internet behind: While some counseling during the three-month reflection period takes place face to face, a mandatory course on the typical challenges of a divorce is available online and through an app.

The New York Times article is here.

 

Sweden’s High Divorce Rate

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

In a recent study of women in Sweden, 28 percent of people born to Swedish parents had divorced. But the divorce rate was much higher for immigrant women, where almost 60 percent had divorced in Sweden. The country may explain a lot about international divorce rates.

Stockholm Syndrome?

The divorce rates for immigrants in Sweden seem especially high when compared to the divorce rates in their home countries.

That the divorce rates are higher in Sweden may not be solely due to women’s higher workforce participation. In many patriarchal countries, like Iran, divorce is less accepted, and it can be legally more difficult to get divorced than in Sweden.

Rules about children can differ too. I’ve written on international divorces, especially as they relate to child custody issues and The Hague Convention on abduction.

International Divorces

I’ve written frequently about international divorce issues, especially international child abductions. The Hague Abduction Convention is a multilateral treaty developed by The Hague Conference on Private International Law to provide for the prompt return of a child internationally abducted by a parent from one-member country to another.

Sweden is a signatory to The Hague Convention, but many of the countries where Sweden’s immigrant population are from, are not signatories at all. This can be a problem if child abduction is an issue.

There are some essential elements to every Hague Convention case:

  • The country must be a Hague signatory country;
  • The child must be under the age of 16 years of age;
  • The wrongful removal must be a violation of the left behind parent’s “rights of custody;”
  • The left behind parent’s rights of custody “were actually being exercised or would have been exercised but for the removal.”

So, if a child under the age of sixteen has been wrongfully removed, the child must be promptly returned to the child’s country of habitual residence, unless certain exceptions apply.

The catch, of course, is that a child must be taken from a signatory country to another signatory country, and that is where understanding The Hague Convention comes in.

There is also a problem with hiding assets overseas. The problem of discovery of hidden wealth is even bigger in an international divorce because multiple countries, and multiple rules on discovery, can be involved.

Welcome to Sweden

Often, divorce is seen as a negative development. When families split up, children can find it difficult to adjust emotionally. But, not always for immigrant women in Sweden.

In a country like Sweden, the dynamics between the men and women change. Men who dominated their families because they had the economic power in their home countries lose that power when they integrate into a more gender-equal country like Sweden.

Women from patriarchal societies gain power when they integrate into a country like Sweden. There are more economic opportunities for them, and resources for women’s rights are more developed.

The welfare system is also extensive in Sweden, meaning that even women of low socioeconomic status can leave their husbands with no jobs and receive low-cost health care, education, job training, and a stipend from the government.

For women in Sweden who have migrated from more patriarchal countries, divorce may be an opportunity.

The Atlantic article is here.

 

Does Size Matter in Divorce?

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

A Saudi Arabian woman has proven that height is important in matters of the heart after she filed to divorce her husband, citing his short height. The Saudi divorce filing raises the question of fault in divorce, and of course, does size matter?

According to Gulf News, the woman told the endowment department in Al Qatif that she wanted to be separated from her husband of seven months, saying:

she could no longer withstand the mockery and shocked looks of her friends because he was too short for her.

She added that the shocking attitudes by strangers in public when they remarked how she was towering over her husband made her feel painfully uneasy and distressingly uncomfortable, Saudi daily Okaz reported.

Florida No Fault Divorce

The Saudi Arabian case is interesting for Floridians interested in filing for divorce because granting divorces only in limited circumstances, by proving fault like being to short for instance, has become very foreign to Floridians.

I recently returned from speaking about international divorces at the prestigious, Florida Bar/AAML Certification Review Course in Orlando. I’ve also written about no-fault and fault standard divorces around the world.

Florida is a no-fault state. Florida abolished fault as grounds for filing a divorce. The only ground you need to file for divorce in Florida is to prove your marriage is “irretrievably broken.”

Many people argue that the introduction of no fault divorce is the reason the United States has a high divorce rate. In fact, many people think so, and want to return to the old “fault” system to promote families.

Saudi Divorces

The number of divorce cases in Saudi Arabia has exponentially increased in recent years. According to Saudi Open Data, 35,000 divorce cases were reported in 2015, and 40,000 in 2016.

Experts believe that divorce rates have gone up by around 50 per cent this year from last year. According to the General Authority of Statistics, currently one in five marriages end in divorce.

The recent divorce about being too short though, has got to be among the most peculiar the Saudis have received. Most Social media users condemned the move by the young woman, blaming her for accepting to marry him when he proposed.

The few who supported her said she was right to ask for the separation, arguing that her uneasiness was not a matter of days that could be overcome with patience, but of a lifetime.

Does Size Really Matter?

According to a study by New York University published last year, researchers found that height might affect “more than just a man’s suit size.”

The study concluded that:

“short men married later in life than average or tall men, but were 32 per cent less likely to divorce. They were also more likely to marry less educated and younger women. Once married, they did less of the housework and earned a much higher income than their spouse.”

According to the findings, tall men married sooner in life, but were more at risk for divorce later on, as shorter men had more stable marriages. Tall men were also more likely to marry women closer to their age, and who were better-educated.

The researchers argued that “from the perspective of relationship exchange models, this indicates that the tallest men exchange their attractive attribute (height) for better-educated spouses, while short men are unable to do so.”

The Gulf News article is here.

 

Upcoming Speaking Engagement

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

I will be speaking at the Florida Bar Family Law Section and AAML’s, Marital & Family Law Review Course in Orlando on Friday, January 26th. I will be discussing interstate child custody, interstate family support, and The Hague Convention on international child abductions.

Interstate Custody

Parents move from state to state for various reasons. It is a matter I have often written about . Whether children are moved by parents wrongfully or not, moving creates interstate custody and child support and spousal support problems. The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, and The Hague Convention on Child Abduction, can work together in those cases.

International Child Abductions

You should become familiar with the Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, also known as The Hague Convention. This international treaty exists to protect children from international abductions by requiring the prompt return to their habitual residence.

The Hague Convention applies only in jurisdictions that have signed the convention, and its reach is limited to children ages 16 and under. Essentially, The Hague Convention helps families more quickly revert back to the “status quo” child custody arrangement before an unlawful child abduction.

If your ex has taken your children out of the country against your will, the Hague Convention can help you get them back.

Interstate Family Support

The Uniform Interstate Family Support Act is one of the uniform acts drafted by the Uniform Law Commission. First developed in 1992, the UIFSA resolves interstate jurisdictional disputes about which states can properly establish and modify child support and spousal support orders.

The UIFSA also controls the issue of enforcement of family support obligations within the United States.

In 1996, Congress passed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, which required all U.S. states adopt UIFSA, or face loss of federal funding for child support enforcement.

Every U.S. state has adopted some version of UIFSA to resolve interstate disputes about support.

Certification Review

It is a privilege to be asked to address interstate custody and international child abductions at the annual Family Law Board Certification Seminar again.

The annual seminar is the largest, and most prestigious advanced family law course in the state. Last year’s audience included over 1,600 attorneys and judges from around the state.

The review course is co-presented by the Family Law Section of The Florida Bar, and the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers.

More information is available here.

 

Hague Convention in Japan

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

James Cook wants his 4 kids back. His estranged wife, Hiromi Arimitsu, says they want to stay with her in Japan, and they’ve been fighting in Japanese courts for almost three years. Isn’t The Hague Convention supposed to make international custody cases easier?

Japanese Cooks

If child custody battles are messy and expensive when the parents live in the same city, they’re much worse when they live in different countries, and are fighting over where the children should live.

For three years of their lives, the Cook kids have not had their dad. Kids need their dad, they need both their parents. I can’t describe to you the hell that this has been.

Cook, who studied Japanese in college, and Arimitsu, a Japanese woman who attended a university in Minnesota, lived in the U.S. for almost the whole time they had been together.

Three years ago, Cook agreed that Arimitsu could take their 4 children to Japan for the summer – with a notarized agreement that she would bring them back. When that ended, they agreed that Arimitsu and the kids stay a little longer, while Cook looked for work.

By the end of the year, Cook realized his family wasn’t coming back. The problem: court officers failed to enforce the order, saying the children refused to be returned, and the Osaka High Court nullified the enforcement order under the grave risk of harm defense.

Hague Child Abductions

I have written – and will be speaking later this month – on international custody and child abduction cases under The Hague Convention.

The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction is supposed to provide remedies for a “left-behind” parent, like Mr. Cook, to obtain the wrongfully removed or retained children to the country of their habitual residence.

When a child under 16 who was habitually residing in one signatory country is wrongfully removed to, or retained in, another signatory country, The Hague Convention provides that the other country: “order the return of the child forthwith” and “shall not decide on the merits of rights of custody.”

There are defenses though. For example, in the Cook case, the court considered whether there is a grave risk that the children’s return would expose them to physical or psychological harm or otherwise place the child in an intolerable situation.

Outside Japan, the grave risk exception is very narrowly drawn because the exception can swallow the rule, and also, there is a belief that courts in the left behind country can protect children – just as easily as Japan can.

Big in Japan

Many suspect Japan is not really compliant with The Hague. Japan signed the Convention in 2013 – and only because of international pressure.

Under their law, Japan expanded the grave risk exception by making it a mandatory defense. Japan also requires Japanese courts to consider more things when the defense is asserted, such as whether there is “a risk”, as opposed to a grave risk.

Japanese courts also can consider if it’s difficult for parents to care for a child – a factor outside the scope of the Convention – which allows Japanese parents to complain about the challenges of being away from home.

The U.S. has determined that Japan was one of just two “Convention Countries That Have Failed to Comply with One or More of Their Obligations under The Hague Abduction Convention.”

Enforcement is a big problem in Japan. Japan cannot enforce their orders. The law Japan passed to implement The Hague forbids the use of force, and says children must be retrieved from the premises of the parent who has taken them.

According to research, about 3 million children in Japan have lost access to one parent after divorce in the past 20 years – about 150,000 a year.

For now, that leaves James Cook, who has found work with a medical device company, sitting in Minnesota, having no contact with his kids.

The Standard-Examiner article is here.

 

Speaking Engagement

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

For readers who may be interested, I will be speaking at the prestigious Marital & Family Law Review Course in Orlando on Friday, January 26, 2018. I will be addressing the issues of interstate child custody, interstate support, and international child abductions under The Hague Convention.

The Review Course

The 2018 Marital & Family Law Review Course is considered the premier advanced, continuing education opportunity for marital and family law attorneys and judicial officers in Florida.

It is a privilege to be asked to address interstate custody and international child abductions at the annual Family Law Board Certification Seminar again. The seminar is the largest, and most prestigious advanced family law course in the state. Last year’s audience included 1,600+ attorneys and judges.

The review course is co-presented by the Family Law Section of The Florida Bar, and The American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers.

Interstate Custody

I’ve written about interstate and international custody cases before. Generally, when two parents reside in Florida, Florida custody laws will apply. However, when one of the parents and the child move across state lines, you have an interstate custody problem.

But, which law applies? Historically, family law is a matter of state rather than federal law. So, you would look to the state law of Florida, for example, in deciding an interstate case; not Federal law.

For various reasons, people travel more. As a result, family law has to take on an interstate, and international component. Accordingly, the conflicts between states can be amplified.

To help with confusion between different laws in different American states, the Uniform Law Commission is tasked with drafting laws on various subjects that attempt to bring uniformity across American state lines.

With respect to family law, different American states had adopted different approaches to issues related to interstate custody, visitation, and time-sharing. The results were that different states had conflicting resolutions to the same problems.

To seek harmony in the area of interstate custody, the Uniform Law Commission promulgated the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (the UCCJEA), which Florida and almost all U.S. states passed into law.

The UCCJEA: Initial Actions

The most fundamental aspect of interstate custody under the UCCJEA is the approach to the jurisdiction needed to start a case. In part, the UCCJEA requires a court have some jurisdiction vis-a-vis the child.

That jurisdiction is based on where the child is, and the significant connections the child has with the forum state, let’s say Florida for this example.

The ultimate determining factor in a Florida case then, is what is the “home state” of the child.

There is a good reason for the ‘home state’ approach under the UCCJEA, which has been adopted by most state laws. That is that Florida – and the other states – all have a strong public policy interest in protecting children in their states.

You can register for the 2018 Marital & Family Law Review Course here.