|
In Steffen F. v. Severina P., 966 F.Supp.2d 922 (E. Ariz.
1997), the Court held that breaking the three-year old childs bond and attachment to the mother so that the child could be returned
to his foreign father in another country after the mother wrongfully
abducted the child would present a grave risk of harm. The Eighth
Circuit decision of Rydder v. Rydder, 49 F.3d 369, 373 (8th
Cir.1995) suggested that
specific evidence of potential harm
to a child as a result of separation from a primary caregiver may
constitute grave risk of harm under the Hague Convention. There, a
mother relied upon several authorities
A that recognize that
separating a child from his or her primary caretaker creates a risk of
psychological harm. 49 F.3d
373. The Eighth Circuit declined to find a grave risk of harm,
emphasizing that the mother had failed to present
A specific evidence of
potential harm to the children at issue.
At least one previous petition pursuant to the Hague Convention had been
denied because the court found that the child
s return would be psychologically dangerous to the child. While the
Court recognized the absence of precedential impact of any foreign court
decision and the absence of precedential impact in Germany of a German
court decision, Germany being a civil law country, the decision in B v.
B, Family Court of Westerberg, September 29, 1992, is nevertheless
instructive. B v. B was a mirror case to the instant matter. There, a
German court found that grave risk of harm existed should a German child
abducted from Texas and taken to Germany be returned to Texas, because
of the A Intensive bond
between [German] mother and child. |
