|
In Feder v. Evans-Feder, 63 F.3d 217 (3d Cir. 1995), reh=
g and reh= g in banc denied,
(Aug. 24, 1995) the Third circuit held that a child=
s habitual residence is the place where he or she has been physically
present for an amount of time sufficient for acclimatization and which
has a "degree of settled purpose" from the child=
s perspective. A determination of whether any particular place satisfies
this standard must focus on the child and consists of an analysis of the
child= s circumstances in that
place and the parents=
present, shared intentions regarding their child=
s presence there. A
wrongful removal from a country does not change a child's Hague
Convention habitual residence
|