U.S. Dad Wins Huge Custody Fight
By Ana Cabrera and Elizabeth Stuart, CNN
Snowmass, Colorado (CNN) - It's been seven months since Dennis Burns has had any contact with his two young daughters. No visits, no Skype, no phone calls, no communication at all.
Just silence.
But all that could change in the next few weeks.
His daughters are victims of an international abduction.
Burns' ex-wife, Ana Alianelli, spirited away the children, 7-year-old Victoria and 5-year-old Sophia, from their home in Colorado and fled to her native Argentina more than 3½ years ago, violating a court order.
"You know I think about them a lot," Burns told CNN in an exclusive interview. "I dream about them a lot. I can feel their little hugs around my body. I just want to hug them back, and it's super painful."
Burns has devoted his life savings and all his time to fighting what's become a messy international legal battle.
His odyssey now appears to be reaching a conclusion: Argentina's Supreme Court has denied the last of appeals by his ex-wife this year, which means Burns has won his case. The final step will be an order of return from the U.S. State Department and a date to transfer custody of the girls to him.
It all began in September 2010, when Burns and Alianelli were divorcing and found themselves at an impasse: Alianelli wanted to relocate to Buenos Aires, and Burns wanted to stay in Colorado.
After a 13-month custody battle, a Colorado judge ruled in favor of Burns, declaring him the primary residential parent.
"I felt a sense of relief that was just beautiful," he told CNN last November, when "New Day" first presented his story. "I was like, 'I'm going to be able to spend time with my daughters, finally, and live with them and be able to teach them things, and show them things."
Just three weeks later, Alianelli flew the girls out of the United States on their Argentine passports. They've been living with her in Buenos Aires ever since.
Messy legal battle
Burns filed an application through the Hague convention child abduction treaty to have Victoria and Sophia returned to him. The Hague treaty is an agreement among countries designed to prevent or resolve cases like Burns'. The U.S. State Department describes it as "a multilateral treaty that provides protection for children from the harmful effects of abduction and wrongful retention across international borders." In theory, children should be returned within six to eight weeks after a Hague application is filed and a court gets the case. Argentina became a signatory country in 1991.
Despite the treaty, Burns' case has taken years to resolve. The Argentine court system allows for multiple appeals, which is exactly what Alianelli has done, dragging the case on for years. Two appellate courts ruled in Burns' favor. The last ruling was on New Year's Eve.
"The Supreme Court of Buenos Aires ruled for the return of Sophia and Victoria, which is fantastic and was really, really good news to bring in the New Year for me," he said.
Six weeks later, on Valentine's Day, Alianelli filed what would be her final appeal to the Supreme Court of Argentina. It has meant more waiting for Burns, but the Supreme Court of Argentina has ruled in his favor, and that court's decision is final.
Alianelli and her lawyers have declined several requests for an interview to get her side of the story. Instead, they provided this statement: "No comment."
Meanwhile, Burns was supposed to be allowed at least three Skype communications with his daughters each week - under court order - but he has been completely cut off by Alianelli.
"We're getting closer to justice being restored, and this is her way of getting back at me, I guess," he said. "But it's punishing them more than me. It hurts me, but they're children who need their father and their mother."
Taking the fight to Washington
Burns has joined forces with the hundreds of other American parents enduring the same heart-wrenching situation, taking their battle to U.S. lawmakers in Washington. Notably, he's working alongside David Goldman, who has been in Burns' shoes.
Goldman fought for more than five years to bring his son, Sean, home to the United States from Brazil. During his ordeal, U.S. Rep. Chris Smith, R-New Jersey, played an integral role in helping Goldman. Since then, Smith and Goldman have worked together to develop new legislation in the hopes of resolving parental abduction cases more quickly.
"Where's the enforcement? Where's the ruling? Every day is a day lost, every day is a day you can't get back, and we have to do what we can," said Goldman.
House Resolution 3212 is a bill designed to ensure that countries comply with the Hague abduction treaty. The bill outlines more than a dozen steps that the U.S. State Department could take, including the threat of sanctions, when a Hague country does not hold up its end of the deal.
The legislation has the potential to affect thousands of U.S. parents. The State Department reports more than 1,000 children were internationally abducted by a parent in 2013 alone.
The bill passed the U.S. House in December.
"It was beyond expectations," Smith said. "It was unanimous: 398 (yes votes). Totally bipartisan."
The bill now sits in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which held a first hearing on the proposed legislation on February 27.
"If HR 3212 was already a law, my daughters would most likely have been not only returned by now but probably would have been returned in the first year of this unending nightmare," Burns said.
The final legal decision
Now that Argentina's Supreme Court has ruled that Victoria and Sophia should return to the United States, Burns is in what he hopes are the final weeks of his nightmarish journey. Even after his daughters are back in his care, he vows to continue to help other parents fighting the same battle.
Burns hasn't had any communication with his girls since last July, and he realizes that he will never get back the precious moments he's missed out on for the past 3½ years. He also says he's concerned about how his ex-wife may have characterized him in the years since his girls were taken.
However, Burns remains determined and steadfastly hopeful that he'll be able to say these words to his daughters, in person, someday soon:
"Papa loves you, Victoria and Sophia. I love you very much."
CNN's Melissa Kondak and Michael Martinez contributed to this report.
New Day Hosts
Weekend Hosts
this is a sad case all around, but would the younger girl even remember him? she hasn't seen him since she was one year old, now she's five... at this point it might be harmful to separate her from her mother, even though that's what SHOULD have happened many years ago.
What a bad situation. That woman is going to murder those girls.
Only an idiot would have kids with someone from another country, because when the relationship goes south, the parent from another country flees with the kids. I don't feel sorry for him, I feel sorry for the kids.
It will be the children who will pay the biggest price, regardless how this turns out.
GOOD!
Yay dad wins... What about the kids? They have lives in Argentina. Perhaps they are happy where they are? Seems the dad is a selfish ahole.
Thank goodness for The Hague convention. My granddaughter was abducted to the United States. We were lucky, 9 weeks later she was home. It is the most despicable form of child abuse, stealing a child a way from her home and no contact with the left behind parent. The Hague does not decide custody. It determines where custody is heard. There are 4 parameters, the child abducted is under 16, the left behind parent is exercising their parental rights at the time of abduction, the child was taken without the other parents consent (joint custody) and most important the habitual residence of the child. The convention does not determine custody, but where custody issues will be heard. We consider ourselves so fortunate that The Hague convention exists.
Strange. Men never win custody battles unless the woman is in prison for murder.
Strange indeed. Men never win custody battles unless the woman is in prison.
I am stuck in the UK because I married a Brit and can not come home unless I leave my children. A women leaving the US to return to her family and home county does not seem to be such a terrible idea. If I returned to the US with my kids I would be liable to prosecution as per The Hague treaty. Instead I am trapped in the UK and rarely see my parents/siblings. My children do not know anything about my home country and are ridiculed by the other kids for being half American and are ashamed to be Americans. Why didn't the father move to Argentina?
The bxtch is now running out of option. Good for Dad. Yay.
The bottom line here is that matters of custody are litigated along with the rest of the divorce. Folks coming on here and re-arguing the case are missing the point that this was already done – and based on the totality of evidence – a judge entered a ruling. There's enough chaos associated with disputed custodial situations even if everyone nominally respects the original court's authority on the matter – parents who take the law in their own hands on such matters ought to be facing a felony charge.
I had experienced a similar situation, when my ex had fled with our daughters (then 4 and 9) into the US after an affair. No contact. No address. Rare calls from the girls were allowed, but cut off as soon as they started to cry over the phone. Appeal through the Hague Convention did not help. The relevant administrators in the US merely reminded the mother of her obligations, which was easily ignored. After multiple attempts, I was able to establish contact in the US after about 8 months only after bringing it to the relevant US court. By then I had lost my job, and ended up completely broke after traveling several thousand miles several times a year to see the children and represent myself in the child custody court.
However, there is more to learn from this experience then just the plight of one parent whose child/children is/are abducted across the border by another. The children always suffer the most. Even in this news report, regardless of how the Argentine Supreme Court rules and how the guilty is punished, the two young girls of Mr. Burns will be torn between two worlds not knowing how to forget loving one parent or the other, see one set of relatives and not the other, relate to one neighborhood and then another, but never both. Since we have to accept the possibility of broken-down partnerships, disgruntled exes, parents losing their minds, family wars, it will be useful to (i) prevent abduction in the first place, and (ii) when it does happen – help the parent across the border to connect with the children. There are laws and systems in place to prevent cross-border travel without the consent of both parents, but these are easily flouted. I would rather see more international cooperation and the will to ensure access between the children and the left-out parent instead of subjective assessment and debate about material needs, relative opulence, education and health systems, job opportunities, etc. The emotional impact on a child from a lost bond with a loved one is irreplaceable.
Another stimulus to extended dirty custodial battles is this practice of paying child support to the custodial parent by the other. Custody of a child can translate to 'regular income' and, at the same time, 'loss of income by the ex' for those that wish to misuse it. There is no policing of how much of that support money is actually spent for the children's well being and sustenance. I would love to see a system where the State collects payments from both parents, maintains an account for each child, and then reimburses the parents against actual demonstrated expenses. The balance of any unclaimed money can be claimed by the child at a later time. By removing any prospect of 'financial incentive' from child custody, the number of long custodial battles, manipulation and angry rhetoric can be reduced. Most importantly, a child will not need to 'pick' one parent and not the other!
What is it with South America? Do they specialize in child abduction? These countries are civilized and well developed, so why allow your citizen to take two kids ILLEGALLY from the U.S. and take them to Argentina? This reminds me of the Brazil case where a father battled for years with his rich in-laws who had absolutely no right to custody.
Why is it people are attacking a man for trying to get his children back. But when a woman goes to the same trouble to get her kids she is a saint. I am a lady who believe that either parent has a right to fight for their children and should not be discriminated for being a man. I believe he is doing what he thinks is best for his children. And should be respected for it
Why don't you men stop marrying these foreign bitches. There are plenty of beautiful American women to marry. Last I heard, the ratio is 6 women to each man. Same goes for women marrying foreign men. In some countries, Africa and middle east, men believe the children belong to them if the marriage does not work. Foreigners don't give a rat's ass about a Hague treaty. Thank God this guy and others have gotten their children back.
It is sad when parents of any gender turn their children into weapons in a divorce case. That every court has ruled in this father's favour tells us exactly who is the fit parent and who is not. The mother needs to stand trial in the US for kidnapping and if convicted, server her sentence with supervised visits with her children.
Parental Alienation is a serious problem not just in this country and it doesn't just happen to men. It should be mandatory shared custody unless there are extreme mitigating circumstances involving illegal activity. I walked in shoes similar to Mr. Burns'. My job transferred me out of the US, I thought we would all be going. How wrong I was. At the end of the school semester, they didn't come, at the end of the school year they didn't come as promised. I came home to find out the ex was knocking boots with 18 year olds, doing drugs and had managed to get fired for banging one of is 18 year old employees in the break room. Because I was trying to fight from outside the US (I am a US citizen), I could not have my son come to visit nor could I adequately fight my ex-husband and my mother who decided to use my son as a WMD. I lost the custody battle because my ex's rich parents stepped in and in the US, you get the justice you can afford. In the end my mother said I was dead to her, my son refuses to speak to me, and my ex knocked up two 18 year olds and has a felony record for defrauding Unemployment.
Our laws must be changed to protect the rights of children to see both parents and protect the rights of both parents.
The girls are safer w/ their mother, in Argentina!
This guy should drop his fat ego and let those girl be w/ their mother!
US courts most of the time give custody to mother except when she is from a minority or different place.
I don't think she did right, but I understand why she would take them.
Imagine you are a mother and you lose custody of your kids and you know the dad is not going to provide as you, you would be tempted to take them too, specially if you think the ruling by a US court is unfair because of your nationality.
I think kids should be given more say in regards to who they want to stay with.
Volatile Latina, a possible touch of vindictiveness, let's hope this has a happy ending and not end with, "If I can't have them then no one will!"
Good Luck, I'm having the struggle of a lifetime in states, the laws never have the kids best interest at heart it's as if the courts want a bunch of emotionally F***ed people in the future.
Keep in mind that the mother acused the father of abuse during their divorce proceedings. While the court didn't have any hard evidence to substantiate her claims, that doesn't mean that he wasn't abusive. Many victims are so afraid that they never call the police because it may just make matters worse for them. Before you bash the mother as being an abducter and a lunatic, stop and consider that she may have been running to save her children from this man, and now he gets to control how the story is told in the US. I'm not saying that he is definitely an abuser, but that would be very logical justification for her actions, so you don't really know.
Are you kidding me...there is no good parent in this case. The mom was wrong for taking them to BA unexpectedly and the dad is wrong, now, for suddenly yanking them back for custody. Then again what do we really know about this family? Perhaps the father was abusive and the mother had a reason for suddenly taking her daughters overseas to Argentina without a word of communication with them. I see a lot of sexual innuendo in his words...but then again, that could be my paranoia, I faced the same kind of thing when I was younger...
Anyway, not defending the mother or anything, but I find it ridiculous how her case was called "international abduction". Law vocabulary often makes something sound so much more horrible than it really is. Like I said before, she could've been fleeing with her daughters, but if she hasn't said anything to the Argentinian law enforcement than maybe it isn't the case. I'm just saying, though, how are you so sure these girls aren't happy where they are?
And my third point: both parents are selfish for making their daughters have to feel a choice. No, follow a choice (as the dad is apparently doing by taking custody of them). If he thinks the mom is feeding them bad info on him, he probably isn't going to be any better and paint up a bad picture of her to them in return...that's how it always is with these kinds of parents who put revenge above their child's emotional well-being. I've been through this same thing with my sister at the exact same age as these girls so don't think I don't know anything. Good parents who end up divorcing would somehow be able to not make their child feel like there are two opposing sides; instead, they would cooperate with one another and still show some feeling of "oneness" so that the child's world, especially at that young age, is not seriously shaken like poor Victoria and Sophia.
American women keep children from their American fathers all the time and there is basically no recourse. Good for him, but the divorce system in the US needs to change to benefit children instead of mothers.
The men in today's America are second-class citizens. The child custody law is all messed up, that is probably why half of the country's families are separated.
I lost my son by an international child abduction by his mother. That was back in 1987 before the internet and before such accurate tracking of parent locations. This crime is not new and this is not the last such case. The problem is a slow moving government one has to rely on.
I am of a different story. I didn't want to pay for my children.. they are spoiled brats anyway.. so I tricked my ex-wife into believing that I value the kids above all, since I know that "hell hath no fury like a woman scorned." So, she took the 2 kids and went back to China, falling right into my trap. So, I pretend to worry and keep on trying to call her in China to talk to the kids but she will not let me... in reality, I am having the time of my life with no burden and recently I met a nice lady. LOL.
This is an important lesson for young people who wish to marry a foreign national.
DON'T DO IT!
sanjosemike
Meanwhile, the kids have already been brainwashed to hate their father. You bet your dollar there will be a major PR blitz with screaming children being separated from their mother by force and Argentinian politicians will jump in to score political points.
I'm glad that it looks like he will be re-united with his children. He should expect that they will NOT be happy to see him. They have been told that he does not care for them, does not love them and has no interest in them. His ex-wife will probably have also told his daughters that he is a drug addict as well.
Like many have reported here, it will take years for him to regain emotional parenting with them.
That said, this just underlines the importance of NOT marrying a foreign national. They can be charming. They can be beautiful. They can be handsome. They can be seductive. They can be intelligent.
And they can steal your children. You may never get them back. Think about it. First.
sanjosemike
Read about half the comments, and didn't see one that mentioned the obvious: In most custody cases the court's assumption is that change is stressful for children. So, any parent requesting a relocation, whether to the next city or across the world, has to demonstrate that the positive gained from the change outweighs the stress.
The mom here asked for a major change, which I think we can all agree on that without any discussion over which country is "better." Additionally, the children had consistently in-person access to both parents at the time the parents separated, which is unequivocally in all research what's best for most children when there is no abuse involved. The mom wanted to change that. Knowing both the court's standard of "the best interests of the child" and how they apply that standard, it's hard to see how the courts could have decided any other way.
The fact that the mom stalled for 3.5 years tells me that she understood this as well. Making a change against the other parent's wishes and then stalling long enough to argue that the new situation is now the child's consistent routine and should be given priority is not an unusual tactic.
What makes us think that she's going to comply with the court order and not flee to some other country? It's a big planet and she clearly is pretty determined.
And yeah, she's had a LONG time to poison the daughters against him.
I'm amazed that people write with such certainty to condemn or support one parent or the other in this situation. Based on this story, we have no information at all about the divorce and the ensueing custody struggle. All we know is that she wanted to move back to Argentina with the kids and he wanted to stay here in the US with the kids. We know nothing else about what was going on or what led to the US court awarding custody to the father. We know nothing about how the kids have been doing in Argentina as their mother fought to keep them there with her. We know nothing about how childcare was shared prior to their split, what the kids think and want, etc. In theory, we support the laws and want all other countries to be held to the treaties they've signed. But we also know that sometimes, the courts get these things terribly, horribly wrong. What we don't know here is whether this is anything more than two loving parents who each want to live in their own country with their kids.
I'm amazed that people write with such certainty to condemn or support one parent of the other in this situation. Based on this story, we have no information at all about the divorce and the ensuring custody struggle. All we know is that she wanted to move back to Argentina with the kids and he wanted to stay here in the US with the kids. We know nothing else about what was going on or what led to the US court awarding custody to the father. We know nothing about how the kids have been doing in Argentina as their mother fought to keep them there with her. We know nothing about how childcare was shared prior to their split, what the kids think and want, etc. In theory, we support the laws and want all other countries to be held to the treaties they've signed. But we also know that sometimes, the courts get these things terribly, horribly wrong. What we don't know here is whether this is anything more than two loving parents who each want to live in their own country with their kids.
What goes through people's minds when they are divorcing is beyond me. I haven't been through it, and I cannot understand the decision to take the hate & rage that one person has for another and pour it on the children. To make the decision "Hey, I want to move myself and the kids as far away from you as possible" is entirely selfish (not considering extreme circumstances, of course).
A friend of mine who found herself in an unloving and abusive relationship with a guy who was originally from India was so fearful of doing anything wrong because she was terrified that he would flee to India with their son, her only child, and he would do everything he could to keep her away from him. She chose to remain in the relationship (they have been together for 11 years) rather than take that chance.
Give him his kids and send her a five dollar footlong.
Doubtful.But I wish him and his girls all the best and happiness.
No one wins in this decision. The kids especially.
Sucks, because the mother is filling their head with lies and he will not have the warm welcome he is expecting when they come back.
I worry about those poor girls... What are they going to think when they can no longer see their mother, the person that has taken care of them for the last 3 years/ i have a feeling he has a long road ahead of him with two little broken hearts. I hope everything works out for the best!
From what the father has said, he intends to keep the mother in their lives: he said that the children need both a mother and a father. He doesn't appear to be just thinking about what he wants, but what his children NEED. Maybe his ex-wife could learn a little of his attitude.
This is major milestone for Dennis Burns! I hope he is reunited with his daughters without delay. I am happy for him as he one of the lucky ones.
My children’s abduction to the Dominican Republic is similar to this case contain the same elements of wrongful removal, wrongful retention, and U.S. jurisdiction. However, the Dominican Republic has failed to uphold the rule of law. I am awaiting a final appeal in the Supreme Court since July 2012. There is another abduction case waiting in the same court for since 2010. According to the Office of Children's issues' report to congress for 2009, the Dominican Republic was the 7th country in the top 10 countries to which children are abducted to from the United States. With the recent Constitutional Court ruling on September 23, 2013, that rendered hundreds of thousands of Dominican-born persons stateless, there is little hope that that this country will uphold any rule of law.
I also differ on Mr Burns’ opinion on HR3212. The Bill lacks both preventive and remedial measures. By omission, the Bill to fails to make use of the existing laws, which defends children from international abduction. Although Existing laws contain such measures, a focus on diplomacy diminishes enforcement. Placing the Department of State in the primary role responding to International Child Abduction further obfuscates the difficult path to resolution. The Bill only uses the single path of diplomacy. Without binding language, the Presidential Actions are discretionary. National interest places such discretionary actions at a low urgency. The President can take any of the actions today without the passage the Bill through executive order.
HR3212 no sits in the Senate Committee on foreign relations. Both the Chairman and the minority leader are committed to fix the Bill. Although the wheels of legislation may be turning, I have had little luck with any progress and I have not been allowed any contact with my children since the day of their abduction.
Since no one else has responded, just wanted to say I'm sorry for what you're going through; I followed the David Goldman case closely and was thrilled when he was reunited with Sean. Hope you're reunited as well.
IGMak, stop making this about you
Having been through a long and expensive inter-provincial custody battle in Canada, I can only imagine the sacrifice this father has made. I pray the parental alienation the kids have suffered can be repaired. I've had my daughter for 3 years now and fighting that fight was the best decision of my life. Surprisingly, my child's mother actually accepts that our daughter is in a much happier and healthier environment and we've a better common understanding for our daughter's "best interest". I hope this troubled mother will grow to have a better understanding of her child's needs while being a supportive force in the kids lives. The sooner the battle ends, the parenting can really start.
You have no clue why this women decided to, one, divorce this guy and two, flee wit the children to another country, and then fight tooth and nail to keep them away from him.. maybe hes a pedophile, maybe hes an extremely abusive person, if you really dont know, how could you possibly understand who sacrificed what and then who to pray for...
I am also in Canada and although I had major legal battles over custody of our daughter, in the end we settled on joint custody. I am American and wanted to return to the US to continue my career where opportunities were better. But when you have a child/children, you have to learn to do what is best for the child...not for you. It was a big sacrafice on many levels but a huge learning curve for me on many others. And for my daughter, she is become a fantastic young adult, whole and very well adjusted although she spent all her childhood going between two homes.
My fear is for this man who has a wife that has already abucted them once with total disregard for the father. And as the time to part with these two girls gets nearer, the more I would be afraid she will bolt with them again. She has a family and support system in place there to perhaps help her do that. Or if she is a highly emotional woman, she may do something even worse to keep those kids from him.
If I was the Father, I would be looking for someone in her homeland that can act as child protectors to mediate and begin the transition for the girls to insure, oversee and to accompany the girls and mediate them as a family so the father is reunited in a healing, non-threatening way and the Mother is at least dealt with so she can begin the process of letting go.
*How is this News* & who cares?
We care! About the story that is, not about you.
Just because it's not news to YOU doesn't mean it's not news to OTHERS. Shut up and let the grown-ups talk.
It is not "news," it is a human interest story.
write a post when you have a child.
How is this news? Vivo, it's called 'good' news. I cared about this news a lot!
Well, YOU must care... You spent your time posting a comment. duh.
Your callousness and utter ignorance is astounding. I'll type this slowly, so even you can understand:
1. It's news because it involves international law, American children, & the crime of kidnapping.
2. A lot of people care - people who have hearts and souls (which you obviously lack). It's painfully aware that your parents must have hated you, so you are incapable of understanding how some parents would do anything in their power to regain custody of their children. Of course, being the sociopath you are, your parents had good reason to hate you.
I do.
Anyone with a soul cares. It is very important for many people. If it's not important to you, don't read it. Turn the page! Move on without leaving your negativity.
My siblings and I were spirited into Canada decades ago – and we're still recovering. You lose EVERYTHING when your parent does this to you: your other parent, your home, your friends, sometimes even your name (as was the case for me). And the parent who takes you didn't have custody for a good reason, and life isn't good after that. Many children report having been moved from place to place, changing names each time, living in poverty and raised to fear the missing parent. Many of them are abused by the abducting parent or that parent's new spouse. Some are ultimately even abandoned.
A parent who abducts a child, short of proven intractable abuse, cannot be a good parent, and life will be hell for that child.
SOOO the father think that he is WAY more important than their mother and does not mind harming them for life by taking them away from their mother to be with him? Not selfish at all. Granted mother should not have moved to BA and deprive them of their father, they should have worked things out somehow. One of the reasons she fled is probably b/c the US court (surprise surprise) gave custody to the US dad and not foreign mom??? Victims of international abduction – NOT! T
tk- you can not possibly be serious. They were living in CO when SHE made he decision to leave. This is on her. If she wanted to be part of their lives all she had to do was stay in CO.
What makes you think the mother was a good person. Why did she have to cut the girls completely off from the father. Do you have any idea how hard men have to fight to see their kids in a divorce in the US. The US usually perfers to give the kids to the mother. So before you make accusations of him being selfish, think of what harm she has done to her kids by making them go through the separation and complete isolation from everything they knew before she just flew away to Brazil.
I agree. Why didn't he move to be with his daughters then? Men love a foreign exotic wife until it comes divorce time. Then she has to figure out how to support herself in a foreign country or in some cases she's forced to leave bc she can't work without proper citizenship. No money, no family, kids to care for, and she's the bad one for going back home. Maybe if he'd spent that money relocating himself he'd have a relationship with his kids. It's always the woman's fault though.
The mother broke the law. Yep, they would totally end up better with her.
that's a pretty stupid comment. no, correction, that's a really stupid comment.
So by the few bare facts about their divorce and initial custody hearings, you have deduced that they ruled against the mother because she's a foreigner. Has it ever occurred to you that there may have been issues you know nothing about? At least he said they need both a mother AND a father. She on the other hand determined that he wasn't necessary in his daughter's lives and that she was going to move back to BA whether he liked it or not. Awfully selfish of her I think. There had to have been some middle ground between all and nothing.
Sounds like a real sour grape mom to me. I had custory of my daughter over her mother 30 years ago. I know I was the better parent and proved it. He mother constantly tried to reverse this custody order often, usually on her dime (she wanted the money-I was never awarded any so that blows any retor from you). I remarried and we raised hers mine and ours and there is one left in the home and 4 foster children. All of ours including my oldest one are in well established jobs and all but the youngest married, and her brothers who are cops says that won't happen until she can date which will be somewhere around 2045.
BS! That woman needs to go to jail. You do not kidnap children and think you can get away with it. F' her!
The woman kidnapped the children and has eliminated the father's ability to contact them. It is inconceivable that you could even possibly take the mother's side in this. She is clearly self-centered and irresponsible, and these are not the values ANY child should be raised with. If you have a problem with your exspouse, keep it between yourselves. Don't use your children.
tk: You are a misandrist sow. Females pull this crap all of the time but I bet you are silent then. Grow up and get over the female privilege that dominates the west.
You are a true idiot.
what about the father why should he have to choose between never seeing his children again and uprooting his life to move half way around the world just because this lady can't decide what part of the world she wants to live in? If they started their life together and decided to start a family in the US weather they choose to stay together or not is irrelevant she has the choice to stay if she wants a relationship with her children if she decides to go she should forfeit her rights as a parent.
Uhhhhhhh did I miss something or did it not say that the Argentine Supreme Court sided with the father. Just asking.
What terminology would you prefer for the willful violation of a court's order on a matter of custody? And upon what basis do you impugn the court's wisdom in making whatever choices it made? Have you seen the record? There are a lot of divorces in our society – and people can't always come to decisions. That means a court has to decide – and the best court to do that is the one closest to where the children are residing at the time of the divorce. These things are bad enough without the specter of international flight. Adding that takes an unfortunate situation and makes it a disaster. Actions of this sort should be considered kidnapping.
She married him and chose to move to the USA and have her family in the USA. The fact that she decided she wanted to move home after the divorce isn't the court's concern, their concern is for the kids who were born in the USA and had, to that point, lived there. She can't just pack them up and take then wherever she wants to go. If the shoe was on the other foot and he moved down to Argentina to be with her and raise his family there the fact that he later changed his mind and wanted to go home would mean the kids should stay with her. I assume (and would hope) that she could move back to Colorado if she wants to be close to them and see them which is the life that she chose in the first place.
All I'm seeing are emotional sixth-grade arguments with no facts involved. It's been clearly outlined. She abducted the children and that makes her wrong. The question isn't who is a better parent, but who is lawfully right.
You argue that the father is being selfish by taking the kids back from their mother. Are you that one-sided that you can't see the other side? What about the mother being selfish instead? Put that aside and just open your eyes. This isn't about emotions, it's about the real word and the fact that we have laws.
The Argentine court ruled the same way, so sort of a pointless comment.
You have no idea what you are talking about. This happened to my sister and I around the same age. My mother (who had split custody with my father moved us to Canada during one of our week long visits). When my father showed up to take us to his house he arrived to an empty home. My mother who was a Canadian citizen took us and we where there for three years without any contact with our father. I can say without question that the parent that attempts to remove the other from their child's life has no right to be in it, PERIOD, and your comment's underlying assumption that the mothers role is more important than the fathers is down right disgusting. You have no idea what you are speaking about and should stop spouting your ignorant views on public forums because you look like a moron. The mother chose to deprive her children of their mother when she made the selfish decision to move out of the country. PERIOD.
How very generous of you. I am glad you are not any kind of decider in this case. Basically you are about as one sided as it get.
so kidnapping is ok? is this how it works in your home? only the laws you like are ok?? please say you don't have children that will be as ignorant as you
Doesn't it tell you something when the mother refuses to let the father have any contact whatsoever- and they're his kids too. Maybe they should ask the girls which parent they'd rather be with. His actions do not show selfishness but rather a true love for his kids. If anyone is refusing to work together and dragging things out it's her.
you are part of why children are exploited every day. the children had a life here in the states, friends, family, school.. and the mom decided to rip them from it to return to her native country. The courts make the decision because the parents ( at least in this case the mom) was not reasonable. instead she was selfish to take her kids from everything they know and everyone they know and toss them in with strangers. when they grow up they are going to really dislike their mom for what she did.
TK, what a stupid comment. The simple fact of the matter is, he had custody and she kidnapped the children. This is not about him thinking he's better than her, this is about her the law and fleeing the country with the girls. She should also be extradited and imprisoned, as far as I'm concerned.
You are a complete idiot IQ of a gerbil moron. Have a nice day!
Isn't it nice for you, you can insert your own little story with you won facts to come to a conclusion that you wish. Bit I think in the end that is actually called fiction.
Nice forum to show the world that you are a complete idiot, huh?
How does your tiny little brain define international kidnapping then? She lost custody and she then took the kids out of the country against a court order...what do you call that? Being a good mother? Because the best thing to do for your child when getting divorced is to relocate the kids to a foreign country where they don't know anyone and probably don't understand the language.
Courts are SO against men anyway – for the father to be granted custody is a miracle. The US even returned a child to Cuba, so don't play that card.
She came to the US and married an American and had children with an American....she made that choice....she left HER country...not the other way around. This is not grounds to simply take the children back to her home country because her marriage failed, they were born in the US, they should reside in the US, and you can't simply take those children to another country because you decide you "want to return to your own country". She should have honored our laws when she chose to have children in the US. From what I've read of this story she only lost her fight to take them internationally to live...she would have most likely kept her kids if she was willing to stay in the US...but she chose not to...that's on her.
You are just guessing. If the mother flew with the girls despite a court order for sure she was a crazy enough into the relationship for them to divorce and for her to lose the case. Probably she was just lazy and a gold digger in the US, again, who knows. But the fact is that she did a crazy thing and she lost the original case for a reason. Those are facts.
tk – yes the Father is more important than the mother. You see, he didn't kidnap his own kids and keep them from their mother. Everyone knows that dads are the better parents these days. Women are too busy having abortions and trying to "have it all" with their "careers" to even care about their kids anymore. This "mother" should be thrown in jail to rot. The girls are much better off without her horrible example.
A lot of times the courts will rule that both parents be a part of the kids lives. The mom was probably unstable, clearly proving that. I think most dads find the courts to be biased towards the mom, so the fact that the father was given custody means the mom was probably a complete scumbag. Nice of you to defend someone who takes their children to a foreign country away from one of their parents and does not allow the kids to communicate with that parent. The father I am sure is much happier being divorced from that psychopath. Soon the kids will be in a better place.
Fathers can be just as good a parent as any mother. This woman is a criminal. Stuff it.
You use the logic of a 3 year old. Really. Don't embarrass yourself.
You obviously didn't read the article. She left the US without the consent of the courts, actually in contradiction of the courts. Your an idiot.
How is that different from what their mother did? Compromise must be found. The initial court found in his favor.
You born in the US..u live in the US you live by our laws..want to live by your laws?? Don't marry an American, live in our country and break our laws..simple.
A real see you next Tuesday.
I can't believe the people on here saying nonsense like "if he really loved them he would leave them where they are, he is just selfish". My God. All of you nutjobs are either 1) NOT a parent or 2) do NOT deserve to be parents and God help your children. All the while ignoring that the mother broke several American and International Laws and kidnapped those girls from their home and father. Nutjobs, all of you. The vindictive, law-breaking mother should be thrown in jail. God bless this man, and all the love and devotion he has for his children, and I hope he is reunited with them asap.
Yes, much better to yank them from their mother.. you are insane.
TK, do you have any common sense or are you just heartless. I am a woman, not all women should be mothers and guess what, she could have stayed here in the US or atleast tried to let the girls communicate with the children. SHE the mother is selfish here not the father for wanting to be there for his kids. Shame on you
why wouldn't it be? do you know her? do you know him?
The mother is a criminal, you're probably a Spanish woman aren't you?
So TK, if you don't like the judge's ruling you can just kidnap your children and deprive them of their legal guardian and father? Yeah, right, It is the mom who is being selfish and I hope she spends many years in jail for what she has done.
So you support purposely kidnapping children. I hope you don't have kids.
I have to defer on the side of the father. Any person, rather male or female, that takes their children out of the country of their birth without both agreeing should lose custody. The only exception I should mention is that the father/mother is physically or mentally abusive. Instances of this would have been brought up in court.
The mother, by her actions, is clearly unfit to be a parent. So, yes, "yanking" them away from her is in their best interest. If you think otherwise, I think you need psychological help.
You clearly have a problem. SHE is the one who "yanked" them from their father.
ya because a mother who abducts her children and cuts them off from their father is such a good influence to keep around. Don't be stupid
Giving birth to a child does not automatically make a person a good mother. The fact that she illegally fled the country sends up a red flag to me. If she had stayed here and settled the case, chances are some sort of split custody would have been arranged. After it was settled, she could have arranged visits to her home country with the girls.
This father obviously loves his children. If he didn't, he wouldn't have spent so much time and money pursuing the case.
since when is a mother more important than a father? get over your 60's way of thinking, the world has changed and so too as parenting. It's all about who the more responsible parent is. And unfortnately for the mother in this story she made wrong and illegal decisions.
Better they be with their father that fought this battle to be in his children's lives than the mother who felt that a relationship with their father was not important.
What SHOULD have happened is that two adults should have compromised.....PERIOD. The children need both of them and if she wants to go and visit family in Argentina....fine. If she wants to take the children with her for defined periods of time that are agreed upon...fine. Bottom line is that either parent depriving another capable parent of their children are absolutely nothing less than maniacal a$#holes that in the end get children with many more issues than if they were to have "played" nice to begin with and at least let the children see and attempt in their name to do the right thing.
its called kidnapping for a reason, look it up and get educated
AAAAAAAND you can go 'fun' yourself!
How is it better to leave them with their mother? She may be a drug addicted wh0re for all you know.
Better to put them with the dedicated parent than the criminal parent? Yes, yes it is.
You seem to think that the mother is automatically the better single parent. You would be wrong. Each case should be judged individually, and that's what the courts in Colorado did. Yes, they take into consideration that she stated her intent to take the kids out of the country, and the court decided that was not in their best interest.
Because shes a woman? A man has equal rights to a child. She could of made sacrifices for HER children to stay in their HOME country. She put herself and her children in this situation. Shame on her. As a parent you think of your kids first. Women do not have the right to steal children from their fathers. Your a moron.
The mother had no right leaving the country. She can always come back to the states and learn to live like other people do here. If she wants to stay in BA, then that's her problem. Why should the father and girls suffer?
Dear tk, you clearly have none of me. When a mom kidnaps her children, runs from the law to another country and refuses to let children and father even speak to each other, yes. You take those kids from that selfish criminal bich, AND give them to the parent that deserves them.
Thank you for the intelligent reply ta all of these people who seem to ferret that a father can be just as worthy of guardianship as the mother. A mother that broke both U.S.and international law.
It also appears completely lost on them that the mother totally cut off their children's contact with the father . . . not even allow them a phone call or Skype or whatnot. There has not been an iota of claim that the father was abusive to the children so there is no grounds for total cut off from the father. All these people in support of the mother are completely ignoring that she is willfully hurting her children by refusing any and ALL contact with their father. That is monstrous; her behavior de facto paints her as an unfit mother as well as outrageously mean spirited.
I'm with you, Luth999. If a father did this he would be sitting in jail already and the children would be back with mom. Far too much lenience on this woman.
you are so right! these people don't know what they are talking about!
You state God bless this man, but what would God do in this situation ? Both parents needed counseling. But God gave children to the woman and woman to man. The children do need dad too, but the mother-child bond is most important. When the Dad married a foreign woman he should have considered this could happen as she may become lonely for her own people and culture. This family suffers because both the Dad and the Mom were not living right in Christ Jesus and bringing up their family in the unity of God.
How about if the children are traveling with only one parent, especially anyone in the middle of a divorce, they can't leave the country without the other parent's permission?
The airports don't enforce any such rule, and the immigration service (TSA) does not either. These rules are enforced by the State Department (who prevents one parent alone from obtaining a new U.S. passport), the consulates (who do the same, but for the second citizenship passport), and the U.S. state courts (which compel the parents to turn in any existing passport to the court for safekeeping). so if the mother managed to convince the embassy of Argentina in Washington, DC to issue a passport for the girls, no one at the airport would stop her.
I'm divorced and every time either I or my ex-wife take the kids out of the country we get the other one to sign a notarized permission slip, but so far after 6 trips (3 each) we've only been asked once to provide proof that we had the other parent's permission to leave the country with the kids. Our lawyers have also told us to bring our custody papers with us when we travel but so far no one has ever asked to see those.
Children who are traveling internationally with only one parent are supposed to be accompanied by a notarized statement indicating that the non-traveling parent is aware of and authorizes the travel. The problem is, airline gate agents and immigration officials rarely ask to see that document.
We went through this several years ago when our daughter was still a minor (16). We were all planning to travel to Italy, but I was leaving a month before them to spend several weeks in Ireland, and planned to fly directly to Rome from there, where they would join me. We had to have a letter of consent for her to travel with him (and without me) notarized and carried with her passport.
Hispanic women are to be avoided at all cost.
Yes, I had a similar major problem with a Hispanic wife What a nightmare. They think they own the kids.
I agree
You have done a big favor for Hispanic women! Lucky for them, you will avoid them at all costs! You're an idiot.
Way too beautiful. I could see not marrying one, though.
"The sad true is that those girls would be much safer in Argentina than any where in the USA. They will also get better education, free medical care and better eating habits. Argentina is the most European nation outside of Europe with a super mix of mostly Spaniards, Italians, Germans and other Europe folks. IF this dad loves those girls then he knows that is the best place for them to be."
This isn't necessarily true. There is a shocking amount of crime and corruption in Buenos Aires, not unlike the US. I live in a BA suburb and I am scared to walk my neighborhood at night, with or without my kids, and for good reason. Also in regards to medical care, I wouldn't place the quality above that of the US, though it is cheaper and the system isn't quite as flawed (from my experience). To say she's safer in BA than Colorado though might not be so accurate..
Nobody goes around with assault weapons killing each other on the streets or at school. You also dont have cops, as in the USA, going around each day killing innocent people or minors for making small or stupid mistakes.
I too live in Bs As for a few yrs and is much safer than any where in the USA and the education is better too. Many North Americans from the USA travel to Argentina to get medical care since is much cheaper.
ALso if they do live in the USA by the time they are 14 chances are they will join the rest of the nation in obesity. Argentinians are very friendly, slim, white and beautiful.
What a ridiculous statement. The United States spans an entire continent. It has the world's best university system, and research hospitals. It has one three quarters of the Nobel prizes in science. It is the bread basket of the world and the leading depository for the world's investors because of its political stability. An educated parent who makes a decision on residency based on their child's best interests can have them in a community as safe as anyplace on the planet. Certainly safer than Argentina given its political history. Your comment is just a typical thoughtless hate the USA comment.
Argentines are fleeing Argentina in such numbers that the Argentine government has begun using money-sniffing dogs at the airport to catch people trying to leave with their savings.
Argentina is a wretched mess. An arbitrary dictatorial government, terrible inflation, high crime rates - Argentina's murder rate is higher than that of the US, and the rate in Buenos Aires is as bad as that in Washington, DC, Chicago or New Orleans.
These children are American citizens and belong in the US.
@Julio. While the mother may be a dual national, if the girls were born in the US they are US citizens. Argentina may recognize them as Argentine nationals due to their mother, but the US does not recognize dual citizenship. Legally they have up until the age of 18 to decide which nationality they want for themselves, but it still does not take away from the fact that the US doesnt recognize dual citizenship. You do have a valid point that they should be in the custody of whoever is more fit to care for them, even though the legal system in the US usually does favor the mother over the father. The overall point is that it's a shame in the first place that the children have to endure this whole situation in the first place.
US does allow and recognize duel citizenship under certain circumstances, and with certain countries.
I am a British citizen and a US citizen, both through birth (Father is American, Mother is a British Natural, I was born in England.) I was never require to relinquish or choose between the two at 18.
I still hold both passports and use them whenever travel. I am required to use my US passport when departing & entering the US and my UK passport when entering England.
Not true. The U.S. allows a person to be a citizen of both the U.S. and another country. Take a look at a U.S. State Department website for guidance. There are some risks, but it's certainly not forbidden.
The US does recognize Duel Citizenship under certain circumstances, and with certain countries. I, myself, hold duel citizenship. I am a UK and US citizen,n and have been since birth (Father was an American citizen, Mother was British, and I was born in England.)
I never had to choose between either many years ago when I turned 18. I still hold valid passports in both countries which I have to use when I travel. I am required to use my US passport when entering or departing the US, and my UK passport when entering or departing England.
USA DOES recognize dual citizenship. Im and adult with 2 passports and citizenships one is usa. There are millions of usa childrens and adults with dual citizenships.
This is only true when dealing with nations considered hostile to the US. You are free to maintain as many citizenships as you want for as long as you want otherwise.
The US recognizes and allows for dual citizenship at least since 1964, though it does not encourage it.
Anon that is not true...the US DOES recognize dual citizenship...it doesn't recommend it but it does recognize it. I am fighting the very same issue now in the California courts...without my knowledge my ex-husband secured Austrian citizenship for our 2 AMERICAN born children...he did it without my knowledge ...it forces them into mandatory 2 years service in the Austrian army! The US judge has let my argument drag on for 3 years with no resolution! I say it is simple...if born on American soil you are American unless at 18 you decide to go elsewhere! Our system is a broken one, open for the highest bidder...
My husband is Argentinean and I'm An American Citizen. My daughter is 25 and enjoys both nationality. However while visiting Argentina something illegal happens the US Citizenship does not hold that strong she will be considered Argentinean first.
You can have dual citizenship in the US. How do I know this? Because I have dual citizenship. You really shouldn't run your mouth when you don't know what you're talking about.
I have not double but triple citizenship, (Italian, Canadian and US) what you are saying it's just not true. After the end of the draft in most countries multiple citizenships became allowed in most of them.....
The us does recognize dual citizenship. Google is your friend
The sad truth is.. The judge could have it all wrong.. the public could have it all wrong..
The father could be the problem.. The mother could be telling the truth.
I know a guy that got his kids.. And he is the coldest most selfish person I ever met.. His only real desire was in winning and PROVING he was NOT what she said.. Cause he likes to THINK he is great..He wants to be seen that way..
The reality is he is a pig, that has good acting skills.
The kids grew up miserable.
Have WHAT all wrong? These cases and appeals have been done in countless international courts, and nobody, even the vindictive nutball mother, has ever accused the father of anything. These cases and appeals have been decided on FACTS presented by both sides. The facts are : the mother illegally kidnapped her daughters and took them out of the country without the fathers permission and has refused to send them back, ignoring countless court decidiond in the father's favor. What is this nonsense you're talking about?
You call the mother a nutball and you do not even know her thoughts or feelings.
Mary, shame on you for disparaging the integrity of this man by bringing up a story that has nothing to do with this. Also, how could you know that "the mother could be telling the truth" if she's never commented? Why would she refuse to even comment if she felt she had justification to kidnap these children. What we DO know is the mother kidnapped the children and has refused to bring them back. What we DO know is the father has spent his life savings trying to once again see his two beautiful girls. You embarrass yourself by casting aspersions on this man.
Oh wow, a woman blindly defending another woman at all costs. Shocking.
Do you have any idea how hard it is for a father to get custody of children, you have to have solid evidence that the mother is problematic, and its hard even then
I hope that is not the case here. Only silver lining is the legal system here is stronger than the one in Argentina and if the dad is messed up the kids will have better protection here than if the mom was messed up. The first judge must have talked tot he kids before he granted custody to the father.
I know lots of females who got the kids and then gave them back to the father ... as long as he kept paying the leach child support. Does that mean all females are leaches?
Your story has no bearing on this man's plight. There is no evidence that anything you are saying is in any way relevant to his case, so why muddy the waters?
In that case, it must have been terribly unfortunate. But that isn't the question here. This isn't a case of who is a better parent, but who is right in the eyes of the law. The facts here state that she abducted the kids, which puts her in the crosshairs and not the father.
Both the Argentine and American courts agree the children should be with their father. Failing any actual evidence the father is less than capable as a father, why should he NOT have custody. You state that the sad fact is the courts could have it wrong. The good fact is that the courts could have it right. What position are any of us to make a judgment. The incontrovertible fact is the mother's behavior (cutting total contact with the father without an iota of indication he was abusive in any manner whatsoever points to her as an abusive parent who willfully is hurting her children.
LOT'S OF MAYBE'S. MAYBE ITS WOMEN WHO INSTIGATE MOST THE PROBLEMS IN THE PROCESS OF PARENT PLANNING. I KNOW IT WAS IN MY DAUGHTERS CASE.
No, the sad truth is you are some kind of hater. You know no facts but if it is a man, got to be wrong. Really trashy, glad you can hide behind the internet, keep it ugly.
So you believe that the courts in ARGENTINA are wrong about the mother? If anyone is in a position to know whether she is a fit parent, it is the courts of the country she is in, and apparently they don't believe that she is.
For a father to win custody outright, given the courts still current bias towards moms, which thankfully is changing though slowly, the mom must have been a real dirtbag. The father might have been the lesser of two evils. The kids, although unhappy, could have been much worse off with the mother.
To separate mother and young children is cruel. period. Most probably, she left because she felt she couldn't provide for the children in a country which is foreign to her. The guy didn't want to relocate to Argentina but expected her to live in a foreign country even after being divorced. Isn't it selfish! And no, fathers and mothers shouldn't have the same rights. We, women, pay with our health and sometimes life for the privilege to bring the child into this world. What do men sacrifice: a drop of sperm? The child needs both parents, but he or she needs mother way more. A motherless child is traumatized for life. The recipe here is abstain from international marriages.
Your comment is insane. You start out by saying 'most probably', followed by all kinds of made up accusations/scenarios against the father! Love how you managed to 'forget' that both the US AND Argentina ordered the girls be returned to their father. Thankfully, they both chose to pay attention to the facts of the case and decide what is best for these girls...unlike YOU who created all kinds of 'most probably' fake scenarios.
I agree with you. And what was the mother supposed to do? go back to Argentina without her children? stay in the country without a job? The truth is the only losers are the kids. The father could have fl to Argentina to see his children. Perhaps if he had put the money into visiting them and child support instead of lawyer fees, he and his ex-wife could have come up with an agreement where the children could be with both their parents. And now, after not seeing them for 3.5 years he is just going to take them from their mother?
Your comment is absoloutely offensive and sickening.
Reading the ignorant comments from you men-hating psychopaths is infuriating. I regret I clicked on this article.
The disrespect being shown here to the integral role of the father in a childs life is unbeliveable.
You cant take the law into your own hands and maintain credibility
"No matter how you flatten the pancake, it always has 2 sides..." I couldn't agree MORE with the statement bluejau has made. Children need both parents, but historically it is continually the mother who cares in ALL ways for children. The great "papa" is the exception to the rule unfortunately.
This story never stated where the children were born?
A bigger part of this problem is that our State Dept. has an illogical pass through protocol for Hague matters. They unfortunately pass along the information to a local judicial office (DA) who often times can be corrupt/paid off. Our system is broken and the solution may be as simple as requiring every married couple to write their domicile of intention on their annual tax forms so there is no question where the children should be located. If the children were born in the USA...Constitutionally they have the rights to this soil...which may have been the intended first order from the CO court.
What a shame...and good luck to this family
oh how i agree with you!!
i was raised by my father who did a wonderful job raising me and my siblings we are a military person, a business owner and a teacher. Our mother tried to keep us from our Dad, she told us he was a bad person but when she got arrested for drugs and check fraud we got to live with him we were not rich but we had clothes, food, and essentials for a good and decent life. you should have seen my Dad trying to buy a dress for prom LOL! it was too funny. what I am trying to say unless we see all sides of the situation we can not assume anything and not all fathers are bad my Dad was my hero.
really? is not just sperm is much more than that! maybe we are really important in a kid life, but if you are not a good mom don't be one! do you imagine living apart from your kids for almost 4 years? he's been fighting for a long time! he deserves getting the custody!
@bluejau, you are mistaken. there have been many studies over the last two decades evaluating children being raised by a single father versus those raised by the mother. Children raised by a single father have statistically faired better in the long run with regards to development, stable home life, education completion, career development and economically. granted while every case is different, the totality of the situation needs to be evaluated, children are better off with the father. Regardless, every court that has heard this case, in the US and Argentina, has decided in favor of the father. There a facts in this case to which we are not aware of that has brought these courts to this decision. Besides, courts in Argentina would be less likely to side with the father unless there was a compelling reason for them to do so.
A child needs a good *parent*. That is not always necessarily a mother, and clearly not in this case.
You should have your tubes tied, before you pass your pathetic bitter nonsense on to an innocent child and ruin its life.
Requesting all passports of children during a custody hearing which includes an international parent would be a good idea. Also, would have been a good idea to hire a PI to keep tabs on his wife before she left the US, and a less expensive measure.
Interesting story. Mine is similar. I was married to a woman from Sweden. When things started to go bad in our marriage she blatantly lied to me drawing up a story how she was going to move to Sweden to go to school for one year. One year turned into 2 then three and so on. My daughter was 8 at the time. She is now 13. I thought long and hard about fighting for custody but realized that would hurt my daughter more than anything and I am not the selfish type like my ex-wife is. When my ex-wife remarried I realized they would remain in Sweden permanently. In the end my daughter is living a safe and happy life. I do get to see her every summer for 6 weeks. I absolutely got the short end of the deal here but I have accepted the situation and try to have open communication with my daughter on a daily basis. She knows I love her and knows that I am as present in her life as I could be. Yes her mother is extremely selfish and what she did was wrong and against the law but my daughter's happiness is more important to me than anything else. I wish good luck to the dad in this story but also hope that he thinks about his girls first and what is best for them, not what is good for him. Its a hard decision to make!
You are an honorable man and did what is right for your children. In Argentina those girls will grow up with a much better education and will be living a much safer life and wont be getting fat like most people in the USA.
Peter, the way I see it is as long as my daughter is happy, I am happy. She was in excellent schools here in the US too and she would have had it just as good here as in Sweden. But the reality is that the battle to bring her back to the US would have been years of fighting and in the end I most likely would have lost the battle....and for what, for my own selfish cause. In winning the case I bring her back to the US and force her to have no daily interaction with her mother? I initially constantly asked myself that question and realized it would have been more about me than about my daughter. She is approaching her teenage years and she has all the troubles a teenage girl has but she is mostly in a good place emotionally. Using her as a pawn to prove my case would have only lended to more emotional issues for her down the road.
You rolled over for your ex wife. My guess is she was controlling and put you down a lot. She left and you once again took it like you always did with her. Your daughter would have been better off with both parents present.
Timmy, you are absolutely right. My ex wife was controlling and manipulative. In the beginning I didn't want to believe the move would be permanent although everyone around me was telling me that. I completely agree that she would have been much better off with BOTH parents but when dealing with a woman who is as self centered as she is, nothing I say to her has any impact. It was a life decision that she has to live with and while its been almost 5 years it STILL crushes me every day to have no daily impact in my daughter's life. Not the way I anticipated fatherhood. The way I see it is the man she is married to now can deal with her selfish manipulating ways. It doesn't change the situation with my daughter but I tried for 13 years of our marriage and finally realized it was more about her (my ex-wife) in her eyes than anything else. Its the sad reality I have to deal with every day.
you should have moved to Sweden. 6 weeks out of 52 is no real impact. You are like a buddy to her, nothing more.
I agree that 6 weeks out of 52 is no real impact. Its sad but I was manipulated in this case. Moving to Sweden, while an option I considered, wasn't one that I could do and feel it was a smart decision. I have a career, in order to provide for my daughter I have to maintain that career. Yes, my daughter means the world to me but I cannot continue to be manipulated by her mother. I have daily communication with her through text but you are right, I am nothing more than a buddy to her.
Well, who the bleep did he marry? It is amazing how flip people are these days, when it comes to marriage. His wife will not give up, and may not return the girls to him. For the rest of his life, dad will also be looking over his shoulders. Due to the age of his kids, dad may be heart broken when the kids grow up and decide to return to mom. I hope if dad decides to marry again, he will be careful.
Ah, yes. Lets completely glaze over the fact that the mother was the one who broke the law, period.
By all means lets victimize her and heap all of the blame on the man.
Somebody better watch the mother because cases like this turn into a murder-suicide situation for the parent being asked to give up their kids. I wouldn't surprise me if this were the next update to this story.
ONLY IN THE USA!!! Argentinians are very civilized and dont go around killing each other, children or shooting for the sake of killing with assault weapons. Argentina is whiter than the USA so not blacks or brown Mexicans to worry about it or crazy white North American. Those girls are safer in Argentina than in the USA and they wont be getting fat either.
That's the spirit !
She is the one who violated the court order. So right or wrong, she is the one who broke the law. Additionally, anyone who marries a foreigner must take into consideration these types of situations can occurr.
Responding to those above. The mother has demonstrated that she is a bad parent by ignoring the wishes of the court time and again and denying time with children's parents. She has chosen to show that she is very immature and vindictive. Though the father is probably not an angel, it looks like he chose to take the higher road. He could have just forgotten the children like so many other fathers. Regarding the girls being gone so long... they will get over it. Still young and they will remember little of it. the biggest problem is that both parents will not get along and the Mother has now assured that her access to the kids will be very limited and controlled. To Peter.. Nonsense. Europe has many of the same issue there as we do here and it does not guarantee a wonderful life. Just ask the unemployed French, Italians, Greeks, Spaniards etc. While the US moans about a 6-7% unemployment (depends whose counting) Europe enjoys 12+% with some countries exceeding 20%. Not sure the education is really better there, especially at the post high school level.
Does it occur to you that they will be deprived of their mother? And that she possibly fled b/c US court gave primary custody (big shocker) to US dad??? If you are not a foreigner in this country you may not be able to relate or even understand. Gosh, I do hope that you are just frkg perfect to be so judgemental.
You are the judgmental one. Fathers almost never get custody, even when the female is from another country. The fact that the father did tells me just how bad the female is. You clearly have problems with misandry. You come across as a pathetic child.
No one forced the mom to leave. She could have stayed and been a part of the kids lives. She was selfish as she wanted them all the time. She was also most likely unstable as it is nearly impossible for a dad to get primary unless the mom is nuts.
Argentina is in Latin America but most of it citizens have European ancestry. That said, Argentina, or even Europe, doesnt have the same problems as in the USA. NOBODY goes around killing each other with assault weapons or at school. And for sure COPS dont go around, as in the USA, killing innocent civilians of all ages for minor or stupid mistakes. And for sure they will be healthier and wont get fat down there.
Europe, especially the North is MUCH better than the US in every single aspect of quality of life, sorry, read any statistic compiled by any serious institution and you'll find the truth, which is not what kool aid drinking Americans think......
Unfortunately, I would not be surprised to see the ex-wife move the kids on to the next country and challenge this under their laws, which would probably be another 3 year delay.
A man won custody of his children against a woman.... What are the odds of that???
You are right, it only happens if the mother is foreign and the father is US citizen. If it was the other way around, then good luck to the father...
In American courts...if he has a good bit of money to pay off the right people ...his odds are actually really, really good...
Good for him. It's hard enought for a father to fight for custody within the limits of the United States. I cant imagine that coupled with the troubles of fighting through foreign courts as well. The best interests of the child(ren) are supposed to be the driving force when considering custody. Unfortunately, at least in my case and many that I have heard of that are similar to my situation, it seems like the courts take the best interest of the mother into consideration moreso than the child(ren). Someday, courts will recognize the importance of a caring and loving father is equal to that of a caring an loving mother. By cutting out (and/or down) the father's involvement, you are hindering the development of the child(ren). (and purpetuating a serious problem in our society)
I do think it's unfair that for some reason courts still seem to think the mother is automatically the "better" parent. This is not often the case. Sometimes the dad is the better parent and should get custody. I also think unless there's some type of abuse, the children benefit from seeing both parents on a regular basis. I don't know the particulars about this situation, but it would be good for the children to see their father too.
I was filling out taxes online and when claiming a child there was an entry for "kidnapped child" in the menu.
I just thought, man! How sad. She seems to not have much regard for the law so I hope it all comes to a peaceful conclusion.
Unfortunately, the state legal systems are naturally geared toward gender bias when it comes to matters of settlements in divorce, and it's most evident in the statues of child custody. Their case law is based on precedent, which means the role modeling of the past prevails in current legal matters. The laws have not adapted to the near role-reversal of today's dads and their increased involvement in their families. It's vindicating to hear a success story like this to help level the playing field and hopefully promote future equity for other fathers.
Completely agree. The law has been slow to reform. Attitudes are changing and I would encourage all good fathers to fight the fight to the best of their ability. Their kids deserve the best parenting possible even if the courts may be slow to recognize that might be within the father's primary care. Ideally, both parents can maintain a positive influence on their child's life.
Just a case study here. I grew up in the 1980s within a steady, married family and my parents remain married to this day. My father was involved but his parenting was maybe 15% and my mother did the other 85%. Every case is unique but there is a reason why there is a bias in court towards mothers. EVERY case should be evaluated independantly in the children's best interest. We ALL need to stop using our children as a means to get back at an estranged/ex-spouse. Some fathers do the best for their kids and some mothers and for some, kids need to go to somebody else.
Truthfully, we're only hearing one side of the story here. We don't know why she fled the country with her children beyond not wanting to live without them. Everyone likes to say they'd do X in that situation, but unless you've been there, you don't know. In the US, men who are abusers win custody suits in 75% of cases. I'm not saying this is that situation. I'm saying we don't know. If it were the other way around, and she'd fled from Argentina to the States, we'd be demanding the US keep the children here in the US...giving all sorts of reasons why the child is better off. I don't think you can make a blanket statement like that. I feel horribly for the mother. I think the father is more concerned with his best interest than the kids'.
He's fighting to see his kids. How is that selfish? I would fight with all I have if necessary to be with my children.
"men who are abusers win custody 75% of the time"? Please provide a citation. It is actually the opposite. Women get custody exponentially more often than men. The slightest hint of abuse by the man nearly voids any opportunity for him to get custody over the mother.
That 75% of abusive dads win custody is the most absurd claim I have ever heard. First off, I would guess that close to 90% of cases where one parent gets custody, it is the mom. Secondly, mothers are just as capable of abuse as dads. Moms tend to do more verbal and emotional abuse. The effects are much more lasting and harder to detect than physical abuse. Thirdly, in order for a dad to win primary custody, the mom had to be crazy. It would have to be documented with witnesses. It is not easy to win primary over a mother.
Her behavior is so vindictive it makes me wonder if she's going to kill them to keep them from him.
My question: Why are refusals to rotate custody treated as a "civil" matter? Criminalize it so the police can simply return the harmed child. By the way, I know the answer: "Lawyers profit from auctioning children off to highest-bidding parent" in these cases. If the act of refusing rotations was deemed a criminal act, "done". You can show a police officer your driver's license. You can show the police officer your "parental rights certificate." FIX THE SYSTEM. STARVE THESE DISHONEST LAWYERS. Enough already.
This article is framing this situation as if the mother was a bad parent. In these situations where one divorced parent seeks to leave the the US, US courts generally give the parent remaining in the US custody regardless of which parent is more fit. The US legal system inherently believes that it's the child best interest to stay in the US. However, the mother and the children are dual nationals and they shouldnt be forced to stay in the US just because a US court ruled the US parent has custody.
It should have been determined by who is going to be a better parent. If its the father then they should stay in the US. Choosing the US just because its the US is not a good argument for the children's well being. This could be a situation where the father is using the children to hurt the mother, knowing US courts always side with parents that remain in the US.
Your typical in your logic. The girls are American. The family lived in America. The mother and father & girls lived in America. Why would the children be better living away from where they were born or raised? Of course the US courts say theyre better off in America, theyre American. They very fact that the mother would kidnap the children is evidence of why she isnt fit to have custody. Therefore the US courts got it very right. The mother was ok with living in America before, enjoying the benefits of being American, now she wants to hurt the father by taking them far away & everyone knows it. You simply dont like America. Which is why you should leave or never come here.
Are you that ignorant? They girls are ALREADY in America. Argentina is part of America!! So keep them in America instead of a unsafe places as the USA of North America.
Easy there Julio those girls are U.S. citizens end of story. She abducted them and she should by all rights go to prison. She is a BAD parent because she keeps the girls from their father. That's why WE have laws against that sort of thing, that stinks, right? Abducting a child is what a BAD parent does, umm right? What she did was not in the best interest of the girls but HER, right? She is selfish, and thought she could just take the children as she saw fit without consulting the father. Sorry pal that is NOT how it works here OR in Argentina for that fact. How do we know this professor, ALL the courts in Argentina and the United States agree. The kids belong with their dad here in the good old US of A. If she wants to see them SHE can come back here – however, I highly doubt she will.
This article did not mention any negativity towards the mother at all except for the fact she took her children to another country against a court ruling and is denying a US and Argintine Court Order. That's a fact. Children deserve both parents. The wife needs to recognize this and play smart and let Dad have them summers and holidays. Now he'll have them all the time.
I'd say being a kidnapper and denying the kids any contact with their father is pretty much the definition of a bad mother. No sympathy for her, she belongs in prison.
And how do you know the court didn't decide that he's the better suited parent? Safe to assume he had a job at the time of the divorce and also safe to assume that she'd be less likely to have a job lined up upon relocation. That's reason enough right there.
I thinking ignoring a court order and aducting a child makes one a bad parent, regardless of the reasons.
Remember that the courts of Argentina have also ruled in Burns' favor, so apparently it is not just simply "US is a better country" view as I'm sure his ex-wife has presented her side to her country's court. We don't have all the evidence and information that were shown in both courts. All we have here is CNN's very brief summary of the situation. Both countries have ruled these children belong with their father.
Argentina is a much better nation for children and adults. NOBODY goes around killing you with assault weapon and they are healthier and slimmer.
Remember that the courts have ruled that the children must return to the U.S. This may or may not have any bearing at all on who is the better parent. That's the way the law works. This issue for the court, I believe, was whether the extradition of children without consent occurred and should that law be upheld. Maybe the father is great and maybe not. CNN does not provide a full story and this being peoples' private lives, they shouldn't.
@Julio
The Colorado court made the father the, "primary residential parent", so if it didn't mean that he was the, "better" parent, it at least meant that the US is their home country, where they speak the language and have relationships with friends, neighbors and other relatives. The other parent, when moving here, must be willing to live here after a divorce for the emotional health of the children, regardless of who the, "better" parent is, which in most cases is neither one.
That fact that she disobeyed the court order and kidnapped her kids and took them away from her country and her dad makes the dad, in my mind, the better parent. And she hasn't even allowed the girls to have any contact with him at all since last July. The article isn't trying to make her look bad, it only described what she did. When you have a child, your life if to provide the best life for that child, even if it means staying in a country not your own to remain in your childs life, not taking them away from the other parent.
The mother's actions speak to her being a bad mother. A good mother would not have cut the children's father out of the picture which makes the whole thing so much worse!
What if YOU just found out your husband (or baby daddy if that's your thing) had been molesting your kids? Would you remove your kids from him or would you allow visitation? If you can think of conditions where removing the kids is the right thing to do, please don't make blanket statements like "cutting the father out automatically makes her a terrible mother". This is true for removing from a mother as well. Heroin addition? Alcoholic who drives wasted? Drug dealer? Come on. We can all think of situations where that would be the right thing to do.
the very fact that she ran off with the kids pretty much validates the decision of the Judge. Her behavior, as I have read it, has been reprehensible.
Buenos-Aires is pretty nice.
While the article doesn't elaborate on what type of parent the mother is, we do know that she hasn't allowed the father to see or communicate with his children since July of last year. She's doing this, despite what the courts say, not just the US courts, but the Argentinian courts. She was also given an opportunity to express her side of the story, which she did not do. While silence doesn't necessarily equal guilty, her actions would suggest a lack of respect for the father's rights. It appears that she is the one that's using the children to hurt the father, not the other way around.
First, mothers are almost always favored over fathers in custody battles. It takes a lot for a father to get full custody of the children. Second, I think the mother showed her true colors when she illegally abducted her children instead of fighting appeals battles like this father has done. Also, if it was just the US court being prejudice, why did the Argentine Supreme Court rule in the father's favor?
How do you know the Colorado (United States) court did not consider what the best interests of the child were when it decided it was best for the children to live in the United States? That is the legal standard here. Nor do we know if the Colorado court granted joint custody or visitation or even international visitation. You engage in speculation and draw unwarranted conclusions.
One thing is certain. Children need both parents assuming they are fit. Child abduction should not be tolerated regardless of nationality. Or are you going to assert abduction is in the best interests of the child?
And why should the mother deny the father all communication with his daughters? It is not my intention to characterize the mother as bad. But her actions are unacceptable.
I suggest you not let your nationalism blind you. Because that is exactly what you are doing.
Julio, not to be mean about it but there are very very few examples where it WOULDN"T be better to keep the kids in America.
Ha, Ha, thanks for the laugh man....please read any worldwide quality of life report, it might open your eyes to see how far down the US is (or has fallen).
Advice, travel more, much more.....
She kidnapped them from the custodial parent. She IS the bad parent.
Quite agree with you ...excluding "situation where the father is using the children to hurt the mother". You should not assume and claim this, otherwise you just sound like there is a principle rules as long as the non US parent is right! This isn't fair judgment at all!
I think it has more to do with the fact, that she illegally took them out of the country and violated a court order.
They were born here and are therefore U.S. citizens by birth – of course they should stay withe the parent remaining in the U.S.!
Wouldn't it really have been in the children's best interest, for the mother not to have been as militant as she was? They could have established a shared custody, complete with modes of communication open to the non-custodial parent. To cut him off, without a word, was cruel to both the children and parents. There is truth to the statement "you get more with a carrot, then a stick".
What you say is true about how the media presents the situation, but I believe that it is illegal for one parent to kidnap children from the other parent or family unit. Parental rights in separations are decided by the courts, not the one who kidnaps the kids. That is just the way it is.
While I agree with you in principle that ethnocentricity should not trump parenting, in this case the Argentinian court system has repeatedly ruled against the mother, who is Argentinian.
You're so right Julio because women who kidnap children make great mothers. You are a real piece of work!
She's proven herself unfit by not even allowing the children to Skype with their father. I could understand a mother feeling that she had no choice but to flee. I get that. But then how do you explain the complete lack of communication with their father? She's a jerk, as proven by her actions. I suspect her father, if he ever actually gets custody of his daughters, will allow the mother as much access to the girls as she would like. Time will tell, but she's a jerk, that much is clear.
You mean that mother who kept the father's daughters away from him for 3 1/2 years? That mother who continues to defy court orders with video conference communications for the past 7 months? You mean that mother ?
You also seemed to skip over the Hague treaty mentioned in this article. Did you look that up?
Doubtful. Why the sudden interest in leaving the US? Clearly, she wanted to cut him off, and take the kids somewhere he couldn't follow. She's a monster... mentally and emotionally abusing her children by keeping them from their father, without allowing any form of communication.
That's ridiculous justification of her actions. It's not her right to unilaterally choose who gets custody. Regardless of the legal process or what your opinion is of its fairness, a legal ruling was made to give him custody. She, I'm sure had plenty of legal opportunities to challenge the ruling. She could have made a sacrifice and chosen to live in the US if it would strengthen her argument for custody. She took the law into her own hands by fleeing. What's worse, she's deprived the kids of their father for 3 years, making for an awkward situation when they return to him. That is on her. I hope they extradite her to be charged with kidnapping.
she ran off with them after the ruling. Already Breakin The Law. Not a good look
ahh, the mother is a BAD parent as she spirited the children away from their father who has not seen them in almost 4-years. She should be jailed.
Elián González
If you read the article, she was here when she lost custody and the kidnapped the girls. Even the courts in her home country agree the father is the better parent. Stop your American hating garbage and learn to read
She lost and TOOK them out of the country. She should be arrested for kidnapping if she ever sets foot in the US. Daughters need their father. This Mother is disgusting.
What a load of nonsense.
The mother tried to separate the children from their father – her actions make her a bad parent.
@Julio... I think we know who the alleged "bad" parent is in this custody battle... She and her lawyer both say "no comment" to share their side, not complying with Argentina decisions, not allowing Skype "visits". I hardly think that it's the father causing the issues.
right the mother is such a good person she refused to follow the court order and let this man skype with his girls 3 times a week.
I dont think it makes her look like a bad parent but a very selfish one, she did take the children out of the US against court orders instead of following the laws of the country she chose to live in and have a family. That hurts the children period!
spoken like a true Latino/Hispanic/Mexican–> FAIL.
...dude ... she is bad parent ... she abducted the children and did keep them from having a relationship with their father ... that is the epitome of a bad parent.
Or, maybe, they found him fit to be the sole parent. SHE is the one that ran. She could have stayed in the US and fought...but instead tucked her tail and ran.
Good for this guy!
The "better parent" is the one that wants to share custody. The "bad" parent is the one who wants to move away and take the kids with them. Both parents deserve and the children need joint custody. It is that easy.
I understand what you're saying but I'm gonna have to politely disagree with you. If this lady decided to start a family and a new life in the US with this man and decides that she no longer wants to stay that's her choice but she goes without the kids. Why should this man be forced to uproot his life in order to have a relationship with his children when it was understood they were to be raised in the US at their time of birth, why should he suffer just because she can't decide what part of the world she wants to live in? Also immigration laws would prevent the other parent from up and relocating so I would say these would be the bases for any decision passed in favor of the parent in the US. Besides how would they fairly decide who is the better fit parent unless there is some type of history of abuse by one of them, that's a bit easier to determine if the end result isn't taking the children away from one parent forever. And that's why I say that in this case the children most definitely should remain in the US, if she wants to continue a relationship she has the option to stay.
She could have stayed in the U.S. to be near her kids. Instead she decided to kidnap them. Apparently the courts in Argentina have not seen her side of things either...
I don't doubt that there is some truth in what you're saying, however, I don't think this is significantly different than any other country's child custody courts deciding in favor of their citizens. Assuming that both parents are equally good parents the court has to choose one, and since one parent wants to take the children away from the other parent it makes sense that that parent shouldn't be awarded custody because if they did get custody the other parent will never get to see their children again. In this case, given that their mother violated a lawful court order and has continued to violate court orders and has denied the children access to their father I would have to say she has shown herself to not be a good parent.
I think the presumption is that children will be better off in a familiar environment. Regardless of how good a place Argentina is, one has to question if a major relocation away from friends and family is really in the child's best interest. I would expect similar decisions to be made by courts in Argentina.
In any case, the mother had to know that moving away from the United States was going to make it difficult to retain primary custody, so she put herself into this situation. Further, she didn't help matters when she ran with the children.
How on earth does anyone determine who is going to be the better parent? That's a completely subjective judgement, and presumably why the original court order awarded custody to the father.
The fact the mother abducted the children, took off with them to another country in violation of a court order, would not come back and cut off contact, does in fact make her a bad parent. Is it in the "best interests" of any child to not have both parents in their life? Is it in their best interests to remove them from their habitual residence and separate them from half of their family? Cutting of contact with a parent is part of Parental Alienation. Look it up. In many countries it's considered child abuse.
Unless there is some proof that one parent is abusive to the children, no one has a right to deny that parent contact and involvement with their children. Fathers often get screwed in these situations because there is a very old fashioned view, especially in Latin American countries, that children belong with their Mothers by default. Many countries that are signatories to the Hague Convention, follow that belief and wind up violating the treaty.
Speaking from personal experience, and still actively fighting for the return of my children from Costa Rica, anyone, Mother or Father, who abducts their children, takes them to another country and cuts them off from their other parent, is by default not a good parent. It is a shameful, selfish act. Your children are not property for one parent to own. They are a gift and a responsibility both parents should have an active part in raising, regardless of how the parents feel about each other.
She should have simply stayed in the US with the children. We make sacrifices for our kids. It's what we do as parents. She had the here, so she should stay here with them.
Apparently, the courts in Argentina much to their credit decided the "better parent" is the rightfully legal parent. And, yes a better parent is one who encourages children to have relationships with both their parents no matter the divorce issues or location of each parent. The problem here is selfish Mom can't be trusted under any scenario.
The beginning of the article states the mother's abduction of daughters to Argentina violated a court order.
I disagree with your characterization of what should have happened.
Cutting off children's contact completely from their father like this narcissistic woman did really deserves a jail sentence.
The mom kidnapped the kids and violated a court order, what are you talking about
How will they force her to return to the US?
"She" is not being returned to the U.S. the girls are. Her country (and the US) will facilitate that through law enforcement and court order. If she runs she will end up in prison. Trust me no one wants to go to jail in Argentina .
As for "mommy" the abductor she can stay in Argentina – good riddens.
The mother is not forced to return, the children must be returned.
Rule number 1 (with as many women there in the U.S.) never marry anyone from outside the United States. Part of this problem here is solved.
This is not the issue.
You are an absolute MORON. What kind of comment/statement is that? There are US borned parents who have killed their own children to keep them away/get back at their former spouse/partner. Being from another country did not/should not exclude you from seeking a partner or spouse.
I would agree with one thing you may be trying to say: just to be carefull with whom who decide to marry and have children with.
PS: this is coming from a Jamaican immigrant who is still married to my American wife of 30 years and have grown, college educated children.
Oh please, it is because of the women here in the US that this guy went outside the states to find a wife.
All of those white women in Argentina, men too, are white, slim and very good looking people with a mix of Spanish, Italians, Germans and other Europe nations. That is why he married her instead of a fat and ignorant woman from the USA. Argentina is whiter than the USA and with much better education and eating diet. Nobody goes around killing each other with assault weapon neither are cops killing innocent civilians each day the way is done in the USA.
Good news for Mr. Burns, congratulations! Now if we could only resolve the idiotic Pelletier hospital-driven child-kidnapping case sanctioned by the "great" state of Massachusetts in our own country, then we'd be getting somewhere!
Perhaps she'll ignore the request and then get arrested and be where she belongs.
I personally hope you choke on a chicken wing.
"Burns' ex-wife, Ana Alianelli, spirited away the children, 7-year-old Victoria and 5-year-old Sophia, from their home in Colorado and fled to her native Argentina more than 3½ years ago, violating a court order."
Does this criminal bimbo honestly think she can get away with breaking international law?
She should be jailed for her actions, once the kids are safely brought back to their father, away from this psycho woman.
You have it incorrect. Lawyers create self-serving laws. They have defined "child custody theft" as a "civil" matter, not criminal. This way, fighting parents are not entitled to FREE LEGAL AID... which results in the auction of rights to the highest-bidding parent. THE SYSTEM IS SOOOOOO DISHONEST LAWYERS SHOULD BE ROUND-UP AND ARRESTED.
sad, and the true victims are the two girls. Hopefully when they are older, and they can make sense of this on their own, they can establish good relations with both the father and mother. But for now, I am sure the mother has painted an incredible tapestry of lies regarding the father. Will take years to repair the graffiti.
sad, and the true victims are the two girls. Hopefully when they are older, and they can make sense of this on their own, they can establish good relations with both the father and mother. But for now, I am sure the mother has painted an incredible tapestry of lies regarding the father. Will take years to repair the graffiti.
Those kids have been in their situation in Argentina for more than half of their lives. To uproot them now would just cause more injury to their security and stability. If this control freak of a Daddy cared a whit for the best interests of the child, he'd move his selfish butt on down to South America for the sake of his children.
May karma serve you well kid.
I second that!
The girls arent Argentinian, theyre American. They're better off with their father who truly cares for them and is not a scumbag child kidnapper -which the mother is.
They are both. And BTW Argentina is part of AMERICA!! So they are Americans any where in the continent!
So what time frame do you believe that a kidnapper should evade the law for in order to keep their victims. How long until the parent is just out of luck and should give up having ANY communication with their child? It's not as though the children's situation is ideal, seeing as they are in no way allowed to communicate with their father. As a man, don't you know how important it is to a little girl to have a father? Look at statistics.
What do you suppose the "mother" is telling these children to explain why Daddy isn't there? Does she tell them he is dead? That he doesn't love them anymore? That he is crazy and dangerous? That is called Parental Alienation, it is one of the absolute worst things you can do to a child, and nobody should let that happen because a certain time frame has passed!
So, his wife disobeys a court order and moves the kids illegally to her country and you feel he's at wrong and needs to move to South America? Wow!! Talk about misguided anfd wrong..
Selfish?? His wife flew to Argentina breaking a court order. He hasn't seen them because the wife won't let him!
wow...selfish, control freak really? that is what a loving father, whee 2 daughters were kidnapped and who has been constantly refused visitation rights too?
The Control Freak would be the woman who doesn't have the heart to at least let a little girl9much less 2 of them) talk to her papa at all for years. Can you explain the necessity of that? Only if you were heartless yourself...
Sure, if this happened to you then undoubtedly you would just decide not to be involved in your children's lives anymore. In essence, the implicit conclusion behind your statement is that the parent has nothing beneficial to offer his children.
ANd maybe his wife is a real bi.... and a bad mother. If she cared about the kids, she wouldn't have left. Sounds like the selfish one is her. But nice try
His wife and kids were Argentine citizens. He is not. He was not allowed to follow, which is exactly why that child abusing mother kidnapped them and brought them there. Durrrrrrrrrrr.
Or, you know, the kid's mom wouldn't have run...remember, SHE took them, illegally, away....SHE caused just as much harm...if not more.
So your suggestion is that once a parent kidnaps a child, he or she should be able to keep them because it will just take too long to get the children back?
Jim,you need some serious help-NOW!!!.
I sure hope the people on this board supporting a kidnapper don't have kids.
What and never be able to see them anyways?? Did he not travel there and then the visit got cut short by her attorney's???? BOTH PARENTS should be able to spend equal amounts of time with their kids. This is her alienating the kids from him. If I ever divorced, which I will not, I would NEVER punish my husband not to see his own child! It is not healthy for the child not be with him also. unless there is abuse, there is no reason to do such a thing.
Jim, you clearly don't know ANY of the facts in this case. Know what you're talking about before making declarative statements.
Source
This dad is lucky he is not in Canada where the Ontario Superior court judges in practice fail to assist male victims
of parental abductions which occur by the hundreds on a daily basis. These cases are encouraged by the Police, and child protection workers
who treat these abudctors as victims with inherent rights because of their gender to abuct children for the generally fathers, to rare or never see
their children again.
For every dead beat mother who abucts children there is generally a dead beat judge with a pathological hatred towards fathers
who does or does not make the required steps to protect the children.
Ottawa Ontario is one of the worst places in the worst provinces for abuse of children by those mandated to protect children.
http://www.OttawaMensCentre.com
Not truth in general, obviously you have personal experience...
When will the world wake-up to this inbalance??.
Poor kids...
That's great news for Dennis, but I bet the State of Colorado still made him pay child support...and the ex-wife accepted it.
It is only right for the father to pay child support notwithstanding the disagreement between the children. It is about serving the children's best interests which is the way it should be.
I'm happy for the father, but lets be fair here. There are no winners in this. The girls will either grow up without their mother or their father. The mother will no longer have access to her children.
If I were a father going through this I'd fight just as hard as this guy to get my kids back. But at the end of the day the family as a whole has lost...
The better outcome here is the father and mother reconciling and they all live happily ever after. 🙁
That's not true. The mother was more than able to stay in America with her kids. THe father wasnt asking for sole custody, but when the mother wanted to leave the US, he didnt want the girls to leave their HOME. The mother was the one asking for a huge change. She could have stayed and lived the life she chose -with an American, in America. But she wanted to hurt the father. She doesnt deserve to ever see the girls again because she proved she not fit.
She and the girls are in AMERICA already. Argentina is part of AMERICA! Also they are safer there than in USA which is more violent and people shoot each other or cops will do it for you.
I feel bad for the girls – it's been over 3 years since they've lived in America – I hope they can adjust well to being back here in the land of crazy.
"Burns has devoted his life savings and all his time to fighting what's become a messy international legal battle." Fathers lose everything and have to fight for years to even enforce a visitation order, but women don't have to pay a dime to enforce child support (Welfare from the father).
The courts try to maintain equity when it comes to finances. It's one of the few objective measures they're able to rule on. A woman would have to pay the husband child support if her income were significantly greater and/or her level of visitation with the child(ren) was significantly less. It's all calcluated.
If you don't like it, get a vasectomy! Fifteen minutes of pleasure, fifteen years of regret!
It's men like this that make a difference to all of us. Best wishes for him and his kids on being reunited.
Congratulations!! With a Son I haven't seen since he was a year old and is 36 years old now and lives in Germany and know how you feel. I cannot afford to travel to Germany to see him which makes it worse. I am able to talk to him and my grandson via computers. Wait and hope one day he will be able to come to the states but I doubt we will ever be able to change his last name to mine like it should be. My heart goes out to you and your children and hope for the best.
It's sad to know that there are some parents out there who put their personal greed & their sense of vendetta first before the children's well being and happiness. Then, they helplessly fight what is right for them. not the children. For women of these type, they have no reason to conceive, to produce.
Just because he wins the court case there is no assurance he will get his kids back. Argentina is not the United States. They have their rules and regulations. Also this is the children's mother's home. Say what you want, rant all you want. The father will have to go down there himself and get his kids. I don't see Argentina shipping them back.
She ignored the law when she took the kids. She ignored the law when he submitted his grievance. She's ignoring the law about weekly communication. Somehow it seems hollow to say "this is over, the law has said she has to return the kids".
She went thru the legal process here, and lost.
She then comitted two kidnappings.
The kids should be taken away from her.
Her only visitation should be HERE...and supervised.
Make her (and all abducting parents) PAY dearly for their abusive/illegal behaviour.
She
Whether it's this particular situation or any other divorce/custody dispute, fathers are historically always on the losing end of the deal. This man's concerns as to how he has been characterized are also very real. The parent that wants control at all costs will malign the other parent in all cases.
My question is, why is this not considered "kidnapping" instead of "abducting"?
3 1/2 years is way too long for something like this to be worked out. It sounds like the mother stretched this as far as she could but will she really comply with what is required of her?
Too bad the children had to suffer through all this. No matter how this ends, they will likely only have one parent active in their lives.
Good thing for the dad that his ex didn't flee from Argentina to the U.S.
Our laws are more primitive.
There should be an international law against this kind of thing. Dads typically pay a huge price with divorce – loss of home, pension / savings, etc. and if the ex is not particularly mature, they use any kids involved as a tool to further punish the ex. Maybe if the courts stopped giving women EVERYTHING in a divorce case, they wouldn't feel so entitled to use the children this way.
You summed it up exceptionally well there ScoobyDude! Amen!
>>>He also says he's concerned about how his ex-wife may have characterized him in the years since his girls were taken<<<
That is undoubtedly a huge hurdle he will face. It happens to be the mother in this case, but I speak objectively without regard to gender: when one parent defies a court order and steals the children across international borders, even state borders, it is one of the most selfish things one can do. Equally selfish is trashing the other parent. The interesting thing is, you can bet your last dollar that this man will NOT be trashing the girls' mother when they ask about her. He knows the pain of that, and will do what is best for the girls. Congrats and good luck, you're a good dad.
" Equally selfish is trashing the other parent." you dont know if the mother is doing any of that. He is the one trashing her. Those girls are safer in Argentina and better to be with their mother. How come he didnt travel there more often to see them ALONE instead of a news crews? He was selfish for doing this.
There aint no good guy... there aint no bad guy there's just she and he and they just disagreeeee.
And the children have to pay because I'm sure they missed their father and now they'll miss their mother.
What this story avoids is the REALITY American family courts STEAL custody rights and money from American dads on a daily basis by using the child as a "carrot on the stick" to bleed BOTH parents dry when custody issues ensue. Even worse, in PBC County Florida family court – a known criminal enterprise – custody rights are literally STOLEN during 5-minute UMC hearings when fathers are drained of finances and rendered Pro Se. So, CNN report the news. If you're American. Stop the CIA-type propoganda that America is so "rights oriented". Nonsense. Stop obfuscating the truth.
Americans – We need a national referrendum to outlaw lawyers from controlling our legislative and executive branches of government. Presently, they have scripted dishonest and immoral "laws" that allow them to literally steal money for a living in corrupt family courts they conspire to protect under the nonsensical "judicial indepedence" theory. So, the judicial system can remain independent ( i.e., suffer no penal code for blatant crimes committed by judges and lawyers and maigistrates and, worse, the dishonest judicial assistants ) BUT dishonest lawyers can "have their cake too" by controlling the legislatures and executives branches of government to literally USURP checks-and-balances.
This situation DISGRACES every sacrafice our brave men and women offer to defend "liberty and justice for all". Lawyers are swine. Wake up America. Enough already.
This has been a public service announcement with the best interests of the public at mind.
Every American ought to be legally-required to watch Dr. Drews's "Divorce Corp" movie now on DVD. It defines the problem with the broken family court system.
Bull. Women are awarded custody 90% of the time because women are the ones who take care of the kids 90% of the time. It is true that sometimes a woman should not have custody and is awarded it...and the opposite is also true. All a dad has to do is going crying about parental alienation, and everyone falls at their feet trying to fix it.
And who looses here?
They need to be very careful here.
This is the point where the woman (yes more often the woman) typically murders the children rather than lose custody of them.
you have statistics, really? Don't post such nonsense
A truly loving mother? So, let me get this straight. Are you suggesting that the kids should remain with the mother because she might kill them?
The sad true is that those girls would be much safer in Argentina than any where in the USA. They will also get better education, free medical care and better eating habits. Argentina is the most European nation outside of Europe with a super mix of mostly Spaniards, Italians, Germans and other Europe folks. IF this dad loves those girls then he knows that is the best place for them to be.
lol you're cute. You think it's the country that dictates the eating habits? Personal responsibility – Learn what that means. As for a super mix...there is no country on Earth with a greater mix of different cultures than the United States. We have EVERYONE. Not just the white Europeans that you listed.
Bull, Peter. These girls would be much safe in the United States than in Argentina, which is known for having 'rape gangs' walking around.
The United States is the best place in the world, as long as you have a middle-class income, to raise a child.
NOBODY goes around gang raping in Argentina. Check out all the killing happening each day in the USA by its citizens or cops vs Argentina.
When you compare the USA to other TOP nations like Western Europe, Japan or Canada the USA lacks behind any of those nations in what is best for children or its citizens.
You've got to be kidding! Check out Wikipedia.
In the 2013 UN education Index, the US is #21, and Argentina is #38.
In the Life Expectancy index, US is #35, Argentina is #60.
On the Overall Human Development Index, US is #3, and Argentina is #45.
OF course you have no facts to support your misinformed opinion that Argentina (of all places!) has better schools or is safer than the particular town the father lives in.
There is a very small town in Colorado where some kids did lots of killing about 10 yrs ago. It happens every other day across the USA.
It's also home to a woman who kidnapped her own kids...the rest of your post is meaningless because it's all about how the parents raise them.
He will have his work cut out for him.
His ex-wife is obviously a vindictive person.
No doubt she has polluted the childrens' minds with bad images of their father.
These will be erased with time but it will be no easy task.
.
The text in the video says "fighting to get Gaughters back"