2011 US State Dept report on Hague Compliance is out

[LukieD]

The US State Dept just issued their report for 2011.

http://travel.state.gov/pdf/2011HagueComplianceReport.pdf

[Nicole's Dad]

I have to say Mark you were right about how they would handle Brazil. They are anything but compliant. What a joke.

[forthelost]

I just realized when I read the report I could tell you who almost every case report was about, solely on the missing date and the name of the country.

[forthelost]

Oh, and Argentina case 2 almost certainly involves taking the requests of a two year old child on where they want to live. 

[tweinstein]

It's interesting to note that, apparently, my case has been resolved in that I can't find it listed anywhere in the report. It might be #6 on the list, but there are some factual errors that leave me with doubt.

Furthermore, there are more than 6 cases between the United States and Brazil that are older than 18 months listed in this forum alone and I'm aware of some that aren't listed in the forums. What happened in those?

[lovellboys]

So Brazil gets a gold star for sending Sean home when there are still so many unresolved cases? 

[SageDad]

It's interesting to note that, apparently, my case has been resolved in that I can't find it listed anywhere in the report. It might be #6 on the list, but there are some factual errors that leave me with doubt.

Furthermore, there are more than 6 cases between the United States and Brazil that are older than 18 months listed in this forum alone and I'm aware of some that aren't listed in the forums. What happened in those?

Am downloading this report now.  Interested to see what they say about me.  I should be on here for the first time.

In reality the case must be some 24 months old to appear on the report.  The "reporting period" ends in October of the prior year (in this case Oct. 2010) and they only count the amount of time since the Hague application was filed, which is often several months after the abduction.  In reality there are very few cases listed in the unresolved section that are under 3 years old.  Just another distortion in the way State represents the issue.  If not for these vagaries my case would have appeared on the report last year.

[SageDad]

Of the 114 "Unresolved Cases" listed in the report 82 of them are with Mexico (I am Mexico #2 though there are a number of factual errors in the description.)

Yet Mexico has been upgraded from "Noncompliant"  to having "Patterns of Non-Compliance"

Overall a VERY disappointing report and a HUGE step backwards from previous reports.

Unlike in prior years State has chosen to hide the total number of abductions from and to the United States as well as the total number of abductions per country.

It seems State is determined to continue their longstanding history of obscuring the breadth of this issue.  Not only do I not see them getting better, but if this report is any indication (and it certainly is!) they are getting worse.

I hope that Congressman Smith will add significant additions to State's reporting requirements in any bill he proposes.

This report is total shit.. a whole new low in the performance of the US Central Authority on the Abduction Convention.

[LukieD]

I would also like to know why the quality and quantity of this report appears to have taken a serious turn for the worse. Where is all the data that appeared in previous reports and why the changes and obvious omissions? Will the lawmakers who this is intended for have anything to say about the changes?

This report looks like a landscape PowerPoint presentation for a school project, rather than a serious report by the US Dept of State. I'd really like to know who at State decided that they didn't have to report the same information as compared to previous years.

[SageDad]

I believe that State previously reported total numbers because they considered the numbers low enough that the provided numbers served to diminish the visibility and importance of this issue.  As those numbers began to increase dramatically and the percentage and numbers of returns began to decrease (something they also excluded from this report is the number of returns) they chose to exclude the numbers altogether.

Any action that State undertakes in relation to international child abduction can be understood if you appreciate that their goal is, and has always been, to prevent the issue of international abduction from becoming a real issue that impacts States other "more important" foreign policy objectives.

All of their distortions, actions and inactions over the course of decades can be readily encompassed under this narrative.

If the shoe fits...

[tweinstein]

I spoke to someone at the OCI and he confirmed that my case was #6 in the Brazil section. I was told that the accounting for the reports ended on December, 2010 and that the cut-off to be included was June 30, 2009. Like Carlos, I am still trying to get clarification on the factual errors in my brief summary.

[gil]

they don't even repeat the column headings on the top of each page in the last section. How much time did they spend on this?

[M.Capestro]

Compared to what went out last year, I'm having a hard time believing this is the official report.

I agree the 2011 report looks like an internal document that someone released in error.

[tweinstein]

I asked and was told that it was partially a budgetary issue.

[SageDad]

I asked and was told that it was partially a budgetary issue.

If you believe that I have some lovely real estate in Mexico I think you'll be interested in...

OCI refuses to be transparent on how their money is spent, will not ask for more money and then claims they are constrained by their budget.  Kinda like when State sets up a set of policies to not help parents and then claims they can't help parents because they aren't allowed to.

How much does it really cost to generate this report anyway?

They have last years report.  Would it really have been so hard to just fill in the blanks from last year with this years numbers?