在英国、威尔士、澳大利亚和美国的海牙儿童诱拐诉讼中听取儿童的异议

IF 1.3 Q1 LAW
Laws Pub Date : 2023-08-05 DOI:10.3390/laws12040069
Michelle Fernando, Jess Mant
{"title":"在英国、威尔士、澳大利亚和美国的海牙儿童诱拐诉讼中听取儿童的异议","authors":"Michelle Fernando, Jess Mant","doi":"10.3390/laws12040069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article we compare how children’s objections to being returned to their country of origin are treated in Hague child abduction matters in three different international jurisdictions: England and Wales, Australia, and the United States. We examine the relevance of children’s views for the purposes of the ‘gateway’ stage of the relevant exception to mandatory return, and how children’s objections have been approached in legislation, case law, and scholarly commentary. We critique each jurisdiction’s approach against the objectives of the Hague Convention and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. We discuss how aspects such as the methods by which children are heard can make a difference to experiences for children and make recommendations to promote greater certainty and consistency in how children’s objections are heard and considered across jurisdictions.","PeriodicalId":30534,"journal":{"name":"Laws","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hearing Children’s Objections in Hague Child Abduction Proceedings in England and Wales, Australia, and the USA\",\"authors\":\"Michelle Fernando, Jess Mant\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/laws12040069\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this article we compare how children’s objections to being returned to their country of origin are treated in Hague child abduction matters in three different international jurisdictions: England and Wales, Australia, and the United States. We examine the relevance of children’s views for the purposes of the ‘gateway’ stage of the relevant exception to mandatory return, and how children’s objections have been approached in legislation, case law, and scholarly commentary. We critique each jurisdiction’s approach against the objectives of the Hague Convention and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. We discuss how aspects such as the methods by which children are heard can make a difference to experiences for children and make recommendations to promote greater certainty and consistency in how children’s objections are heard and considered across jurisdictions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":30534,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Laws\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Laws\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/laws12040069\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Laws","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/laws12040069","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在本文中,我们比较了三个不同的国际司法管辖区(英格兰和威尔士、澳大利亚和美国)在海牙儿童诱拐案件中如何处理儿童对返回原籍国的反对。我们研究了儿童观点在强制归还相关例外的“门户”阶段的相关性,以及儿童的反对意见在立法、判例法和学术评论中是如何处理的。我们批评每个司法管辖区违反《海牙公约》和《儿童权利公约》目标的做法。我们讨论了听取儿童意见的方法等方面如何对儿童的经历产生影响,并提出建议,以促进跨司法管辖区听取和考虑儿童反对意见的方式的更大确定性和一致性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Hearing Children’s Objections in Hague Child Abduction Proceedings in England and Wales, Australia, and the USA
In this article we compare how children’s objections to being returned to their country of origin are treated in Hague child abduction matters in three different international jurisdictions: England and Wales, Australia, and the United States. We examine the relevance of children’s views for the purposes of the ‘gateway’ stage of the relevant exception to mandatory return, and how children’s objections have been approached in legislation, case law, and scholarly commentary. We critique each jurisdiction’s approach against the objectives of the Hague Convention and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. We discuss how aspects such as the methods by which children are heard can make a difference to experiences for children and make recommendations to promote greater certainty and consistency in how children’s objections are heard and considered across jurisdictions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Laws
Laws LAW-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
16.70%
发文量
77
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信