Japan: a haven for parental abductions?

posted at 12:00 pm on September 12, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

I have been meaning to write something on this topic for quite a while.  I first began corresponding with Randy Collins a few months ago through a mutual friend who wondered whether Collins’ story might make for a good Hot Air topic, and he told me of his son Keisuke — who was kidnapped years ago and taken out of the country.  Unlike many kidnappings, everyone knows exactly where Keisuke is; he’s in Japan, with his mother Reiko.  Despite having a court order granting Randy custody, Japan refuses to extradite Reiko and give Keisuke back to his father, and Randy is hardly alone in this predicament:

Several countries, including Japan, Singapore and South Korea, are not signatories to the 1980 Hague treaty on international child abduction. These countries regard parental abductions of children as a matter for family, not criminal courts.

As a result, authorities in these countries won’t extradite parents for prosecution in the U.S., forcing victim parents to battle things out via diplomatic channels or in civil courts of the country where their child is living.

Randy Collins, 49, of Anaheim Hills, is fighting to get back his son, Keisuke. The boy was 5 when his mother, Reiko, fled with him to her native Japan in June 2008 despite a court order forbidding her from leaving the country.

“Japan will not lift a finger in returning my son to his home country,” said Collins. “I cannot begin to express the deep pain, heartbreak, frustration, and sense of loss I have had to live with every day since Keisuke’s abduction.”

Earlier this year, NBC profiled another, similar case for their nightly news broadcast:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

They have more stories on Japan and child abductions here. Japan has refused to sign the Hague Conventions on child custody, the only industrialized nation to balk. Japan therefore considers parental abductions a family-court matter rather than a criminal matter, even when standing court orders in the US ordered the abducting parent not to leave the country, as in Reiko Collins’ case. The US cannot get extradition in these cases, which leaves parents like Randy with no recourse whatsoever.

Congress has taken notice of this issue. Earlier, a bipartisan effort to scold on Japan for their obstruction of justice was authored by Reps. Jim Moran (D-VA) and Chris Smith (R-NJ) in an attempt to pressure Tokyo into cooperation. Smith warned that sanctions might follow:

Sponsored by Rep. Jim Moran, a Democrat from Virginia, and Rep. Chris Smith, a Republican from New Jersey, the resolution calls on the American government to emphasize to Japan that it is a major bilateral issue that must be resolved by joining the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

“The House condemns the abduction and retention of all minor children being held in Japan away from the United States parents in violation of their human rights and United States and international law. It calls on the government of Japan to immediately facilitate the resolution of all abduction cases, to recognize U.S. court orders governing persons subject to jurisdiction in a U.S. court, and to make immediately possible access and communication for all children for their left-behind parents,” the resolution reads.

But first, parents victimized by Japan have to fight apathy from their own State Department:

In a telephone interview with The Japan Times Thursday morning, Paul Toland, a U.S. Navy commander now living in Maryland whose daughter Erika was taken from their home at a U.S. naval housing facility in Yokohama in 2003 by her now deceased mother, said the resolution shows that Congress is getting behind the issue, although he criticized the State Department for not doing enough to push the issue.

“We’re now fighting the apathy of the Japanese government and the U.S. State Department,” Toland said.

The bill, HR 1326, is only a non-binding resolution. However, even that weak effort has ground to a halt. Four months later, the resolution remains stuck in the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. These children are American citizens abducted and transported overseas in defiance of custody rulings, and Congress thus far can’t even manage a finger-wag. It’s long past time for the US government to demand accountability and cooperation from Japan, and the return of children kidnapped from their custodial parents.

Update: One commenter criticized me for repeating the 20K figure used by advocates without checking and verifying the figure. I think that’s a very fair criticism, and I have changed the subhead to “Too many,” because that at least is indisputable. I’ll try following up with Rep. Smith to see if he has some clear figures on this. I’d be leery about accepting the State figures at face value, too, though.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Considering the anti-father and one-sided nature of family courts in the west, I can’t honestly say this bothers me very much.

abobo on September 12, 2010 at 12:07 PM

Most foreign countries are. That is why you better think long and hard before you have a child with someone who has citizenship or the right to citizenship of a foreign country.

Blake on September 12, 2010 at 12:12 PM

This is the kind of issue that some of our past presidents have handled particularly well with quiet diplomacy. It’s deeply saddening to think of the family situations in which this could happen. I’m not sure lots of noise from Congress is the best way to put pressure on Japan, but clearly, this needs to be addressed. I wish I could think O and Hillary are running a show that could get some results.

J.E. Dyer on September 12, 2010 at 12:14 PM

When you prepare to marry someone who is a citizen of another country, take some time to look into what precisely that may mean legally.

MayBee on September 12, 2010 at 12:14 PM

It’s simple. Japan signs the treaty, or the US makes very clear that they will look the other way on, if not actively support efforts by mercenaries to kidnap juvenile American citizens from their Japanese families.

Sekhmet on September 12, 2010 at 12:16 PM

Most foreign countries are. That is why you better think long and hard before you have a child with someone who has citizenship or the right to citizenship of a foreign country.

Blake on September 12, 2010 at 12:12

Exactly.

If the US started forcing kids back to other countries they’d be an outcry.

Heck, Clinton had to send swat in to send Elyan back and that didn’t go over too well.

TheBigOldDog on September 12, 2010 at 12:17 PM

A few years back, I remember a case that involved either Norway or Sweden where the mother absconded with the child back to her home country.

And Canada can be an a-hole, too, though I think they learned their lesson: Google Dr. Andrew Bagby and Zachary Bagby. They made a documentary about it and it’s like having your heart ripped out.

Blake on September 12, 2010 at 12:24 PM

Interesting. I had never heard this about Japan.

I wonder… are the examples overwhelmingly of Japanese mothers and American fathers? Does the shoe fit on the other foot? What I mean is, if an American mother of a child with a Japanese father ‘flees’ to America from Japan, does Japan seek extradition?

This is why I think bilateral agreements are better than multilateral agreements. I can think of a few countries where Japan would not want such a relationship. I can even think of a coldly political reason why Japan would not want such a relationship with the US: Japan’s rapidly aging population.

But if relationships such as this were bilateral, the pressure that could be brought to bear by the US would be much greater.

Sekhmet’s solution is… direct, and probably not the best idea. It would certainly highlight the issue, though.

Scott H on September 12, 2010 at 12:25 PM

Keep in mind, this happens with the duplicity of the US State Department and the airlines.The State Department, and even the airlines are usually notified well ahead of the of the intent to flee the country, yet they allow estranged parents to leave unencumbered. While it is horrible that Japan, and the rest of the countries allow this, it is despicable that our own State Department does nothing.

The only chance a parent has is if the his state is able to stop the estranged parent, and then it is difficult if the child gets into the airport, or boards the aircraft. Your vote counts, and is important. Much more could be done to stop kidnappings if there were fewer internationalists in our government.

Rode Werk on September 12, 2010 at 12:27 PM

Sad thing is that many of these children are considered substandard by the full blooded citizens of the country they are residing in. They don’t get treated very well in many cases.

It would be in the best interests of the children to be in the US in most cases.

The biggest question I have is how did they actually leave the country. Even a child has to have a passport now. Both parents have to agree for a passport.

I am going through that now. My ex is from South Korea and has moved back there years ago. Unfortunately, to get a passport I have to have her signature and I have no means of getting in touch.

So how did these kids actually leave?

Dannic on September 12, 2010 at 12:29 PM

The State Dept and Justice Dept will need to be flushed and disinfected in 2013.

Mojave Mark on September 12, 2010 at 12:30 PM

This is satire intended to make a strong political point:

http://infanticide-canada.weebly.com/

Blake on September 12, 2010 at 12:31 PM

Does it have to do with the Japanese ancestry of the child? I love Japan, it’s an incredible place to visit and travel, but they have a racist streak a mile long.

Bishop on September 12, 2010 at 12:34 PM

Considering Japan is in the powerful position of being either our #1 or #2 debt holder (it swaps positions with China), I’m not surprised Congress won’t take a stand. Our government isn’t in any position to demand that Japan, or China for that matter, do anything.

Kim Priestap on September 12, 2010 at 12:36 PM

After the way our buffoons in Congress unfairly abused Toyota because of seniors that got their pedals mixed up, or were outright con artists, I don’t think the Japanese are thinking too well of us.

slickwillie2001 on September 12, 2010 at 12:38 PM

Bishop on September 12, 2010 at 12:34 PM

Haven’t you learned by now that the only people in all of history who were ever racist are Republican-Americans?

Just ask Barack Obama, he’ll tell you.

NoDonkey on September 12, 2010 at 12:38 PM

The biggest question I have is how did they actually leave the country. Even a child has to have a passport now. Both parents have to agree for a passport.

Dannic on September 12, 2010 at 12:29 PM

Minor children can travel abroad on their parent’s passport, especially if the spouse has a US Military Armed Forces ID. Dependent spouses can keep their Military ID’s even after divorce or separation. Also, many countries will grant passports with only one parent initiating, and signing. My ex-wife has Japanese passports for all of my children, and I have never been notified by anyone other than her about it. Fortunately for me our divorce was semi-amicable and she has no intent of living in Japan.

I know a couple of fathers who have had difficulties with their Japanese ex-wives being allowed to get passports from Japan and even the US while bypassing the father.

Judges are also at fault, especially when they know the mother is a flight risk they still grant visitation, and weekend custody.

Rode Werk on September 12, 2010 at 12:58 PM

So now we’re again going to try to force Japan to sign a treaty?

We had no trouble with Japan until we forced them to sign a treaty the first time.

DarkCurrent on September 12, 2010 at 1:10 PM

Unless the kid is being abused, we should let them parents work it out. No government needs t be concerned.

It is a domestic squabble.

esnap on September 12, 2010 at 1:29 PM

Psych evaluations should be mandatory of parents who abduct.

John the Libertarian on September 12, 2010 at 1:36 PM

If the US wants to get this issue noticed, the Congress should halt all diplomatic efforts and cooperation regarding the Japanese abductees in North Korea.

Dongemaharu on September 12, 2010 at 2:26 PM

I read Collins site – what a bitter bitter man he is. Never mind that she is a legal citizen of another country and that if he really wanted to see his son he could move to Japan and live there. Or that for the same reason his son is considered a US citizen by birth so too is he considered a Japanese citizen.
Never mind that he makes attacks on her parent’s character and posts false information about the 900$ payments the parents get, whom he refers to as abductors, when in fact any person in Japan with kids (including foreigners but probably not military folks due to the SOFA agreement) get certain amount of money per month.
He spends a lot of time tearing down the mother of his child and spills details of her previous marriage and problems, yet he was all too willing to date her on the rebound less than a year after her first divorce and to marry her within 2 years.

Bradky on September 12, 2010 at 2:48 PM

Unless the kid is being abused, we should let them parents work it out. No government needs t be concerned.

It is a domestic squabble.

Uh, they did “work it out” through the family courts, and he got custody. She then broke the law by illegally taking him out of the country.

You see, when someone breaks the law, the government “needs to be concerned”. Helping to uphold the laws of the land is one of the things the government is actually supposed to do.

Tomblvd on September 12, 2010 at 2:56 PM

One other thing – he also goes out of his way to post her current address in Japan and email address with encouragement to “Feel free to write her an email or write a letter to her or her parents at the above address.
“. For someone who is concerned about the well being of his child this seems a very odd thing to do.

Bradky on September 12, 2010 at 2:57 PM

Just checking: we don’t have any agreements like this that would force us to return a child to Egypt for genital mutilation just because her father was awarded custody in an Egyptian court, do we?

Count to 10 on September 12, 2010 at 3:02 PM

I read Collins site – what a bitter bitter man he is.

Yea, I’m mean, he only had his child kidnapped, what’s the big deal?

Tomblvd on September 12, 2010 at 3:02 PM

His claim

Mine is not an isolated incident. Over 20,000 children have been kidnapped to Japan in the past 10 years. seems wildly inflated.

From Wiki
“United States
The U.S. State Department, which enforces the treaty in the U.S., in 2009, has more than 2,000 active cases involving nearly 3,000 children abducted from the U.S. or wrongfully retained abroad.[25] The ten countries with the highest incidence of reported abductions in 2008 are Mexico (316), Canada (57), the United Kingdom (42), Japan (37), India (35), Germany (34), the Dominican Republic (25), Brazil (21), Australia (18), and Colombia (17) which represents 602 cases out of total of 776. Japan and India are the only non-signatory countries within this rank.[26] However, there is a significant year by year increase. In 2009, 73 outstanding cases involving 104 children who have been abducted to or retained in Japan by parents.[27] An additional 29 cases involve American parties in Japan with one parent denied access to their child.[27] However, according to the latest December 2009 figure, there appears to be 79 child abduction cases involving 100 children.[28] A State Department official stated in 2008 that no child has ever been returned to the United State as a result of diplomatic or legal means[29] Furthermore, they only knew of three cases where children have returned to America, two involving reconciliation of parents, and one in which a 15 year old child escaped to the American embassy.[29]“

Bradky on September 12, 2010 at 3:08 PM

I have mixed feelings about this. Sometimes, parental “abduction” occurs because one party (usually the dad) got screwed over in family court or because one party (usually the mom) doesn’t honor visitation rights among other outrages.

So I’m not too excited about telling other countries to help our messed up family courts to enforce their decisions.

WannabeAnglican on September 12, 2010 at 3:29 PM

I hope in some way, this article helps Randy and others get their children back!

Thanks for posting, Ed!

CliffHanger on September 12, 2010 at 3:56 PM

Parental Custody disputes are ugly enough in country. When one parent is the citizen of another country I find it easy to understand why they would take the child and flee to their country to gain custody.

Not sure that there is really a good side, or a bad side here.

Just parents that divorced and now both of them want the children- and like most parents are willing to do whatever they have to to obtain that custody.

Sackett on September 12, 2010 at 4:44 PM

He spends a lot of time tearing down the mother of his child and spills details of her previous marriage and problems, yet he was all too willing to date her on the rebound less than a year after her first divorce and to marry her within 2 years.

Bradky on September 12, 2010 at 2:48 PM

There is something weird about the guy, kind of like the Balloon Boy father, also married to a Japanese wife.

I’ve noticed that American guys who marry Japanese or Korean women are often abusive and want a very submissive wife.

I’m guessing he married her, brought her over here, then divorced her. Since he is American citizen and she is not, he automatically gets custody of the child. She would then be deported with nothing.

It is a family dispute, and the government should stay out of it. The kid is probably better off in Japan than with an abusive father here in America.

Gabe on September 12, 2010 at 4:45 PM

Also, Elian Gonzalez was a Cuban citizen with a nutcase Marxist father. The mother “abducted” (according to liberals)her son to move him away from that society and father. She did the right thing.

But according to Ed’s logic and his post, the child would have no right to stay in America because of what a “court” might decide in Cuba. And that is exactly what liberals did and forced the child back to Cuba.

I can understand why Japan and other countries do not want to sign the 1980 Hague treaty and be held by arbitrary and often very corrupt custody decisions of foreign countries.

Gabe on September 12, 2010 at 5:11 PM

The kid is probably better off in Japan than with an abusive father here in America.

Gabe on September 12, 2010 at 4:45 PM

Do you have any evidence that the father in “abusive”? Seems that the court that awarded him custody would have learned about that and NOT awarded him custody.

I also note that the founder of this website would be considered an “Asian wife” — just her parents were from the Republic of the Philippines, not “Japan or Korea” where the women are “submissive” as you write in your post.

I don’t consider Ms. Malkin “submissive” — just one really cute and smart American whose family came from lands of the Pacific. Perhaps less “branding” with stereotypes would be a better thing, no? We might get at the problem, not just its “skin.”

65droptop on September 12, 2010 at 5:19 PM

I’ve noticed that American guys who marry Japanese or Korean women are often abusive and want a very submissive wife.

Wow, stereotype much?

I’m guessing he married her, brought her over here, then divorced her. Since he is American citizen and she is not, he automatically gets custody of the child. She would then be deported with nothing.

Well, you’d guess wrong. She had been in the US for twenty-five years prior to the marriage.

It is a family dispute, and the government should stay out of it. The kid is probably better off in Japan than with an abusive father here in America.

No, it was a family dispute until the woman decided to break the law. It then became a legal issue.

Tomblvd on September 12, 2010 at 5:35 PM

I also note that the founder of this website would be considered an “Asian wife” — just her parents were from the Republic of the Philippines, not “Japan or Korea” where the women are “submissive” as you write in your post.

I don’t consider Ms. Malkin “submissive” — just one really cute and smart American whose family came from lands of the Pacific. Perhaps less “branding” with stereotypes would be a better thing, no? We might get at the problem, not just its “skin.”

65droptop on September 12, 2010 at 5:19 PM

You seem like a liberal ready to jump out and cry “racism” any chance you get.

Notice I said “Korean” and “Japanese.” I didn’t mention wives from the Philippines. I’ve lived in Asia and have a degree in Asian Studies. The East Asian countries (China, Korea, and Japan) are very Confucian, and the wives are expected to be submissive.

It is different most of the Southeast Asian countries. The cultures there are much more Westernized because of the colonial influence and because Confucianism is not prevalent. The women there are on much more equal basis to men than in Japan, Korea, or China.

The Philippines is a very westernized culture both because of the Spanish and the American influence.

Gabe on September 12, 2010 at 5:36 PM

Ed Morrissey states in the headline:

20,000 in past 20 years.

Did Ed do his research? A good journalist would before making a wild claim as that one. The number that Ed quotes is, as Bradky has pointed out above, not real according to State Department statistics. Really? There are 20,000 cases of American citizens abducted to Japan?

Where is the backup for that claim besides an arbitrary number invented by the father? There needs to be a retraction, and a journalist with integrity would.

Gabe on September 12, 2010 at 5:52 PM

There are plenty of men online who claim that foreign women, specifically Russian and Asian, make far better wives than American women. I’m told they are feminine and really know how to treat a man.

Gotta love these reality check stories (in a sad way).

The moral of this story is don’t marry anyone who is a legal citizen of another country. Period.

mistythestripper on September 12, 2010 at 5:58 PM

Where is the backup for that claim besides an arbitrary number invented by the father? There needs to be a retraction, and a journalist with integrity would..

Speaking of, where is the proof that the father was abusive, and a retraction that he just went to Japan to marry and bring back a “submissive” wife?

Tomblvd on September 12, 2010 at 6:11 PM

There are plenty of men online who claim that foreign women, specifically Russian and Asian, make far better wives than American women. I’m told they are feminine and really know how to treat a man.

Gotta love these reality check stories (in a sad way).

The moral of this story is don’t marry anyone who is a legal citizen of another country. Period.

mistythestripper on September 12, 2010 at 5:58 PM

I’ve been married to a Chinese woman for 20 years. She’s been an American citizen for around 7 or 8 years. We have a couple of kids, 17 and 14.

Never had much trouble with her.

DarkCurrent on September 12, 2010 at 6:25 PM

Never had much trouble with her.

That’s because she’s “submissive”, just ask Gabe, our Asian Studies expert….
;-)

Tomblvd on September 12, 2010 at 6:29 PM

There are plenty of men online who claim that foreign women, specifically Russian and Asian, make far better wives than American women. I’m told they are feminine and really know how to treat a man.

Gotta love these reality check stories (in a sad way).

The moral of this story is don’t marry anyone who is a legal citizen of another country. Period.

mistythestripper on September 12, 2010 at 5:58 PM

No the moral as I see it is very simple:

If you love someone enough to marry them-commit to each other for life-and either one of you is a dual-citizen have a discussion beforehand on where you would like to make your lives together, her nation or yours (in my hypothetical example as I’m a guy).

Once this has been talked about well before the wedding and agreed upon, either yourself or your future spouse then retract (or otherwise discard) the citizenship of the other nation.

I am of the firm belief that if you love someone enough to marry them, abrogating citizenship (by one or both parties) should not be that hard.

SgtSVJones on September 12, 2010 at 6:31 PM

That’s because she’s “submissive”, just ask Gabe, our Asian Studies expert….
;-)

Tomblvd on September 12, 2010 at 6:29 PM

Yeah, she’s one of those submissive Shanghainese women. ;)

DarkCurrent on September 12, 2010 at 6:32 PM

Where is the backup for that claim besides an arbitrary number invented by the father? There needs to be a retraction, and a journalist with integrity would..

Speaking of, where is the proof that the father was abusive, and a retraction that he just went to Japan to marry and bring back a “submissive” wife?

Tomblvd on September 12, 2010 at 6:11 PM

We are still waiting…..

Kjeil on September 12, 2010 at 6:44 PM

I’ll try following up with Rep. Smith to see if he has some clear figures on this. I’d be leery about accepting the State figures at face value, too, though.

What this shows is that Ed has integrity as a journalist.

We always have to take claims by advocacy groups with a grain of salt.

Also, I would be leery about jumping on the bandwagon of ANYTHING sponsored by the left-wing nutcase Tom Moran. I’ve never understand why Republicans feel such a need to work with Democrats to pass anything. Don’t they have anything better to do than pick on Japan?

Picking a fight with a staunch ally, such as Japan, is something Democrats love to do, and Republicans should have nothing to do with it. Japan and other countries have many good reasons not to sign the the Hague conventions on child custody, as the Elian Gonzalez injustice should demonstrate.

Gabe on September 12, 2010 at 6:51 PM

@gabe aka “Asian Studies Expert” who thinks I am a liberal.

1. Where is the evidence the court in the United States missed that the father was, in your words, “abusive”?

2. Where did I claim you were racist? I did note your stereotyping, which others have as well.

3. Been waiting a while for your answers.

65droptop on September 12, 2010 at 6:53 PM

I’ve never understand why Republicans feel such a need to work with Democrats to pass anything.

Er, because there aren’t enough Republicans to pass any legislation on their own????????

Are you paying attention here sport?

Don’t they have anything better to do than pick on Japan?

The kidnapped child is IN JAPAN. Would you prefer they yell at Australia for a while to make you feel better?

Tomblvd on September 12, 2010 at 7:02 PM

Considering the anti-father and one-sided nature of family courts in the west

All of us men are nothing but rapists and abusers. I think that’s in the Constitution, isn’t it?

oldleprechaun on September 12, 2010 at 7:17 PM

I’ve never understand why Republicans feel such a need to work with Democrats to pass anything.
Er, because there aren’t enough Republicans to pass any legislation on their own????????

Are you paying attention here sport?

Don’t they have anything better to do than pick on Japan?
The kidnapped child is IN JAPAN. Would you prefer they yell at Australia for a while to make you feel better?

Tomblvd on September 12, 2010 at 7:02 PM

If you don’t understand, let me rephrase: There are so many important issues that Congress could be addressing right now. It really doesn’t seem to be practical to waste time sponsoring a bill punishing a staunch ally such as Japan. Of course, Democrats love punishing and bullying our allies and then coddling enemies. Republicans shouldn’t.

If Tom Moran thinks that because Japan does not feel it is in its best interests to submit to the Hague Conventions on Child Custody, they should be punished with sanctions, let him stupidly go for sanctions against an ally because of such a minor issue. Japan has very good reasons as the Elian Gonzalez injustice demonstrates to NOT sign the Hague Conventions of child custody.

But for Republicans to be cosponsoring a bill punishing our most powerful ally in Asia for not complying with an international treaty? Doesn’t make any sense.

Gabe on September 12, 2010 at 7:24 PM

@Gabe,

I think that you have spent far too much time reading about Asian cultures than living in or interacting with them. If you believe that Japanese or Chinese women are submissive, you have missed ten years of headlines (in local magazines) and conversations with those who are married to such women.

In one book (Shalom Japan (1997), I believe), the author discusses how a Japanese wife sends a fax to her husband at work so that he knows how to get to the new house she bought and furnished for the family with no input from him.

The Japanese have an entire vocabulary (such as, 肉食系女子-carnivore woman, and 草食系男子ーherbivore men), to describe the power women now hold in relationships.

This is a big issue and it isn’t helped by the use of stereotypes, especially those that are more than ten years old.

JiyuLife on September 12, 2010 at 7:29 PM

Still waiting Gabe…..

Tomblvd on September 12, 2010 at 7:46 PM

This is a big issue and it isn’t helped by the use of stereotypes, especially those that are more than ten years old.

JiyuLife on September 12, 2010 at 7:29 PM

I’ve lived several years in Korea and worked for Koreans, so I have interacted very much in Korean society, which is the most Confucian society in the world. Confucianism greatly influenced Japan as well. China lost a lot of its traditional Confucian values because of Communism, but these are all male dominated societies. Yes, the women often control the money for the household finances, but they are expected to stay home, cook, raise the kids, while the husbands are working. In most cases, jobs for women are things like being a secretary, and they are expected to quit as soon as they have children.

you have missed ten years of headlines (in local magazines) and conversations with those who are married to such women.

These types of stories have always been popular in Korea and Japan. Why? Because of the novelty and because they are so unusual and are entertaining as a result. We wouldn’t have headlines in newspapers and magazines like that in America.

Gabe on September 12, 2010 at 7:52 PM

I think that you have spent far too much time reading about Asian cultures than living in or interacting with them.

JiyuLife on September 12, 2010 at 7:29 PM

I’ve lived several years in Korea and worked for Koreans, so I have interacted very much in Korean society, …

Gabe on September 12, 2010 at 7:52 PM

You both sound like Asian Studies nitwits to me.

DarkCurrent on September 12, 2010 at 8:23 PM

You both sound like Asian Studies nitwits to me.

DarkCurrent on September 12, 2010 at 8:23 PM

Yeah but you stayed at a holiday inn express… /sarc

Bradky on September 12, 2010 at 9:40 PM

I am of the firm belief that if you love someone enough to marry them, abrogating citizenship (by one or both parties) should not be that hard.

SgtSVJones on September 12, 2010 at 6:31 PM

No one goes into love expecting they will split up. The tendency of international marriages is that the woman will usually go to the husband’s country.
Unless she changes her citizenship I think it is unrealistic to expect that anyone could be denied the right to return.
When kids are involved it is tragic but what a minefield if you expect the governments to play Solomon about who gets to keep the kid in their country.

Bradky on September 12, 2010 at 9:54 PM

The moral of this story is don’t marry anyone who is a legal citizen of another country. Period.

mistythestripper on September 12, 2010 at 5:58 PM

Yeah they should marry strippers with loose morals and a golddigger mentality — that will be a match made in heaven…./sarc

Bradky on September 12, 2010 at 10:08 PM

Even if the State Department or even our gov’t at large had a spine…we aren’t in much of a position to do much. Not only does Japan hold a Hugh-Jass portion of our debt, but remember the last time we sent a kid home? To Cuba, of all places? Textbook PR disaster. Nobody who values their career will support risking that kind of mess again.

Dark-Star on September 12, 2010 at 11:29 PM

I think you are wandering into a minefield on shaky ground with this one Ed. Between two parents, there is often another side to consider, and another story …which makes all these cases tricky even where both nations are signatories to the treaty.

lexhamfox on September 13, 2010 at 12:55 AM

Go to Japan, find them and bring them back.
If the exes show up in the States they’ll be sent to jail for violating a court order.

Bounty hunter types could open a whole new line of work.

Bubba Redneck on September 13, 2010 at 2:40 AM

Bishop on September 12, 2010 at 12:34 PM

Haven’t you learned by now that the only people in all of history who were ever racist are Republican-Americans?

Just ask Barack Obama, he’ll tell you.

NoDonkey on September 12, 2010 at 12:38 PM

Dam amateurs:
“This article is racist and it’s George Bush’s fault.”
See! You have to admit that the above statement was shorter and carried the same meaning. Don’t let it happen again!

BruceB on September 13, 2010 at 8:48 AM