Support Global Voices

To stay independent, free, and sustainable, our community needs the help of friends and readers like you.

Donate now »

See all those languages up there? We translate Global Voices stories to make the world's citizen media available to everyone.

Learn more about Lingua Translation  »

Japan: Parental child abduction

Given the rise in cases [en] where children born to a Japanese mother and a foreign father are abducted by the Japanese mothers and brought to Japan without the father's consent, U.S., France, Canada and the U.K. have recently urged Japan to sign the Hague Convention. The treaty, covering international child abduction, came into force in 1983 to provide specific legal means for promptly returning the child to their original state of residence.

By flickr user id: ajari.

By flickr user id: ajari.

So far Japan is the only one in the Group of Seven Nations who hasn't signed the treaty, which means that the government is not required to give any information regarding the child or the mother who returned to Japan or even ask the parent to return the child.

Also, awareness about the question is very low among the citizens and major media don't help to raise knowledge of the problem. Blogger and activist Debito comments and criticizes [en] the coverage of the child abduction question by the NHK (Japan national broadcasting organization), where the cases and information provided were biased against the foreign fathers.

I watched the NHK report this morning, and was, frankly, gravely disappointed. After giving some stats on international divorce (around 20,000 cases last year, about double that ten years ago), NHK gave three case studies in brief: […]
It even concluded with the typical relativities (i.e. how everyone’s doing it, therefore Japanese can too), mentioning in passing alleged cases of how NJ mothers were abducting Japanese kids overseas (meaning that now suddenly Japanese fathers were kawaisou [poor thing]; the bottom line was that Japanese are being kawaisoued). The MOFA was quoted as not being able to comment on whether Japan would be able to sign Hague.
No mention at all was made by NHK that there has not been a single case of children being returned to the NJ parent by Japanese courts (the converse is untrue), that Japanese are committing crimes (and not honoring overseas court custody rulings, such as the Murray Wood Case), or that (and I speak from experience of not seeing my kids for about five years now) the Koseki system [Japanese family registration system] will deny all title and access to Japanese parents too after divorce.
NHK tried too hard to be sympathetic to either abducting Japanese mothers, or the position of Japanese in general (not the kids and how they’re affected by not having both parents in their lives). What a crock.

Lawyer Kawahara calls for more proactive and responsible action and participation by the politicians irrespective of which party they belong to.


Many are the cases of Japanese women who divorce from their foreign husbands and come back to Japan bringing their children with them and the failure to sign the treaty by Japan gives to countries such as Canada and U.S. grounds for criticism of such actions.[…]
After the election of the Tokyo Metropolitan Assembly, there has been no further discussion in the Diet about the treaty. but surely the job of the members of Parliament should be to legislate to improve the functioning of our laws and treaties?
Even if the Upper House passed a censure motion against Prime Minister Aso, it's absolutely irresponsible for members of the Diet to leave the discussion as it is, with the excuse that the elections are close. A lot of bills will probably be discarded.
And this is foolish for Japan will be sooner or later left behind by the international community.
Though the possibility of attaining Government seems high for the present opposition party, the DPJ, they should collaborate with the governing party for the sake of national politics, and act with dignity.

Also another lawyer, Mori, expresses his opinion about the child abduction issue but he is more doubtful about the ‘internationality’ of the problem itself.


A Japanese woman gets married to a foreigner and has a child. However, wife and husband don't get along and she brings the child with her back to Japan. We, Japanese, react with a mere “Uhm”.
Here stories such as the ‘evil’ husband one day comes back home after work and finds no one at home because she went back to her parents` house are ordinary and don’t become a reason for a divorce lawsuit.


However, abroad this is called ‘child abduction’ and is considered a crime.
In particular, in case of Japanese women, there are often cases in which they won't listen [to their ex-husband], they ignore his letters and don't even let him know where they live.
[…] For this reason, U.S., U.K. and France are urging Japan to join the Hague convention.
However, here such cases do not apply to International law but to household law and it's not good to globalize everything in every case. Every country should be free to deal with the matter according to its own culture and it's not that easy to say without any hesitation whether one should or should not sign the treaty.

But the child abduction issue does not impact only on Western parents, as the manager of a blog/agency that arranges international marriage points out.


About 80 western countries have already ratified the Hague Convention but Japan, Korea, China, Philippines and other Asian countries haven't as yet.
I heard that the Japanese Foreign Ministry had a lot of cases of Japanese men married to Chinese women complaining and saying things like “My wife went back to China taking the child with her without notice. I want my child back!”
On the other hand there are also cases where a Japanese man married to a Chinese woman divorces in Japan and when they contest custody in the court, it's often the Chinese mother who ends up being denied access to her child.
In any case it is the innocent children who suffer most in these situations.
I feel that Japan should arrange a national law to fix this situation as soon as possible.


  • saki




    最近も、STORY RETRACTED: Nara child abduction case results in NJ father assaulted, bricked in head, computer evidence destroyed


    • Sakiさん、以上のポストにはDebitoさんのブログを紹介したわけではありません。

      • saki


        1)私は、NHKの番組を見ていませんが、Scilla Alecciさんはご覧になりましたか?

        • NHKの番組を見ました。Debitoさんの解釈はDebitoさんの解釈です。人の意見には正しさが関係ないと思います。その解釈と賛成できないと言う権利が読者にはありますが、人の意見を尊敬すべきだと信じています。


          • saki






            なるほど、そうした憎悪ある意見も尊重するのがScilla Alecciさんのお立場かもしれない。



  • saki


    No mention at all ・・・以下、しっかり、過去記事にリンクしているではないですか?

    the converse is not trueにリンクされているのは、親権の管轄についてです。とすれば、There has not been a single case



    • saki



      Sometimes, the child doesn’t want to go. Early this year, Gus says, an American father agreed to pay him $70,000 to recover his 10-year-old daughter from Japan, assuring him that the girl would acquiesce. Gus went to the Philippines to prepare an escape route by boat. He then flew to Tokyo and, accompanied by the father, hustled the girl into a van as she left home. “That little girl screamed bloody murder,” Gus told me. “She was beating at the windows.


      The Atlantic Monthly on mercenary child-retreivers, mentions Japan

      Posted by debito on October 17th, 2009

      AOL on Child Abductions and child retriever Gus Zamora, letter to from Gus

      Posted by debito on November 7th, 2009


  • Vap

    The many of the translations are incorrect. For example

    “Here stories such as the ‘evil’ husband one day comes back home after work and finds no one at home because she went back to her parents` house are ordinary and don’t become a reason for a divorce lawsuit.”

    The correct translation is
    “Stories such as “A husband who does not get along with his wife one day come home after work and find that the house is empty because the wife went back to her parents’ house with the child(ren)” are daily occurrence that the matter does not become an issue in divorce proceeding.”

    Written Japanese is not easy one to translate into English. You should get someone to check your translation. Something like “evil husband” is an easy mistake to spot for a native Japanese with some fluency in English.

Join the conversation

Authors, please log in »


  • All comments are reviewed by a moderator. Do not submit your comment more than once or it may be identified as spam.
  • Please treat others with respect. Comments containing hate speech, obscenity, and personal attacks will not be approved.

Receive great stories from around the world directly in your inbox.

Sign up to receive the best of Global Voices!

Submitted addresses will be confirmed by email, and used only to keep you up to date about Global Voices and our mission. See our Privacy Policy for details.

Newsletter powered by Mailchimp (Privacy Policy and Terms).

* = required field
Email Frequency

No thanks, show me the site