International child relocation cases are different from domestic ones, but these differences are often overlooked by lawyers and judges. This is mainly because both types of cases are governed by the same legal principles, and international relocations are relatively rare.
One major difference is the nature of the applicant. Parents seeking international relocation have unique challenges compared to those wanting to move within the same country. Another key difference is that while U.S. legal systems are similar between states, foreign countries have varied laws on custody and the enforcement of U.S. custody orders, which complicates matters.
Expat parents seeking to move internationally with their children often share common struggles that need to be better understood by lawyers and judges. (This doesn’t cover cases where American parents move overseas for work or love.) In my experience, these applications are usually made by mothers wanting to return to their home country. There are three common types of expat parents in this situation:
A “trailing spouse” is someone who follows their partner on a job assignment abroad. For example, a German couple moves to New York for a few years due to the husband’s career. While he’s thriving, the wife feels isolated, struggles with the language, and misses home. Over time, their relationship deteriorates, leading to a divorce. The wife wants to return to Germany with their child, but the husband opposes it, arguing that their child has lived most of their life in New York.
A “romantic expat” moves abroad for love. For instance, a Japanese woman moves to Illinois with her American husband, but struggles to adjust to life in the U.S. She misses her family and the Japanese way of life. After their marriage ends, she wants to return to Japan with their child, but her husband opposes it, citing the child’s attachment to his life in the U.S.
A “holdover expat” initially came abroad for a short-term reason, like studying or working, but then decides to stay. For example, a Colombian woman studying in Florida marries an American and has a child. When they divorce, she wants to return to Colombia with their child, but her husband objects, stating that she has lived in the U.S. longer than expected.
In all these cases, the courts tend to focus on the child’s stability and life in the U.S., often ignoring the emotional toll on the mother. Even though a happy mother is often better for the child, the focus on the child’s existing life in the U.S. typically wins in court.
If relocation is denied, the situation can become tense:
This can lead to criminal abduction charges, parental alienation, and costly legal battles, all of which harm the child.
The legal system needs to better understand the struggles of expat spouses. Many are unfairly labeled as difficult or irrational, when their actions are often natural responses to difficult situations. Understanding this plight is already common in the business world, where expat families’ challenges are well recognized. The legal system should adopt a similar approach.
A better solution could be a fair compromise that allows the mother to relocate under certain conditions, such as:
While not perfect, this approach could be more effective than simply denying relocation requests in compelling cases.