In 2006 the Supreme Court of Japan made a DVD titled “Kodomo no Iru Fufu ga Hanarete Kurasu Toki ni Kangaenakereba Naranai Koto” (“What Couples with Children Must Think About When They Live Apart”). The basic message in this video is positive and helpful. In essence the video says children need both parents to be happy.
Most likely, if you’ve gone through divorce with children involved with a Japanese national, you’ve never heard of, let alone seen this video. The Supreme Court of Japan, just a few years ago, thought the issue important enough to warrant MAKING the video, but the lower family courts refuse to show it. How can this be? How can the family courts not show this video-which was made by the SUPREME COURT, and which exists solely for the family courts? Moreover, the family courts hide the existence of this DVD. Most parents don’t know about it, and, even if you do know about it there is no guarantee you can watch it. You need to have an active case and you need special permission from the judge to watch this DVD. Few parents know of it’s existence, fewer still ever see the video, but it exists, it’s REAL, and it has pertinent information that flies directly in the face of the traditional Japanese style of divorce, which is, one parent essentially ‘gets’ the children, and the other parent essentially gets the shaft. As in many issues of importance here in Japan, the reality, the ‘sensible’, is discarded in favor of the traditional, even if the traditional makes no sense.
Why make a powerful and helpful video, then hide it? Who benefits from that? Judges in Japan have no real power. Judges can save face by not showing the video. There are no penalties if one parent violates the visitation or custody agreement. Judges and police are unwilling to fine or jail non-compliant parents. So, why stir up a hornets nest by showing this video unless you are willing to penalize parents for not following court orders? Judges don’t show the video because they are aware that if they do, one parent might cause a ruckus about seeing their child(ren)—and without being willing or able to penalize parents who are non-compliant with their decisions, judges can slink off quietly without having to bear any responsibility for informing parents of the importance of both parents being involved in children’s lives after divorce. It’s their (the judges) way ‘out’, go the traditional route, don’t ask questions, keep with tradition, even if families and children and the future of the country is at stake. Bogus.
Recently, there’s a lot of talk about Japan finally signing the Hague Convention’s resolution. The Hague Convention on the International aspects of Child Abduction was designed to do one thing and that is return children quickly to their country of habitual residence. This is really simple and easy to understand. The court in the country of habitual residence is supposed to make the decisions about all parties concerned. And this makes sense because the schools, courts, police, etc. have all the information about everyone involved in the child’s life. Unfortunately, some countries are not very good at returning children to their country of habitual residence. But, almost every non-Hague country, except Japan, has returned at least one child to their country of habitual residence. Japan is the only country that has never returned one child. Japan is special. Over the last 5 years in Japan, many countries have put pressure on Japan to sign Hague. Japan has consistently said they are studying the issue, and recently they’ve indicated they will sign. With one condition, no, well, actually, with several conditions, and these conditions will most likely uphold Japan’s tradition of never returning any kidnapped or abducted children.
These conditions, among others, are:
1) if the child has adjusted to his new environment in Japan.
2) when a spouse has given consent to bring the child to Japan.
3) when the child refuses to return to his/her former residence.
4) if the child is at risk of abuse, either mental or physical.
-amongst others. It’s easy to see that these conditions are difficult to disprove, especially in cases with small children who have been coerced into saying, well, anything.
Japan is special indeed. So special, in fact, that for reasons unknown, they have not agreed to be part of what appears to be an almost universally accepted way to deal with international child abduction. So special, that they commission potentially helpful and informative videos to be made about the importance of children having access to both parents, yet they hide the existence of those same videos. So special, that they allow thousands of children to go without access to both parents, in a day and age where it has become a given that children need both parents to properly grow up and have a chance at adjustment. Japan is so special, that if you ask teachers of young students who have gone through divorce, they’ll tell you honestly and obviously that children need both parents, but the Japanese government and family courts don’t seem to agree—some traditions take a long time to die out. This selfish, ‘childish’, rogue tradition of denying children their right to have both parents in their lives should have gone the way of the dodo bird.
If you are not happy with this scenario you can contact Children First and find out how to help. A few concerned parents with big hearts and a little free time started Children First. Children First is a comprehensive advocacy group for issues affecting children’s rights and welfare. To learn more, please go to www.childrenfirst.jp and look at the ‘mission statement’ tab as well as children’s issues tab. The Children First website is still under construction. They are always looking for web savvy individuals to help build their webpage as well as bilingual people to help with translation. Children First also has a face book page (Children First Japan) and blog (kwbrow2.wordpress.com).
