Mom’s bid to have daughter returned to U.S. dismissed

Judge rules teen who was sexually abused in Connecticut can live with her dad in B.C.

A B.C. judge has found that a 15-year-old girl who was sexually abused while living with her mom in the U.S. had legitimate objections to being returned to the mother and has ordered that she be allowed to stay with her father in Victoria.

The girl, who is only identified by initials in a court ruling on the case, had been living since birth in the state of Connecticut with her mother, who had sole custody under an agreement with the father. The dad had visitation rights, and in the summer of 2017 the girl visited him at his home near Victoria.

After a seven-week stay in Canada, the girl refused to return to her mother. She has remained in B.C. and is now attending school here.

Citing a civil law that deals with international child abduction cases, the girl’s mother went to court in B.C. seeking the return of her daughter.

In his ruling, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Bruce Butler noted that under the law, the girl had been wrongfully retained in B.C.

The judge said the court was obliged to order that the girl be sent back to the U.S. unless one of the exceptions under the law could be found.

The father argued that while his retention of his daughter was wrong, he opposed her return to the mother on the basis that the girl is of an age and maturity that her views about where she should live should be taken into account by the court.

The court heard that for a number of years while the girl was living in Connecticut, she had been sexually abused by a cousin who was four years older, the abuse beginning when she was nine years old.

She told her mother about the abuse around June 2016 and told her father about the abuse in December 2016. The girl told a Vancouver Island psychologist who prepared a report on the case that she had wanted to live with her father for the past three years, and found living in B.C. a lot less stressful than living in Connecticut, where she was in a “bad place.”

The psychologist concluded that there was no indication at all of any “child-parent alienation” taking place and that the girl cared about her father more than her mother for a number of positive reasons.

The judge noted that the girl’s objections to returning to the U.S. were rational and serious.

“She was the victim of sexual abuse from a family member for four years and her perception of the aftermath of the abuse has caused her to distance herself from her mother’s family,” he said.

The girl had two additional objections to what was going on in Connecticut.

She was exposed to family abuse by her mother’s partner and had been teased and bullied at school because of her sexuality.

“That kind of bullying does not occur at the school in British Columbia, where she feels like she fits in,” said the judge.

“These circumstances also provide rational, objective reasons for (the girl’s) preference to live in British Columbia.”

She was the victim of sexual abuse from a family member ... and her perception of the aftermath of the abuse has caused her to distance herself from her mother’s family.