Impact of Family Abduction National Organization of Forensic Social Workers 4/16/12

1. Impact of Family Abduction National Organization of Forensic Social Workers 4/16/12 Geoffrey L. Greif, DSW, LCSW-C School of Social Work University of Maryland ggreif@ssw.umaryland.edu

2. Baltimore Maryland

3. Overview of This Morning’s Talk • Familiarize you with family abduction, the reasons for it, and its short and long-term impact on left-behind parent and child • Offer a lens for considering this traumatic event & other separations & reunifications • Explore clinical issues • Show videos covering family abductions, one covering 17 years in a family’s life

4. Purpose of Abduction Work • Social workers are driven by belief in importance of human connection • Social workers hold belief that family members need each other and want to be together when possible • With abduction, something “wrong” has happened (often includes violence) and with social justice, we try to “right” wrongs

5. A Lens: Ambiguous Reunification • Based on Pauline Boss’s work on ambiguous loss – see her Loss, Trauma, and Resilience (2006) • Ambiguous Loss – most stressful loss, defies resolution & creates confusion about who is in and out of family. With death there is certainty, not with AL; based on MIA families, earthquake survivors, 9/11 families

6. Ambiguous Reunification • With reunification, assumption is that all is well and people can return to the family – but much has changed as we will see. • Is this similar to adoption issues of meeting biological parents, to immigrants who “bring over” left-behind family members, custody disputes, and to OEF/OIF?

7. Ambiguous Reunification • When parent and child expectations about recovery do not align • Child goes from being missing physically and being present psychologically to being present physically and absent psychologically. Parent may be missing psychologically if not ready to deal with child and changes in child • More likely with long-term abductions

8. Ambiguous Reunification • Others (family members/media) in social context may be pressuring to either confront or avoid issues • (see Greif (In Press). Ambiguous reunification: A way for social workers to conceptualize the return of children after abduction and other separations. Families in Society.

9. Family Abduction Defined as one parent or family member takes a child in violation of the other parent’s rights to custody or access (Greif & Hegar, 1993). Also, defined as a parent intentionally concealing the whereabouts of the child to prevent contact with the other parent. States and countries vary in their definitions; see Hague Convention.

10. Recent High Profile Abductions • Jaycee Dugard (stranger aka non-family) In 2009, Jaycee, abducted when 11, found 18 years later, gave birth to two daughters by abductor; daughters now lose contact with father • Goldman case in Brazil (family) In 2009/2010, David Goldman won custody of his son, Sean, who had lived in Brazil for five years with his mother who died in 2008. • Shawn Hornbeck (stranger) In 2007, Shawn was found after Bill Ownby was snatched. Scott had been missing since 2002 when he was 11. • Elizabeth Smart (stranger) In 2002, was 14; found 9 months later after being taken by a couple.

11. …and Elizabeth Morgan • Family abduction in the 1980s where Dr. Morgan sent her daughter to New Zealand with her parents after fearing her ex-husband, Eric Foretich, was sexually abusing her. She went to prison rather than reveal whereabouts.

12. The Context of Divorce in U.S. • About 43% of marriages end in divorce • Of 72 million children in U.S., 49 million live with both parents • 16 m live with single mo., 3.2 m with single fa. (from married and non-married) grandparents/others raise the rest • Estimated 61% of divorces from first marriages have kids under 18

13. With divorce/separation, there may be: • On-going tension - animosity pre-separation can be worse than post • Property disputes • Custody disputes • Money disputes and Legal wrangling • Inability to share parenting • Domestic violence and child abuse • Children’s needs misread or ignored

14. Context for Abduction: Why Abduct? • Anger from the breakup and inability to agree on custody set stage • Domestic and international reasons can vary There are personal and relational issues: On personal level (within abductor) - unemployed /under-employed; little to lose; psychological problems; desire for revenge; does not fit in with society; and significant support elsewhere (international cases); personal issues may drive abduction

15. The Context for Abduction On relationship level –belief child is not happy or is unsafe with other parent (or step-pt.); domestic violence; attempts to get help through legal/social service channels fail; custody attempts fail. Child “asks” to live with the abducting parent – interactions with others drive the abduction (along, perhaps, with previous issues) Info from Greif & Hegar (1993).

16. Cultural Differences • Parents return to their home country • Religious differences within U.S. • Parenting belief differences • Differences about how to raise special needs children • Political/philosophical/lifestyle differences

17. Abductor • Feels justified in abducting; some remorse • Child gives meaning to life • Changes name, loses everything, builds life around child, tipping parental-child boundaries; some establish stable lives • Aftermath, with recovery, may lose contact but many, after years, keep child • REMEMBER – this is a crime

18. Video Clip of Abductor • Took child for 11 years • Felt fooled by husband who promised to reconcile if she signed papers • Saw child going into foster care • Believed system was against her • Worked through Child Find to reconcile

19. Impact on Left-Behind Parent • Depression, anxiety, loss, mourning, and resulting feelings of lack of sleep, appetite, etc. – all varies by length of time missing • Some fear child killed • Fear child will be turned against them • Impact on work/career • Impact on relationships • Can’t go on w/ life but must: double-sword

20. What are the U.S. numbers? Finkelhor et al (2002) NISMART II (phone survey of 16,111 homes): • 800,000 kids reported missing each year • 12,100 non-family abductions with 115 stereotypical long-term (40% of 115 killed) • 56,500 family abductions • Majority of 800,000 are runaway, thrownaways, missing for other reasons

21. Finkelhor et al NISMART II • Almost half of family abductions last less than one week, often only for weekend • 21% of family abductions missing more than one month • 44% of children taken are under 6 • 53% were taken by dads/25% by moms • Boys and girls equally apt to be taken

22. Family Advocacy Outreach Enews Fourth Quarter 2011 for U.S. Missing ChildrenSexually Exploited Children Fam. Abduction 93 Nonfamily Abd 3 Online Enticement 10 Endangered Victims of pornography 11 runaways 105 Victims of prostitution 11 Lost/injured/othe 3 Other sexual assaults 7 Cases intaked within the Family Advocacy Network of NCMEC; not all cases are reported to NCMEC

23. What is the Harm?(Finkelhor et al NISMART I) • 16% of children experience mental harm • 4% of children experience physical harm • 4% of children experience physical abuse • 1% of children experience sex abuse

24. What Happens to Child Huge variations but… • Child may be wrenched from loving parent, familiar surroundings, supportive family members such as grandparents and siblings, as well as from friends, school, home, toys, and routines. • Child may be told other parent is dead, unloving, impaired – see videotape

25. Short-term Consequencesvary by situation and include*: • Nightmares • Fears of doors and windows • Bedwetting (depending on age) • Fears of authority and/or strangers • Anger at abductor and left behind parent • Depression and anxiety • Regression • School difficulties *general literature (see Greif & Hegar, 1993. Am Jo of Orthopsychiatry) – refers to both short-term and long-term abductions

26. Long-term Consequencesvary by situation and include: • Depression and anxiety • Emotional cut-offs from parents • Fantasies about one or both parents’ behaviors and motives • Guilt for causing the abduction • Fear of marriage and child rearing • Sibling issues • Name issues (see Greif, 2003 NCMEC sponsored study)

27. What is related to coping? • abducted for shorter periods of time • with “favored” parent • in stable hiding places • well-treated • naturally resilient • with siblings and other family members • non-traumatic return • leaving a traumatic pre-abduction situation

28. National Center for Missing and Exploited Children NCMEC was established by U.S. Congress in 1984 after a high profile child abduction/murder. Funded through Department of Justice and private contributions. (www.missingkids.com)

29. My work with NCMEC 1. National survey of 14 missing children’s organizations (n=371;Greif & Hegar, 1993) 2. Meeting at NCMEC with adults who were taken when young by parent (Greif, 2003). 3. Group meeting with siblings of missing children (Greif & Bowers, 2007) 4. 2008 In-depth interviews with adults taken when young (Greif, 2010)

30. A Brief Look at Findings • 2003 – Adults who were taken as kids • 2007 - Adults whose siblings were taken • 2010 – Adults who did not self-identify were interviewed about their abduction when young

31. Dr. GreifI would like the opportunity to respond to the interview.  It has left me with so much mixed emotion.  I feel that my world got bigger in a way because of my participation in the study, but I am also at odds with the idea of my return home being referred to as a reunification.  When I first heard about the study the term reunification meant nothing to me - it still holds no special meaning.  If one reunites with loved ones, shouldn't that event have some special meaning, some familiarity?  If reunification means anything, to me it meant being abducted all over again, only without the hope that things would get better.  At least with the initial abduction I always thought things would be normal, better again if I could only get home, there was always at least that hope.  Returning held only mass confusion, but I was the only one confused, everyone around me just went along with their lives as if nothing had happened.

32. Also, the thought of my return being referred to as a reunification also brings anger and sadness.  The interview has forced me to change how I perceived things to be when I finally came home.  I should have been met with and felt much happiness, but that just isn't what really occurred.  It's been a lifetime of minimizing and denial.  Home and family were forever gone, replaced by a mother I no longer knew or recognized and who didn't know me, a new stepfather, and a sister who didn't want me around.  Once again living with strangers.  I left without any of my personal possessions and returned without any possessions.  I have never been able to find that sense of being connected to people or to a home.  I've always felt that I was on the outside looking in, never a part of any family, never a part of any groups of people of any sort, left always with the feeling of being different from everyone else and not being able to fit in.

33. I guess I felt the need to tell you these things because I don't know if I was able to answer your questions at the interview, I was too uncertain of myself, and had no clear thoughts of my own reunification.  But also I had the sense that I was betraying my family, knowing that most would see me as a liar or instigator.  I really don't feel that I was able to contribute much to your study and wish I could feel differently because participating in it has meant a lot to me.  It was a validation that something bad did happen.  When you've had a lifetime of being told that nothing happened or it's in the past get on with your life, it becomes very important that someone understands.Thank you for the experience.  (signed)

34. Clinical Issues from NCMEC 2003 Clinical issues should be addressed openly as deception has characterized their lives. Normalize their experiences by telling them they reacted normally to extraordinary events. Takeroot.org is one source to read about other people’s experiences which can help in this process

35. Clinical Implications • Think about family therapy and broader family context that spawned abduction • Look for PTSD/Abuse symptoms • Help resolve paradox as to whether they were victim or victimizer who caused abduction or hurt abductor after recovery • Speak to identity confusion and fear of relationships

36. Issues from NCMEC 2007 Meeting in 2005 as part of service to adults whose siblings were/are missing [non-family] (Greif & Bowers, 2007) – similar in some ways to family Common themes related to impact: • Siblings’ loss of trust in parents, police, and physical environment (home) • Change in perception of law enforcement – many felt ignored and are doing own search

37. Common Themes Continued c. Siblings watch how parents responded and grow up to respond in similar ways d. Communication in family then and now e. Media’s role – often characterized the situation incorrectly though also helped in search – led to ambivalence f. Anger/compassion at current cases –retraumatized by news reports

38. Common Themes Continued g. Dysfunctional coping – drugs/alcohol, sexual acting out, school underachieving h. Struggle with whether sibling is dead or alive i. Spirituality/need to find meaning as coping mechanism j. Impact on next generation with separation anxiety from own children/hypervigilance

39. Clinical Implications for Siblings • Establish Trust by being knowledgeable and understanding – give feeling client is being taken care of • Help them understand parents’ reactions and give them permission to be angry at parents; most understand cognitively why parents weren’t emotionally available • Encourage discussion about the missing sibling and allow disagreement about it

40. Clinical Implications for Sibs Cont. • Help with raising next generation by discussing boundaries, disciplining, and autonomy • Help them find meaning • Give permission to move on with new life • Discuss healthy coping

41. 2010 NCMEC Funded Study • Nine people missing for 18 months to 15 years and are now over 21 were interviewed – eight were family abductions and one was non-family abduction (by baby-sitter) (Greif, 2010).

42. 2010 Study • Confirms earlier findings about long-term impact • Reunification is ambiguous – people believe all is well with return but it is not (one example of polka dot dress) • Seeking therapy important • Social support system important

43. 2010 Study • Parents need to: listen, be open to what is heard, stay positive, help children relinquish protective role of siblings, do not force connection with the past, be open to therapy, understand legal issues with reunification • Children need to: prepare for long process, form a support system, seek help, especially if victimized

44. 2010 Study • Social workers need to: learn what the experiences were of the client, maintain transparency/openness/honesty, listen, understand that healing takes time, convey to children that no subject is taboo, consider group and family therapy, help child avoid triangulation with abductor/left-behind parent, help understand desire to see abductor…

45. 2010 Study • Help keep media away….

46. Why spend resources on this? • Existential question • It is linked to other issues cited earlier • It has international implications for cooperation between countries (Hague Convention governs this) • Study of ambiguous reunification connected to immigration, adoption, incarceration, custody

47. One Family’s Story: Video • Filmed over 17 years • Children abducted by father after mother “took” children due to domestic violence • Mother remarried during their absence • Mother recovered children from foster homes – daughter first (8) and then son (5)– after three years apart from them • Initially, daughter has easier adjustment; this changes in adolescence

48. Common Themes • Fear of father – they are in hiding in early years • Fear is replaced by desire to see him • Protection/support mother gives • Protection sister gave brother while hiding • Sister now wants to make up for lost time with mother and brother

49. Ambiguous Reunification • Mourning loss and accepting new reality • Are roles clear? How have children and mother adapted, even years later? • Do expectations meet reality • How does this apply theoretically to adoption, immigration, separation, returning home, and other reunifications…? • What are social work implications?

50. Video • 2000 – mother & son (16) talk about dau. • 1989 – mother, son (age 5), & dau. (age 8) • 1990 – mother, son, daughter • 1991 – mother, son, and daughter • 1992 – mother son, and daughter • 2000 – mother and son again • 2006/2007 – Siblings (22 and 25)