Voluntary international relocation with a finnish child

[clarissa]

Hi,
A friend of mine came to Finland 4 years ago, she is from South America and was married to a finnish man. Two years ago they had a babyboy. 7 months ago they decided to separate and they are currently in the process of divorce and it seems like they will have shared custody of the baby.
She has no relatives in Finland and no job and even when she has good finnish skill, It will be very hard for her to get a job in her field because we live in Pohjois Savo and not many chances here. My friend wants to go back to her home country with the baby and do their lives there. In her home country she would have help of her family to raise the child and very good opportunities with her profession. The problem is that the father of the baby won't allow her to leave. Is that possible? Can he deny her the right to relocate permanently? I have been helping her to find out what to do (because she doesn't speak english) in this case, but we don't know yet because nobody seems to know what to do in such a case. The lawyer (form the oikeus aputoimisto) that is taking her divorce case have said that she can't help her with this issue because it is not possible to do it. Is it so? I have find out that there is no official legislation when it comes to voluntary international relocation and each case has to be evaluated in court. Does anyone know of similar cases? What has the result been? Does my friend have any chance to success or she would have to stay here until the child is older?
Thanks for the information

[rinso]

In general you cannot take a child out of the country if the other parent objects. (when you have joined custody.)
If you do, it will be considered kidnapping.
A court can give permission tho but they only look at the welfare of the child, not the situation of the mother.
A solution might be to get sole custody.
But than the husband has to agree to that (he probably won't) or he must be a risk to the child.
I'm sorry to say, but it looks like the mother has only few options, all with limited chance of success.

[Upphew]

Hi,
A friend of mine came to Finland 4 years ago, she is from South America and was married to a finnish man. Two years ago they had a babyboy. 7 months ago they decided to separate and they are currently in the process of divorce and it seems like they will have shared custody of the baby.
She has no relatives in Finland and no job and even when she has good finnish skill, It will be very hard for her to get a job in her field because we live in Pohjois Savo and not many chances here. My friend wants to go back to her home country with the baby and do their lives there. In her home country she would have help of her family to raise the child and very good opportunities with her profession. The problem is that the father of the baby won't allow her to leave. Is that possible? Can he deny her the right to relocate permanently? I have been helping her to find out what to do (because she doesn't speak english) in this case, but we don't know yet because nobody seems to know what to do in such a case. The lawyer (form the oikeus aputoimisto) that is taking her divorce case have said that she can't help her with this issue because it is not possible to do it. Is it so? I have find out that there is no official legislation when it comes to voluntary international relocation and each case has to be evaluated in court. Does anyone know of similar cases? What has the result been? Does my friend have any chance to success or she would have to stay here until the child is older?
Thanks for the information

"32 § (4.3.1994/186)
Luvaton poisvieminen ja palauttamatta jättäminen

Lapsen poisviemistä tai palauttamatta jättämistä on pidettävä luvattomana, jos:

1) se loukkaa lapsen huoltoa koskevia oikeuksia, jotka kuuluvat henkilölle, laitokselle tai muulle toimielimelle, joko yksin tai yhdessä, sen valtion oikeusjärjestyksen mukaan, missä lapsella välittömästi ennen poisviemistä tai palauttamatta jättämistä oli asuinpaikka; ja

2) näitä oikeuksia oli poisviemisen tai palauttamatta jättämisen hetkellä tosiasiallisesti käytetty, joko yksin tai yhdessä, taikka olisi käytetty, jos poisviemistä tai palauttamatta jättämistä ei olisi tapahtunut.

Lapsen poisviemistä tai palauttamatta jättämistä ei ole pidettävä luvattomana, jos 1 momentin 1 kohdassa tarkoitettujen oikeuksien haltija on antanut menettelyyn suostumuksensa taikka on sen joko nimenomaisesti tai hiljaisesti hyväksynyt."
http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/ajantasa/1983/19830361

He can't deny _her_ right to relocate, just like she can't deny the father from the child.

edit. forgot the finlex link

[clarissa]

He can't deny _her_ right to relocate, just like she can't deny the father from the child.

Thanks for the legal information and yes, I get the point. My friend is not trying to leave the country illegally with the child, that's why she is looking for a legal solution.
The reason why she and the husband splited was because he was psicologically violent to her and the baby. She lived in a turvakoti for some months and now she moved to her own apartment and is depending 100% on the social benefits. Right now she is studying finnish and she is with the child all week. The dad takes the child only on the weekends. To be fair, their situation (hers and the baby's) is not bad, they have their basic needs covered, but it would be much better in her home country. She would have more opportunities there and the family could help to take care of the baby. The dad has a good job here with an average income and he travels often to South America (at least 1 or 2 times per year), so it's not like he will loose contact with the child.

Do you think that in this case the embassy of her home country should help with the legal issues?

I know each case has to be evaluated individually and the chances don't seems to be with her. I know it is about the child, but all the time she has been the primary care giver so I would hope her psicological well-being would be taken in consideration.

[007]

[............The dad takes the child only on the weekends.

As far as I understand, a father can have a child at his place only on weekends.. that too once in two weeks. As for a mother being a primary caregiver, well.... it's a priviledge given to the mothers by law, fathers are at odds here.

[interleukin]

As for a mother being a primary caregiver, well.... it's a priviledge given to the mothers by law, fathers are at odds here.

There´s nothing in the law that says the mother HAS to be the primary caregiver. However, that´s almost always how it turns out.

[Upphew]

Sorry to highjack this thread briefly.. does anyone know the age at which a child, with dual citizenship, can decide which country they want to live in if Mom lives in country A and Dad lives in country B?

Changing the country against the will of child over 12 (or younger if s/he is "mature" enough) isn't going to happen. But they can decide by themselves when they are 18.

http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/ajantasa/1983/19830361 11 §
http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/ajantasa/1996/19960619 2 §

[tampere_gal]

She's stuck here unless he gives his blessing on them leaving.

I'm in the same boat, been to court many times. Unless my formerly abusive Finnish ex suddenly grows a soul and releases me, I'm stuck in his hometown for fifteen years at his whim, or then I'd have to leave without my children.


People should never have children in a foreign country without a legal prenup type contract specifying ahead of time, that they will be the sole custodian free to leave with the children in the event of a divorce. It was the biggest mistake of my life. Finland is my prison, to be honest. I try to think of ways to be at peace with it every day, and to make this country my home despite being forced to be here against my will. I miss my family. I miss being around normal daylight exposure and smiling/open human interactions. Sigh.

[Rip]

People should never have children in a foreign country without a legal prenup type contract specifying ahead of time, that they will be the sole custodian free to leave with the children in the event of a divorce.

I seriously doubt this would have been legally possible here anyway, and if it were for exactly the same reasons why would the other spouse agree to sign it?

[onkko]

Finland is my prison, to be honest. I try to think of ways to be at peace with it every day, and to make this country my home despite being forced to be here against my will. I miss my family. I miss being around normal daylight exposure and smiling/open human interactions. Sigh.

That is irrelevant, law is about what is good for children and fck your emotions. Its irrelevant if youre happy or not.

[clarissa]

That is irrelevant, law is about what is good for children and fck your emotions. Its irrelevant if youre happy or not.

It is not irrelevant, since the psycological and emotional state of the parents influence the child. That's why in other countries the situation of the primary care giver is evaluated when making a decision about relocation.
If the child is old enough to feel he/she belongs to that country that is different, because it would harm the child to take him away from his environment, but when the child is still a toddler it doesn't make much difference if he is moved to another country, but it makes a lot of difference if the mother (in this case) feels depressed and trapped in that country. It is quite unfair in anycase. But that's life, specially when you are a foreigner.

[rinso]

That is irrelevant, law is about what is good for children and fck your emotions. Its irrelevant if youre happy or not.

It is not irrelevant, since the psycological and emotional state of the parents influence the child.

The psychological/emotional state of the primary caregiver is taken into account. But that doesn't mean relocation is the only option. It is quite possible that if the mother is to depressed she is no longer considered fit to take care of the child.
The child (and the rights of the father) are protected by Finnish law. Relocation means the Finnish law doesn't apply anymore. A judge will not easily make that decision.

[Adrian42]

It is not irrelevant, since the psycological and emotional state of the parents influence the child. That's why in other countries the situation of the primary care giver is evaluated when making a decision about relocation.

Being 10 000 km away from the other parent also has a negative influence on the child.

[tampere_gal]

Amazing display of compassion, onkko. I wasn't making any statement of whether the law is right or not (totally different conversation). OF COURSE the well being of the child is the main point. (It isn't however always the case that staying in the country is automatically the best option for the child's brightest future-just saying.) I was just pointing out the downside of having a family in a foreign country in the event that the relationship goes disastrously, and basically saying it is what it is, and as the foreign parent you are basically held hostage and have to make the best of it. Someone has to lose in these cases of divorce where children are concerned. The stranded foreigner has a tough way of it, and the other parent will have a tough way of it if the group of them moves to the other parent's country.
My point I guess was that people should really think twice before having a child in a foreign country. I wish I had taken the step more seriously, or even had a faint clue what kind of a decades-long sentence I was signing myself into. Oh, the naive ideas of very young marrieds. Oh, and why would the partner be willing to sign a prenup waiving their rights to keep their child in their home country in the event of divorce? If they badly enough want to have a child with a foreigner in their home country, and that foreigner isn't willing to be the one to waive (by default) the same exact thing, and doesn't want their future pre-determined by the law. Someone has to waive their rights to freedom to live in their home country in the event of a divorce, it's just by default the foreigner. It could be possible to include in a prenup that in the event of divorce, the default would swing the other way. It would be just as fair, just having the shoe on the other foot, so to say.
Divorce is ugly where children are concerned. It always is, even where bi-cultural relationships are not an issue. I think that the location of where the parents and child(ren) end up living after the divorce, whether it be near dad's family and in dad's home country or near mom's family or in mom's home country, certainly isn't the primary factor leading to the best outcome for the child(ren). This onkko seems to think that sticking to keeping the child within the state lines of the government of where the child arrived on the day of their birth is the end all be all of what the child needs out of its future. The most important thing is that the parents work well co-parenting and can focus on raising their children without any hostility as non-married partners in parenthood, and that the parents are devoted to the children. Everything else will work itself out in either country.

To the original post, it sounds awful and tragic and she made a big mistake moving here and having a baby with an abuser and she will have to remain here despite all other factors that would actually lead to what's best for the child in the long run.

I think warning people against making babies in foreign countries without being really really sure that they never plan on leaving is the answer! An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure! But, people in the early stages of a relationship always believe they will beat the odds and not end up a divorce statistic. So sad.

[cors187]

I miss my family. I miss being around normal daylight exposure and smiling/open human interactions. Sigh.

Even though your story is sad and the Fins are retarded in many ways ,the last part of your message made me smile.Keep up the good work