Hi me again yes visitation has been setup for me and my daughter and my ex wants to do visitation by the courts rules and in there it says she can't take my daughter out of state so if she does take my daughter and moves back to PA then wouldn't it be considered kidnapping??

Yes, it would be considered a federal offence. Kidnapping it would be.

No, it would most likely be interfering with custody, and/or contempt of court.

Seldom do they change kidnapping in custody cases.

Also who has primiary custody, you or your daughter ( remember "me again" does not tell us anything from prior posts)
If the mother has custody and you are given visits, and she moves out of state, that is merely a contempt of court issue.

Hi chuck, but what about this:

S.P.A.R.C. Separated Parenting Access & Resource Center
"Keeping Families Connected" t

Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act

If a party (such as your ex-spouse) refuses to return your child, you may seek relief under the Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act (PKPA). Contact the local law enforcement authorities and request they assist in the return of the child. If they refuse, insist that they enforce the PKPA Statute. Local law enforcement is bound by law to enforce the PKPA, and it is NOT up to them to selectively enforce it OR to decide the merits of any specific case or situation where the PKPA is applicable.

Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act
28 USC Sec. 1738A

* 28 § 1738A. Full faith and credit given to child custody determinations

(a) The appropriate authorities of every State shall enforce according to its terms, and shall not modify except as provided in subsection (f) of this section, any child custody determination made consistently with the provisions of this section by a court of another State.

(b) As used in this section, the term -

(1) 'child' means a person under the age of eighteen;

(2) 'contestant' means a person, including a parent, who claims a right to custody or visitation of a child;

(3) 'custody determination' means a judgment, decree, or other order of a court providing for the custody or visitation of a child, and includes permanent and temporary orders, and initial orders and modifications;

(4) 'home State' means the State in which, immediately preceding the time involved, the child lived with his parents, a parent, or a person acting as parent, for at least six consecutive months, and in the case of a child less than six months old, the State in which the child lived from birth with any of such persons. Periods of temporary absence of any of such persons are counted as part of the six-month or other period;

(5) 'modification' and 'modify' refer to a custody determination which modifies, replaces, supersedes, or otherwise is made subsequent to, a prior custody determination concerning the same child, whether made by the same court or not;

(6) 'person acting as a parent' means a person, other than a parent, who has physical custody of a child and who has either been awarded custody by a court or claims a right to custody;

(7) 'physical custody' means actual possession and control of a child; and

(8) 'State' means a State of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or a territory or possession of the United States.


(c) A child custody determination made by a court of a State is consistent with the provisions of this section only if -

(1) such court has jurisdiction under the law of such State; and

(2) one of the following conditions is met:

(A) such State (I) is the home State of the child on the date of the commencement of the proceeding, or (ii) had been the child's home State within six months before the date of the commencement of the proceeding and the child is absent from such State because of his removal or retention by a contestant or for other reasons, and a contestant continues to live in such State;

(B) (I) it appears that no other State would have jurisdiction under subparagraph (A), and (ii) it is in the best interest of the child that a court of such State assume jurisdiction because (I) the child and his parents, or the child and at least one contestant, have a significant connection with such State other than mere physical presence in such State, and (II) there is available in such State substantial evidence concerning the child's present or future care, protection, training, and personal relationships;

(C) the child is physically present in such State and (I) the child has been abandoned, or (ii) it is necessary in an emergency to protect the child because he has been subjected to or threatened with mistreatment or abuse;

(D) (I) it appears that no other State would have jurisdiction under subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (E), or another State has declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that the State whose jurisdiction is in issue is the more appropriate forum to determine the custody of the child, and (ii) it is in the best interest of the child that such court assume jurisdiction; or

(E) the court has continuing jurisdiction pursuant to subsection (d) of this section.

(d) The jurisdiction of a court of a State which has made a child custody determination consistently with the provisions of this section continues as long as the requirement of subsection (c)(1) of this section continues to be met and such State remains the residence of the child or of any contestant.

(e) Before a child custody determination is made, reasonable notice and opportunity to be heard shall be given to the contestants, any parent whose parental rights have not been previously terminated and any person who has physical custody of a child.

(f) A court of a State may modify a determination of the custody of the same child made by a court of another State, if -

(1) it has jurisdiction to make such a child custody determination; and

(2) the court of the other State no longer has jurisdiction, or it has declined to exercise such jurisdiction to modify such determination.


(g) A court of a State shall not exercise jurisdiction in any proceeding for a custody determination commenced during the pendency of a proceeding in a court of another State where such court of that other State is exercising jurisdiction consistently with the provisions of this section to make a custody determination.

Yes, it would be considered a federal offence. Kidnapping it would be.



This is absolutely incorrect legal advice. Question is posted all the time and goes back and forth. There is some question whether you can kidnap your own child.

The correct answer is it might be, it could be, it never is.

Lots of people have posted this and so far no one has been charged with kidnapping. Custodial interference, yes. Kidnapping, no.

Okay, JKT, I realize that is ABSOLUTELY INCORRECT LEGAL ADVICE and thanks for putting that in your usual diplomatic terms to a poster who has been on here for a while and is called an expert as well.

You completely ignored my post after that regarding regarding kidnapping parent act.

You are a moderator, JKT, and I think more is expected of you in the way of an answer to an ultra member.

What the heck does your post mean anyway "The correct answer is it might be, it could be, it never is".

Give me some websites, some information that substantiates your claims that your answer is correct.



I am NOT a moderator - we've been through this before. What you "think" about how I should answer is meaningless to me. As you so aptly described yourself: "Snippy, yes maybe. I can even be very rude and snippier given the opportunity.

We had the whole "should an expert criticize another expert" some time ago when you gave me a reddie - on the legal board - and your advice was incorrect.

This is NOT a guaranteed kidnapping offense. It is NOT a guaranteed kidnapping charge. You can post the law all you want - you also can't dance on the streets with a wolf in Wyoming. Doesn't mean the Police and/or Courts will step in if you do.

Why is it meaningless, JKT and why would a reddie bother you so much, get a grip and why was my post deleted by J-9 defending your reputation.

Aren't we all important here?

I have a problem with this attitude.

And I read back on your comment:

Snippy, yes you got it JKT I am a very bad person, completely uneducated and exceptionally rude to everyone around here including you.

I am not suitable for this board, so someone throw me off as soon as possible before I really get going.

Thread closed due to argumentative nature.

AND, Tickle, I am on no one's side here. I am not defending JKT, nor am I criticizing you.

This thread just became argumentative, so it got closed.