[Nyororin]

Japan has stated it`s reasons as there being no advantage for it`s citizens as other countries "reserve the right to overrule" custody rulings in other countries. The US issue is the one I am most familiar with - even if the child has lived in Japan since birth, does not speak a word of English, and the father has been ruled an unfit parent... If he returns to the US and files there the US courts will overrule the Japanese custody rulings and allow him to forcibly take the children should they ever set foot on US soil. And it`s all "legal". It is also an issue that a child can be abducted from Japan by a foreign parent and no matter what may be said - it`s very easy for a foreign parent to deny access to the Japanese side. I know of two cases where the foreign mother was deemed an unfit parent in Japan (for valid reasons), but who took her children from the country and filed various extensions, etc, once back in the UK and US. One of the fathers is still trying to find out where his little girl is 5 years after the mother took her to the UK. The other has been legally shut out of the child`s life because the mother in the US cited Japanese attitudes toward sexuality as putting the child at risk should they live in Japan - and the US courts agreed.
Japan views this as legal "abduction", but has no recourse against it, so "protects" the children by not agreeing to send them abroad/etc according to the international convention on abduction. "No benefit visible for citizens" being the official statement.

Of course a lot of these cases aren`t ones where they should be protected, and there are plenty of cases of real abduction by an unfit parent, etc. There needs to be something done, but I can sort of see why there are some people out there who are strongly against it... Like women who I translated for during their divorces who are now terrified by the experience of the woman who joyfully took her children to visit their now-interested father in the US and had them removed from her custody "legally". They`re afraid that the father or his family (despite taking no interest at the time of the divorce) will suddenly decide to (if they haven`t already) file something giving him custody in the US - and that they`ll have their kids whisked away if they leave Japan as countries tend to side with the US. And these are women who divorced in Japan and received custody of the children legally - not through abduction.

I think that the entire system needs a serious overhaul to combat not only abductions, but also the reasons behind the abductions - and to hopefully be more in the interest of the children involved.

I have a question. If a couple divorces in Japan, would the non-Japanese spouse lose the ability to live in Japan?

If you have a minor child in Japan with Japanese citizenship, you can receive a PR visa after a divorce for the interests of the child. Having a child with US citizenship doesn`t grant that right to the parents (although it can make it easier, as in fewer years from start to finish). I think the difference is because of the way that citizenship is doled out to children born in the country. Japanese citizenship requires a parent with Japanese citizenship (jus sanguinis), while US citizenship is granted to any child born in the US (jus soli).

The native parent generally gets custody in most cases because the child has grown up, made friends, and speaks the language of that country probably a whole lot better than the other. It's generally less traumatic for the child to stay in the country they grew up in.

Unfortunately, this isn`t necessarily the case in the situations I have had contact with. The native parent where the divorce is done almost always gets custody - even if the children have lived elsewhere up until then. This is true of Japan, the US, and the UK.