In an international child custody dispute, if one parent abducts a child to a Hague Convention country, one that is a signatory to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of Child Abduction, the first main defense is that of Grave Risk of Harm, either physical or psychological, to the child.

What is a grave risk of harm? this is a very fact specific issue, in some cases it is clearly female genital mutilation, but not necessarily male genital mutilation. Returning a female child to an African Nation, one that pratices female genital mutilation such as a clitorectomy would likely qualify if the child was in Los Angeles or California. However returning a male child to Israel would likely not be a grave risk of harm, at least not based on male genital mutilataion.

The Hague Convention on International Child Abduction also looks to the psychological harm that could be done to a child as a defense. This is a harder element to prove, as psychological abuse or emotional abuse can be subjective.

The third clause of the first defense is an intolerable situation that warrants denial of a return petition under the Hague Convention on Child Abduction. Just what an intolerable situation is, will be very fact dependent.