SRES-115-118
Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S1608; text: 03/16/2023 CR S834)
Sponsored by Thomas Tillis (R-NC)
What it does
This resolution formally recognizes April 2023 as "Countering International Parental Child Abduction Month." It expresses the sense of the Senate that Congress should raise awareness of the harm caused when a parent takes a child across international borders without the other parent's legal consent. It does not create new law, allocate funding, or establish any enforcement mechanism.
Who benefits
Left-behind parents — those whose children have been taken abroad without their consent — may benefit from increased public and governmental attention to their cases. Children who are subjects of international abduction may benefit if greater awareness leads to faster resolution of cases. Advocacy organizations focused on international parental child abduction may gain visibility and momentum for future legislative action.
Who is hurt
This resolution carries no binding legal force and imposes no obligations, penalties, or costs on any individual, group, or government entity. No specific group is directly or materially harmed by its passage.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that international parental child abduction is a serious and underrecognized harm affecting thousands of American families each year. They contend that formal Senate recognition shines a spotlight on the issue, encouraging the State Department, foreign governments, and the public to prioritize the return of abducted children. Supporters also argue that symbolic resolutions like this one build political momentum for stronger future legislation, such as expanded treaty enforcement or increased consular resources, and that giving a public platform to left-behind parents validates their suffering and keeps pressure on countries that do not comply with the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that a non-binding resolution with no funding, no enforcement mechanism, and no new legal authority does little to concretely help families affected by international parental child abduction. They contend that congressional time and attention would be better spent passing substantive legislation — such as strengthening compliance requirements under the Sean and David Goldman International Child Abduction Prevention and Return Act — rather than issuing symbolic declarations. Opponents may also argue that awareness months risk creating the appearance of action without delivering measurable results for the left-behind parents and children who need real policy solutions.