Topeka ? Every time Mike Beadle’s four children visit their mother, he gets a sinking feeling in his stomach.

During his divorce, Beadle said, his wife said and did things, such as coming by his house unexpectedly, to lead him to believe she might take off with their children. Four years later, he still worries when the children, who live with him in Kansas City, Kan., spend every other weekend with their mother.

“It’s very frightening and emotional. I never know when she picks up the kids whether that will be the last time I will see them,” the 37-year-old father said. “It’s made me a nervous wreck.”

Chris Yotz, the attorney for Beadle’s former wife, insists Beadle has nothing to worry about. “This guy is the most sleazy lying sack of trash that I ever heard,” Yotz said.

For courts dealing with divorces and custody battles, it can be tough to tell when such concerns are legitimate.

That’s why Ronald W. Nelson, a domestic relations lawyer in Overland Park, is championing a bill in the Legislature that would provide guidelines for courts in such situations so they can better identify when such a threat is credible and spell out what judges can do.

The National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws crafted the bill last year with the hope that all states eventually would enact it.

“It would lead to more uniform decisions by states when these matters arise,” said John Sebert, executive director of the conference. “This is trying to establish an appropriate way to deal quickly with a risk that a child will be abducted and taken out of a jurisdiction.”

Historically, Kansas law has held that, absent a custody order, parents can’t be charged with kidnapping their own child because both parents have equal custody rights and can take the child wherever they want.

“It has been the Wild West up till now, and this bill would limit that ability,” Nelson said. “A judge can look at the circumstances and provide protections against the child being used as a pawn in disputes between parents. It provides guidance to the court on when the situation is out of the ordinary.”

Mike Beadle stands near a window in the living room of his home in Kansas City, Kan. During his divorce, Beadle said, his wife said and did things, such as coming by his house unexpectedly, to lead him to believe she might take off with their children. Four years later, he still worries when the children, who live with him in Kansas City, Kan., spend every other weekend with their mother.

Applying existing laws

The bill, which is awaiting House action after the Senate passed it, does not provide new legal remedies, Nelson said. Instead, it says what factors the court could consider to determine whether a threat is credible and what existing statutes would address the situation.

“Virtually all the remedies included in the act are already available to judges. But a lot of judges or attorneys never deal with these kinds of issues so they don’t know what kind of remedies are available,” Nelson said.

Under the bill, courts could consider such factors as a parent threatening to abduct a child, selling a house, refusing to follow child custody orders, having ties to another state or country, applying for a passport or engaging in domestic violence. The bill also gives courts the flexibility to act in a child’s best interest, said Judge Anthony Powell, who heads the Sedgwick County District Court’s family law department.

It spells out what a judge could do, such as impose travel restrictions, prohibit the removal of a child from Kansas, order a child returned to the state and put restrictions on custody or visitation. A judge also could issue a warrant, as opposed to a court order, to require an abducting parent to return the child.

“The police tend to respond better to warrants,” Powell said. “Sometimes when parties flash a court order to police officers, sometimes they respond to it and sometimes they don’t. A warrant brings greater urgency to it.”

Other states’ action

Aside from Kansas, legislatures in Colorado, Connecticut, Nevada, South Carolina, Texas and Utah are considering the bill, and it has been enacted in Nebraska and South Dakota.

A federal Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention study concluded 78 percent of child abductions in 1999, the latest year available, were by a parent or family member.

Many motives are in play – not wanting to pay child support, exacting revenge or showing the other parent who’s in charge. But in the end, it’s the child who suffers, says Dr. Sharon W. Cooper, a forensic pediatrician at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill.

“I cannot think of many reasons that the abduction of a child is a good thing,” said Cooper, a consultant with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.

Powell sees the legislation as a good step forward.

“It would clarify some issues. I would see it as sort of a supplement. We can do what they are calling for now, but this clarifies the rules and gives us some guidance as to how to treat a situation,” Powell said.