The pediatric psychiatric ward at HUG is separate from the pediatric hospital. It is a small space at the end of a long wing with windowless solid locked double doors. It is guarded by psychiatric attendants 24x7. It is a small space about 10 meters long. D* had no psychiatric or medical diagnosis yet he was held in this ward for three weeks while being given psychotropic drugs. In addition to drugs he was being classically conditioned away from his father, held in isolation while locked in 7 days a week 24 hours a day for weeks on end. Though there was a park outside the window of his room where he could see other children and their parents playing, he was not allowed to play. He was denied an education. During his first week a judge had ruled he could only be held for medical reasons, and there were no medical reasons yet they refused to release him. His father was constantly present but visits between him and D* were extremely limited. His mother did not feel it was necessary to stay in Geneva, just coming on the one occasion Grosjean mentions in his article - so D* had nobody. He screamed for help and put up signs asking for help in his window just to watch as the ward attendent would come tear them down. He wrote letters to the ward doctors asking for his father. On one occasion shortly before being transferred to another facility he fought with one of the ward attendants to give a letter to an attorney. The letter said he wanted his dad. Also, the article fails to mention that such cases where a child does not want to go back after a holiday have happened often before, but the children have not been treated in this manner. The conditioning failed, as of July 11, the last any of us have heard of any news from D*, he told a police officer that he wanted his father.

The first part of Grosjean's article is sensationalized. Firstly, one should note that the picture he used is three years old. My son has grown both in maturity and stature since that picture was taken. A picture of my son dated a couple of weeks before these events can be found on my website at www.ITIOaChild.com. Secondly, it is not the case that I went to the states and kidnapped my son. Rather we were legally on holidays and afterwards he refused to return to his mother. As noted in the article, my son was locked in a psychiatric ward where he was allowed to leave with his mother at any time but had to stay indefinitely while calling for his father - and you can hear him calling on my website. He was in awful conditions, isolated, being medicated, being conditioned, denied access to outside play and eduction - yet after more than a week of this when his mother came to pick him up he locked himself in the bathroom and called for his dad. Indeed on July 11 he repeated this request to officer Chris Wilson in the States. The fact is he fears her. Two things should be obvious to everybody now 1) that my son has good reason to be afraid 2) he was adamantly refusing to go to her.

This is not the first time I have had to deal with this. In the summer of 2008 he refused to return. When I took him to the airport he had to go through security alone as they do not let people without a boarding pass through. Once through he had a fit and refused to geton the plane. Security called me to pick him up and explained they could not force him. They even questioned whether he should be sent at all. Again I received a call from the police in Texas. I scheduled a flight for the next day, and again security sent him backto me after he had gone through the screening area. There is little a parent can do to force a boy his age to get on a plane against his will when he is articulating reasons not to go. Again I was accused of child abduction by my ex. We called her so she could encourage him, instead she threated him. She did not say she missed him, rather she told him that he was stupid *and that he would have to see her psychologist* when he got back, and a number of other horrible things. He was red faced with fear and teary with big eyes and hung up the phone.

The summer of 2008 I took him to a counselor, who worked on him without success to get him to go on the plane. I was disappointed to find that this counselor had limited the conversation with my son to getting him on the plane and did not want to be further involved. My son is close to his grandmother. We called her and she told him I would go to jail if he did not return. As if my son had not been through enough. Crestfallen, on the third try he got on the plane *for my sake*. Abduction allegations from my ex are common, she accused me of abduction a prior Christmas and a prior spring break even when we had followed schedules exactly in the decree. The only difference this time, and the most damaging part, turns out to be Grosjean's article.

His article also misses the mark when it says that I did not return him because of abuse allegations. Though I have made well founded allegations of abuse in the past, given my son's age and maturity and ability to speak for himself, the only thing I requested before going through the mess of last summer again is that *my son's voice be heard* - nothing more. My son is guaranteed this right by both the Hague Convention on Child abduction (due to his age) and by the UN Convention on the Rights of a Child. Yet the more I insisted that his voice be heard, the stronger the effort to prevent him from being heard became. You can see the lengths my ex and the American Embassy went to in order to prevent him speaking making these allegations and then having him locked in a psychiatric ward. Though he requested an attorney, he was denied, by Geneva, though he asked to speak to a judge he was denied by Geneva. Though he requested his rights to a convocation with federal authorities, he was denied by Geneva.

Geneva should be asking a lot of questions as to why your SPMI went so far to shut up a child on the request of an abusive American mother, and why doctors were willing to lock up a child when it was morally and legally wrong, even when a judge said it could not be done without medical diagnosis, something the doctors themselves said he did not have. They are so confident that they can control information they are willing to break international laws and defy judges. Geneva should be asking a lot of questions, yet the Procure General's investigation has not even seen fit to ask me a single one.

Antoine Grosjean has done my son and I a great disservice and caused a lot of damage by branding me a kidnapper in a respected newspaper, by omitting important details such as past history, and using a dated photograph that biases interpretations by making my son look less mature. Though I complained about this to the editor no one followed up.

J ai moi aussi eu l occasion de côtoyer "Jim et Peter" pendant une semaine, lorsque je les ai hébergé chez moi, à peine arrivés en Suisse.
Ce court séjour m'a permis de voir que Peter est un enfant tout à fait comme les autres, même très intelligent (il fait déjà à son âge de la programation de jeux) et qu il ne semblait pas avoir quelque probleme que ce soit. Un enfant voyageant avec son père. Je ne suis pas psychologue, mais je ne pense pas qu il y ait un syndrome quelconque..
Après je ne peux rien dire d autre ne connaissant pas tous les details. J espere juste que le pauvre Peter sortira bientôt de l'hôpital dans un pays inconnu pour lui, avec une langue qu il ne parle pas...ça doit être tres traumatisant de vivre cette experience pour un enfant aussi jeune.
Il ne s agit pas de prendre parti pour l un ou l autre des parents mais penser à une meilleure solution pour "Peter". Il faut lui donner la parole pour avancer.

Il n'y a pas que les USA qui font du commerce avec les divorces! Ballayons un tant soit peu devant notre porte: Plus d'un millard de chiffre d'affaire par an en Suisse!

Et le SPMI chacun sait que c'est une institution prétexte pour faire croire que l'Etat se préocupe du social, mais c'est en aucun cas une institution sérieuse qui protégerait les mineurs! Ces gens-là sont des accusateurs, tout comme les employés du judiciaire! Il n'y a rien de constructif là-dedans ! En fait il s'agit d'un véritable bordel dont tout contribuable serait largement gagnant en cas de fermeture! Ah, Calvin, Toi qui aimait tant l'honêteté que dirais-tu de ces pieuses, mais nuisibles institutions qui font croire à l'aide sociale et à la justice, alors qu'il en est rien! Il s'agit uniquement de commerce! Chassez-moi ces marchants du temple doux Jésus!

Regardez sur quels autres mensonges repose le clan Suisse-USA:
http://www.dailymotion.com/user/ReOpen911/video/x92lw5_11-septembre-la-p...
J'espère que ce lien sera publié en entier, sinon contactez-moi et je vous le donnerai ! Voici la suite:septembre-la-preuve-que-des-expl_news

Que ceux qui ont un peu d'intelligence comprennent!

Olivier MONNEY

Nous avons pu, avec mon épouse, côtoyer Peter et Jim pendant quelques jours... ce qui nous incite à nous garder de tout jugement hâtif!
Le père et son fils s'entendent très bien et il est difficile de croire qu'une telle complicité puisse être créée de toute pièce par un "lavage de cerveau" de 4 mois... Nous avons par ailleurs été frappés par le soin que Jim prend à éviter de critiquer son ex-épouse devant leur fils.
Il est par ailleurs très attentif à assurer à Peter une éducation la meilleure possible dans ces circonstances, y compris au niveau des apprentissages scolaires.
Le livre épais qu'il a écrit sur la saga qui l'oppose depuis 7 ans à son ex, dénonce surtout le business qui règne sur les affaires de divorces aux USA, au détriment des premiers concernés. Business qui conduit apparemment à prendre parfois des décisions contestables...
Même si ce livre contient d'abondants documents sur le comportement pour le moins surprenant d'une mère pour son fils, on peut imaginer que la justice suisse ne les considère pas comme des preuves. Mais qu'au moins elle prenne la peine d'écouter le père ! Et surtout le fils !!
Et que le SPMi prenne garde de ne pas étayer, par une attitude trop rigide,les reproches qui lui sont parfois fait de faire preuve d'un réflexe "anti-père" un peu primaire.

Je ne sais pas qui des deux parents est le plus dingue dans cette histoire mais une chose me dit que le fils va, dans tous les cas, souffrir (quelque soit la solution, y.c. le placement en foyer). Alors la question est: comment faire pour qu'il souffre le moins possible? J'espère sincèrement que tout ira au mieux pour lui. Et pour ses parents une solution pas mal: l'enfermement en hôpital...psychiatrique.

Et dire que la solution pour ces affaires est tellement simple : si des parents enlèvent leur propres enfants et les prennent en otage dans leurs disputes, pourquoi ne pas simplement leur supprimer la garde à tous les deux ?

Ensuite, pour avoir de nouveau la garde ils n'auraient pas d'autre choix que de se mettre d'accord...

Ne serait-ce pas beaucoup plus simple, et cela ne calmerait-il pas une fois pour toutes ce genre de personnes ?

Pathétique! Fréquemment dans les conflits de séparations ou de divorces ce sont les enfants qui trinquent avec la bêtises de leur parents. Dans le cas présent, ne voulant cautionner ni la mère, ni le père, après la lecture de cet article, et de mon propre raisonnement, les autorités dites compétentes devraient se référer au déclarations et désires de l'enfant.