Case Update (17 July 2026): In re Parentage of SI; Registration of Foreign Custody Order, Forum Non Conveniens

The parties are the biological parents of a child born in Illinois in January 2021. The parties were in the thick of custody litigation in Illinois, with the Petitioner Father filing in the Illinois courts, where both parties and the child lived, in August 2022. Illinois was the home state at the time of filing, pursuant to the UCCJEA. The court appointed a guardian ad litem for the child. The parties availed themselves of the courts for certain emergency relief. The court ultimately entered an order for the parents to have equal parenting time and joint significant decision making, along with a notice requirement for any relocation. The parties, at times trying to reconcile, traveled to Colombia to visit family in July 2023, proximate to the entry of the final custody order in Illinois. The parents, while in Colombia, apparently ended their relationship, the Father returned to Illinois, and, on November 29, 2023, he sought an order from the Illinois courts mandating the child’s return. There were then subsequent court filings and hearings in Illinois, in which the Mother did not participate or participated remotely, and where she advised that the Colombian courts took up the matter, and were entering orders limiting the Father’s access due to his violent behavior. The Illinois court was, to put it mildly, unhappy that the Mother was not adhering to an Illinois order it entered that mandated that she return the child to Illinois, and continued holding subsequent motion hearings on contempt, reconsideration, etc. The Mother also advised that the Colombian Migration Ministry refused to let the child exit Colombia, but the Illinois court concluded this was instigated by the Mother.

In early 2025, the Mother then filed a series of two motions requesting that the Illinois court decline jurisdiction over the child’s custody, arguing that Colombia was a more convenient forum, both of which the court denied after examining the statutory factors. In May 2025, she sought to enroll an agreed order entered by the Colombian courts, but which the Father said he was coerced to sign. The Illinois court, in a hearing, noted its uncertainty as to the Colombian court’s jurisdiction, and its concerns that the Colombian court did not adequately address the child’s best interests. It denied the Mother’s request to enroll the judgment. It denied her motion to reconsider. She appealed on the enrollment and forum non conveniens issue.

On appeal, the Illinois Court of Appeals concluded the trial court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that Illinois remained a convenient forum to litigate the custody case. The Court of Appeals likewise affirmed the trial court’s decision to not register a foreign child-custody order. The UCCJEA specifically mandates registration if the child custody order was made under factual circumstances in substantial conformity with the jurisdictional standards in the UCCJEA. The trial court concluded that the Colombian courts did not meet this standard - the custody case was commenced in the child’s home state of Illinois, Illinois had jurisdiction over the child, it continued to have jurisdiction over the child under the UCCJEA, and for Colombia to assume jurisdiction when Illinois had it pursuant to the UCCJEA clearly did not comport with the statute.