A Binational Hostage: the Case of Sean Goldman

Rio de Janeiro - The case of Sean Goldman , the nine-year-old boy, who was the center of a jusdicial dispute, since 2004, after his Brazilian mother brought him to live in Brazil without the authorization of his American father, shows how two cultures put different values on the law.

Every American I talked to about the issue viewed it as a case of child abduction that violated the Hague Convention, signed by both Brazil and the EUA. The American media took the same position.

Many Brazilians I talked about the subject, as well as the Brazilian media, saw the case as a child custody dispute, to be decided based on socio-emotional criteria, that is, considering what would be best for Sean. For them, Sean's mother having violated international law by taking him to Brazil was secondary, if not irrelevant.

Why such a difference of opinion? Many Brazilians believe that the law is never supreme and must be flexible to fit the situation, the so-called "jeitinho" (or shortcut). Many don't respect the law because the powerful here enjoy immunity from it, as shown by sayings like: "A lei, ora a lei" (the law, the hell with the law) and “para meus amigos tudo, para meus inimigos, a lei” (for my friends everything, for my enemies the law).

Americans respect the law more because the powerful in the USA don't enjoy immunity from it. They also feel that the precedents that laws set protect them and discourage others from disobeying them in the future. When, in December, Supreme Court Chief Justice Gilmar Mendes gave Sean's father custody of him the Americans I know felt that the decision would reduce the number of abductions of children with Brazilian and American parents.

Many Brazilians I know simply assumed that because Sean had adapted to living in Brazil , he should be allowed to stay, even after his mother died in 2008. But had the Brazilian legal system, which moves like a tortoise, not taken so long to decide the case, Sean's having adapted to Brazil would not have been an issue.

The justice system continued to move slowly, even after Sean's mother died. I doubt that, without this, Brazilian justice which almost always favors the mother in custody cases, would have given his father custody of Sean.

Finally, this case reflects Brazilian nationalism at its worst. It was shown in the banners at a Rio protest march which read "Sean é brasileiro" and could be seen in the T-shirt of the Brazilian national soccer team that Sean was wearing when his step-father delivered him to the door of the U.S. consulate.

Whether this case was about the custody or the abduction of a child, it was not about his nationality. It was about the bi-national hostage of a lethargic system of justice that, for too long a time, caused him to suffer the agony off not knowing what country would be his home. And regardless of the sides each of us has taken in the case, our solidarity should be with the boy.

Michael Kepp , a U.S. journalist living in Brazil for over two decades, is the author of a book of essays "Sohando com Sotaque: Confissões e Desabafos de um Gringo Brasileiro," (Dreaming in an Accent: The Confessions and Critiques of a Brazilian Gringo), published by Editora Record. Order Sonhando com Sotaque from Livraria Cultura (in Portuguese). Learn more about Mike Kepp and his work on his official website. This article originally appeared in Portuguese in the Brazilian daily Folha de São Paulo on January 7, 2010.

Start Planning Your Trip to Brazil