That’s true of Amber Alerts everywhere. The purpose is to find a fleeing abductor right away. It also requires a basis to believe the child is in danger, so you would not usually see Amber Alerts in cases of a parent abduction, absent some known threat.
In those case then the parent had to have been deemed a threat. Maybe they lost custody due to having harmed the child before or for being unable to care for the child. Maybe they made threats to hurt the kid.
Not taking about statistical likelihoods. Amber Alerts say “this kid is not just missing, but in danger.”
It looks like amber alerts in WI require a possible suspect and vehicle description involved in the disappearance, which the family didn’t have.
That said, you could broadcast the description of the child and rough area in which they were missing I suppose.
That’s true of Amber Alerts everywhere. The purpose is to find a fleeing abductor right away. It also requires a basis to believe the child is in danger, so you would not usually see Amber Alerts in cases of a parent abduction, absent some known threat.
almost 100% of the amber alerts ive looked into it was one of the parents ‘abducting’ their own kid.
but that information is irrelevant as that person is also most likely to harm the child.
In those case then the parent had to have been deemed a threat. Maybe they lost custody due to having harmed the child before or for being unable to care for the child. Maybe they made threats to hurt the kid.
Not taking about statistical likelihoods. Amber Alerts say “this kid is not just missing, but in danger.”