Cradle Robbers: A Study of Infant Abductors

by Larry G. Ankrm and Cynthia J. Lent

Cradle Robbers: A Study of the Infant Abductor

By Larry G. Ankrm, M.S. and Cynthia J. Lent

**FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, September 1995**

Special Agent Ankrom and Mrs. Lent serve in the FBI's National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime at the FBI Academy. In June 1988, a woman dressed in a nurse's uniform entered the hospital room of a new mother and told her she needed to take her baby and have him weighed. Sometime later, a nurse's assistant making her routine rounds realized something was wrong when she saw that the infant's empty bassinet had been left in the room. Less than 2 days after the abduction and following coverage by the media, phone tips led the police to the abductor's home. Although she had cut the baby's hair, apparently in an effort to disguise him, she evidently had given him proper care.

This case represents a typical abduction scenario, repeated many times in jurisdictions throughout the United States. Since 1983, the FBI's National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime (NCAVC) and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) have documented 145 infant abductions. Eighty-three infants have been taken from hospitals; 62 infants have been abducted from other locations, such as residences, day-care centers, and shopping centers.

Over 4.2 million births take place at approximately 3,500 birthing facilities in the United States each year.1 Compared to the number of annual births over the past 12 years, the number of abductions is, statistically at least, insignificant. However, the act of stealing a vulnerable baby rises above statistical significance. An infant abduction is an extremely emotional crime for parents. In the past 12 years, eight parents have died trying to prevent the thefts of their babies. Moreover, infant abductions affect the local community and beyond. They make national news, attracting the attention of the entire country. As the media publicize every detail, they put additional pressure on investigators, who may never have experienced this type of crime. Hospitals that fall victim to child abductors have liability concerns; an Oklahoma City couple whose baby was taken filed a $56 million lawsuit against their city hospital.2

Unfortunately, only limited research on infant abductions exists. In fact, except for training and awareness initiatives undertaken by the NCMEC, no other organization has conducted a comprehensive study of infant abductions.

This article reports the findings of a study of 145 infant abductions. No reporting requirement or mandated centralized collection of data currently exists for infant abduction cases, and the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports do not capture these cases for statistical purposes. Therefore, in order to gather information for this study, the NCMEC, the NCAVC, police departments, FBI field agents, and a hospital security organization gathered data from police reports, court documents, psychological profiles, and media accounts. Conceivably, then, additional cases of infant abduction may have occurred.

SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM

Infant abduction is the taking of a child less than 1 year old by a nonfamily member. Although the FBI classifies the cases as kidnappings, infant abductions occur, by definition, for reasons not typically associated with kidnappings. For the most part, infant abductions do not appear to be motivated by a desire for money, sex, revenge, or custody--considered traditional motives in kidnapping cases.

Since 1987, an average of 14 infants have been abducted annually. These abductions had no boundaries in terms of location or size of the hospital, or of race, sex, or socioeconomic background of the infant.

Infant abductions have occurred in 34 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. California leads the country in the number of abductions with 23, followed by Texas with 20, New York with 10, Florida with 8, Maryland with 6, and Ohio with 5.

PROFILE OF THE ABDUCTOR

The data from these cases bring to light certain offender characteristics. Investigators can use these traits to profile and apprehend suspects. To help prevent abductions, hospital administrators should remain alert to persons fitting this profile.

By way of general background, infant abductors usually are women, accounting for 141 of the 145 cases analyzed. However, men committed 4 of the 145 crimes. Offenders whose ages were verified ranged from 14 to 48 years old, with an average age of 28. Race was determined in 142 cases; 63 offenders were white, 54 were black, and 25 were Hispanic. The typical abductor may not have a criminal record. If a criminal record does exist, it likely will consist of nonviolent offenses, such as check fraud or shoplifting.

To gain further insight into infant abductors and the crimes they commit, members of the FBI's NCAVC interviewed 16 abductors.3 Offenders included whites, blacks, and Hispanics and ranged in age (at the time of the abduction) from 19 to 42. They had abducted infants in 10 different States. Nine of the abductors targeted hospitals directly; five approached the infant's residence, and two chose other locations. Although none had committed a violent crime before, four killed the infant's mother before stealing her baby.

Five of the abductors were single, seven were married, and four were either separated or divorced. Ten had no children. Though 13 offenders said they were involved in a significant relationship at the time of the abduction, many described it as "rocky," stressful, and lacking in communication.

Motivation

Although little research exists on the topic of infant abductor motivation, the cases outlined here illustrate that the need to present their partners with a baby often drives the female offender. Ten of the women interviewed admitted that they had faked pregnancy. One of these women recalled crying in the parking lot of a hospital, wondering if she should tell her husband that she was not pregnant. Though she knew in her heart that she should tell him the truth, she thought he would leave her if she did. She chose to remain silent. Later, she followed a mother home and stole her baby.

Another woman had feigned pregnancy successfully with her husband before they were married, but her second attempt proved unsuccessful. Following her conviction for infant abduction, her husband admitted that he would not have married her had he known she was not pregnant.

Five other women claimed to have miscarried without telling their partners, although no evidence existed to confirm their pregnancies. One said she had miscarried 4 months into her pregnancy, but had continued living the lie, rationalizing that the stress placed on her by her husband's desire to have a baby had prompted her to deceive him.

Thus, as these cases illustrate, the infant abductor frequently attempts to prevent her husband or boyfriend from deserting her or tries to win back his affection by claiming pregnancy and, later, the birth of a child.4 She may view a baby as the only way to salvage the relationship with her partner.5

According to the NCMEC, sometimes the infant abductor is driven by a desire to experience vicariously the birth of a child she is "unable to conceive or carry to term."6 She is desperate to "bask in the rapture of baby love--to feel adored and needed."7 Just as many expectant mothers tell others the "good news," the typical infant abductor truly believes that "...she is about to give birth, and she fully expects everyone to accept the reality she has attempted to create."8

Planning

Some abductors spent a great deal of time planning their crimes; others apparently acted on impulse. Their efforts ranged from a few hours to over 9 months before the abduction. Eleven of the abductors interviewed gained weight prior to the abduction. One gained 61 pounds. Eleven purchased baby goods, and 12 told others they were pregnant. Then, when it came time to "deliver," the abductors employed such tactics as surveilling hospi-tals, monitoring birth announcements in the newspaper, following mothers home, and posing as hospital employees, babysitters, or social workers.

One abductor drove over 300 miles to steal an infant from an area where she had once resided. She also admitted to "checking out the security" of at least two area hospitals. While her actions appear premeditated, when asked to explain them, she responded, "I knew I was going somewhere, but I didn't know where.... It was like I escaped into this little dream."

In fact, though most women planned events leading up to the abduction, many seemed to have not prepared for the act itself. They also could not, or would not, recall the mechanics of how they had carried out the abduction. One woman, who had entered a residence and murdered the mother before stealing her baby, remembered, "I had no plan of action, you know, it just was whatever happened, happened." This same woman had visited at least three hospitals, while wearing maternity clothes, prior to committing her crime.

Following the abduction, 14 of the 16 offenders openly displayed the stolen infant to others. Six claimed to have given birth in an area hospital; four, out of town; and two, at home. Only three of the abductors altered the baby's appearance. According to one abductor, she cut the baby's hair to make him look younger.

THE SCENE OF THE CRIME

Location

Offenders have chosen two distinct locations from which to abduct infants. Traditionally, the hospital setting has been the primary target for infant abductions. Eighty-three of the 145 infants were taken from within the hospital: 49 from the mother's room, 14 from the nursery, 13 from pediatric hospital rooms, and 7 from other hospital locations.

Bolder criminals try locations outside the hospital. Three babies were stolen from a clinic or doctor's office; two from day-care centers. One quick-thinking abductor snatched a baby from the hospital curb. Forty brazen abductors targeted the residence of the infant or a babysitter.

Time of Day

Even in these emotion-driven crimes, perpetrators show signs of logic. In the majority of these cases, the abductors chose to act during normal business hours. One hundred and twenty-one of the 145 cases occurred from Monday through Friday. In the 124 cases where the time of abduction was recorded, 95 occurred between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. The reason for this appears to be ease of movement. That is, in a hospital during normal working hours, abductors could disguise themselves as employees and slip in and out virtually undetected. Similarly, at a residence, there would be less likelihood of confronting a spouse during the workday.

Month

Analyzing the months of the abductions from January 1983 through December 1994 revealed a marked increase in the number of abductions beginning in May of each year and continuing through October. More infant abductions occurred in May (19 total) and December (20 total) than in any other month. Historically, November has shown a decline in the number of abductions (a total of 8). Abductions also occur less frequently from January through April.

Although a pattern seems to exist here, it simply could be coincidence. Most of the 16 abductors interviewed had feigned pregnancy. They had to "deliver" a baby 9 months later, regardless of the time of year.

Method

Whether they steal babies from a hospital or from another location, abductors usually gain access through a con or ruse, as did 101 of the 145 subjects studied. Methods vary but have included posing as hospital employees, babysitters, or social workers. Some abductors have asked to use the telephone to get into the victim's home.

While cons help abductors gain access, they do not always make the abduction itself easier. As a result, abductors have used force either alone or in combination with a con in 16 cases, leading to the deaths of seven mothers and one father. Ten of these forcible abductions occurred in the victim's home. The abductors used guns in 11 cases.

Abductions away from the hospital pose access difficulties for the offender and may account for the need to exercise force. In these cases, the degree of force ranged from threatening or binding the mother to shooting and stabbing the parents. In one of the most gruesome cases, the abductor strangled the mother and removed her unborn child from her womb, performing a crude caesarean section with car keys. Miraculously, the infant survived. Unfortunately, the mother did not.

Thankfully, not all cases are this violent. In 25 cases, the abductor stole the infant without having direct contact with another person at the moment of abduction.

INVESTIGATIVE STRATEGIES

Successful resolution of any case depends on several factors, including the efforts of law enforcement. In 135 of the 136 resolved cases, the amount of time the infants remained missing ranged from mere hours to just over 300 days. Ninety-three of the babies were recovered in 2 days or fewer. Overall, law enforcement has a 94- percent rate of resolution.

One of the primary investigative strategies in infant abduction cases has been using the media to activate community awareness. Friends, relatives, and/or neighbors identified the abductor following media reports in approximately 53 out of 129 cases where researchers knew how the crime was solved. Anonymous phone tips resulted in the capture of 20 abductors following media exposure.

Of the 16 abductors interviewed by researchers, four admitted to following the media reports, but none altered their plans based on the coverage. In short, the media played a significant role in identifying the offenders without impacting their actions. Accordingly, investigators probably need not fear that publicizing the case will bring harm to the infant.

TRENDS

Although 1993 and 1994 did not produce a significant decrease in the number of infant abductions, the number of abductions from hospitals did decline. For the first time in 10 years, the number of abductions that occurred away from the hospital outnumbered hospital abductions. Hardening hospital targets likely will continue to force potential abductors to look for other options. Because the use of force increases significantly when outside of the hospital setting, the future of infant abductions could include an increase in violent incidents.

CONCLUSION

Infant abductions usually are carried out by women who are not criminally sophisticated. However, the women demonstrate an ability to plan the abduction, convincingly play the role of a hospital employee or other professional, and resort to deadly force if necessary.

Most of these women are living a lie--before, during, and after the abduction. Many have faked a pregnancy, which eventually forces them into a corner. They feel they have no choice but to produce a child by any means necessary. Indeed, infant abductions are the desperate acts of desperate women. As one infant abductor put it, "I began getting really desperate trying to figure out what I was gonna do--how I was gonna find someone to give me their baby--now."

None of the recovered infants has been injured, but seven mothers and one father have died trying to prevent abductions. The status of nine missing infants remains uncertain. By continuing to track and study infant abduction cases, law enforcement can profile suspects and identify trends in order to decrease the occurrence of these horrible crimes.

Endnotes

1 J.B. Rabun, For Healthcare Professionals: Guidelines on Preventing Infant Abductions, Arlington, VA: National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, June 1993.

2 T. Farley, "Parents Sue City Hospital for $56 Million," The Daily Oklahoman, March 8, 1991, 9.

3 These interviews were conducted with funds provided by Interagency Agreement #91-MC-004, issued through the cooperation of the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

4 P. Beachy and J. Deacon, "Preventing Neonatal Kidnapping," Journal of GN, 21, 1, 1991, 12-16.

5 Supra note 1, 3.

6 Ibid.

7 R. Grant, "The New Babysnatchers," Redbook, May 1990, 153.

8 Ibid, 152.