This article critiques the usefulness of habitual residence as the sole connecting factor in Hague Child Abduction Convention cases. This is achieved by examining the quality of this jurisdiction in light of changes in the gender dynamics underpinning international parental child abduction and the transnational family phenomenon. Arguably, the child's habitual residence as a home environment of the nature anticipated by the Convention's drafters is an increasingly outdated construct. This is due to an increase in both the number of abducting primary-carer mothers, and their families' growing mobility. Judicial determinations of habitual residence made during Convention return proceedings are entrenched in the state centric paradigm. This paradigm is becoming increasingly incompatible with the lives of families which experience international parental child abduction.