DO COURTS TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE CHILD'S VIEWPOINT AND OBJECTIONS?

Yes. Under Article 13, the court can also refuse a return order if the child objects to being returned and 'has attained an age and degree of maturity at which it is appropriate to take account of his views'.
One issue for the court is whether the child objects to being returned to the country of habitual residence because this is inextricably linked with his objection to living with the other parent, so that the two factors cannot be separated. In general, the objection should be independent/genuine and strong.

There is no age limit below which a child's view will not be taken into account but generally, the younger the child, the less likely that he will have the maturity to make it appropriate to take his views into account. In practice a child under eight is unlikely to have his views taking into account. Also a child's perspective of what is in his own short, medium or long term interests may be limited; and the reasons for his objection may not be found in reality; he may not actually understand the implication of objecting to being returned; and his views may have been 'coloured' by undue parental pressure, direct or indirect.

The court may order an investigation of the child's objection and views by a skilled independent person (such as a welfare officer), but may not do so if it considers the defence to be a delaying tactic by the abducting parent.

Israeli courts take children's views into account at an earlier age than in many other countries – usually from the age of 10, or even younger, if they are sufficiently mature.  Israeli regulations require courts to get input from the child, from his/her perspective before deciding on a return order, as a routine matter, and may even appoint an expert to hear  and report on the child's "objections" or 'grave risk' claims by the parent.