Children/Minors

Yes! For example, in July 2011, Tel Aviv Family Court exercised its jurisdiction to intervene concerning a minor's health and gave an order permitting an operation to amputate a child's arm, in order to remove a cancerous growth and save her life. The mother, the child's sole parent and custodian, had objected.

The Tel Aviv hospital and the Ministry of Health had applied for permission to perform the life-saving operation, which they considered necessary to save the minor's life. The court overruled the mother's objections, saving they clashed with the minor's good. It ordered the operation, after receiving the opinions of several medical experts, ruling that it had "no choice", as the child herself acknowledged , and agreeing with their conclusion that without the operation the cancerous growth would spread from the bone to soft tissue and to the lung, and would result in the child's death.

Yes! You can apply to court for permission to take your son out of Israel for a visit overseas, for a specified period. You may be required to provide financial guarantees to ensure the child's return, if there is a risk of child abduction.

No! The 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of Child Abduction still does not apply to legal proceedings for the return of children abducted between Israel and Russia.

Although the Russian Federation acceded to the Convention in 2011, its accession has to be approved by other "Hague Countries" for it to be in force. So far, only four Hague Countries have accepted Russia's accession - and Israel is not one of them. From 1.12.2011 the Hague Convention will apply to child abduction between Russia and Estonia, or Argentina, and, from 1.1.2012, to child abduction between Russia and France or Greece.

Yes, as the father and natural guardian of  your child under Israeli law, you certainly can bring legal action to get your child innoculated, according to the  recommended programme, as it is your parental right and duty to act in the minor's best interests,and for his/her good.

Issues of health still remain the responsibility of both the child's parents, as functions of their guardianship, even after they separate or divorce, and even if only one of them, in your case, your ex-wife, has custody. Decisions of a child's health are supposed to be made jointly, by mutual consent, and if this is not possible, you, as the child's father can bring legal action, against the child's mother,and  ask the court to intervene and rule on the dispute. You can specifically  request an order that will oblige her to get the child innoculated. The court may appoint an expert to give an opinion on the matter to see whether, in your child's circumstances,it is in his/her medical interests to be innoculated, before making a decision.

Such legal action can be taken before the family court, unless there is any reason for approaching a religious court (e.g. if the parents are religiously observant). Jurisdiction over matters concerning a child's guardianship usually lies with the family court, even after divorce,unless there is a specific mention of continuing, exclusive jurisdiction of a religious court, in the divorce agreement, once the marriage ends. Outside of this situation, if one parent brings the dispute before a religious court, after the divorce, and there is no exclusive continuing jurisdiction, the other parent would need to consent to the matter being dealt by it, rather than by a family court , for it to gain jurisdiciton.

No- you need advance court permission to effect the move if your ‘ex’ objects. If you act unilaterally,in spite of his objections, you are exposing yourself to legal action from him to get a court order preventing you from moving the children,and to make sure the status quo is preserved. Deciding where children live is an issue of guardianship which is supposed to be made jointly,by mutual consent, by the parents,even though one of them may technically be custodian. The court will decide whether the move is in the children’s good, or not, and will probably appoint a court welfare officer , or even a clinical psychologist, to make a report and recommendations in the matter. In the Summer of 2011 our law practice successfully represented a father in emergency proceedings before Tiberias Family Court and got appropriate orders against the mother ,who it held had acted in bad faith, against the child’s interests, and had taken the law into her own hands by moving their child ,in her temporary custody, from the North to the centre of Israel, despite his objections,in breach of the visitation regime which allowed father and son almost daily contact. The mother was ordered to move the child back up north. The decision withstood both applications to delay the implementation of the decision, and permission to appeal, filed on behalf of the  mother at Nazareth District Court , which were both struck out, at the recommendation of the court, which was very clear about the mother's wrongful behaviour.

Yes! You can apply for a temporary court order prohibiting the move and ask the court to rule on the issue. Even if your 'ex' wife has custody of your mutual child, you still have rights of guardianship that include the right to decide jointly with her about where your child lives. If she fails to respect those rights, then you have the option of applying to court to rule on the matter and would be advised to gain medical evidence on how the move would adversely affect the child's health. If you can persuade the court that this is really the case, then it can prevent the move, if it would be harmful to the child's health, and not be in his/her interests.

Yes, you can apply to court for an order preventing her from moving with the child, even though she may be the formal custodian, if the move will jeopordize your visitation rights,and your relationship with him, and be against his interests. Under Israeli law both parents have equal right in issues of guardianship relating to their minor children - including determining his/her place of residence - and are supposed to make decisions jointly. Where the parents disagree on the move, it is possible to ask the court to decide,and meanwhile, to forbid the move.

The Supreme Court held in a petition in 2004 that minors are not “bound” by the contents of agreements made by them as part of divorce settlements between their parents,and, as a rule are not stuck in the legal instance chosen by them either. Minors are bound by such agreements  where the court authorizing the agreement was really satisfied that it served the minors’ interests , but without a substantial hearing as to the minors’ interests, separate from their parents’ agenda within the divorce process, they cannot be seen as being “parties” to agreements concerning them,regarding custody, visitation or maintenance.

This position was underlined recently by Jerusalem District Court in January 2011 when it heard an appeal against the decision of the Family Court to cancel terms of a divorce agreement affecting children that had been authorized at the rabbinical court a few years previously.The appeal court held that the family court had been correct in cancelling the agreement, and stressed that in general parents are often preoccupied with their own agenda when they divorce and tend not to put enough emphasis on the children’s interests,even if unintentionally.

It should be pointed out that sometimes, though, very rarely, divorce agreements authorised at a rabbinical court have clauses giving exclusive, continuing jurisdiction concerning the children.

Firstly, assuming there are no specific arrangements in any court-authorised divorce agreement regarding the mother's right to take the children abroad on holiday, then the general principle applies that the children cannot leave Israel to travel without the consent of both parents. 

In other words, a parent , as a biological parent and a natural guardian, has the  the right under Israeli law to prevent his/her children leaving Israel, though this veto can be overriden by court . Removing the children from Israel , the country of their habitual residence, without your consent would, prima facie, be an act of child abduction, according to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of Child Abduction, even if your 'ex' is the custodial parent. The status of custodian gives her no right to make unilateral decisions about the children travelling overseas - she still needs your consent.

If you refuse to let the children travel, then the family court can rule on the dispute. Your ex would have to apply for and obtain court permission to take the children on holiday, to make their departure legal. The court would have discretion about allowing or refusing their trip. Your opposition  could be overriden, by court order, if this was considered to be in their best interests, subject , if necessary, to suitable financial guarantees of the minors' return.

You could initiate legal action for an order to prevent their exit from Israel, based on reasoned and reasonable opposition, especially if there is a risk that she will not return them. You would be advised to see specialist legal advice on this. In emergencies, temporary ex-parte orders are granted, but afterwards a hearing is usually set before both parties.

Normally, not - unless there was also a court order in force preventing the minor's exit,as part of legal proceedings between the parents. The border police check a child's passport/I.D. details against computer records which register any court orders preventing their exit. If there is no such order, then there would be no way of discovering this, as a routine matter,as records of conditions in divorce agreements in this connection are not kept.

No!Contrary to popular belief,according to Jewish law your grandchild will have normal personal status, and will not be a "Mamzer" or bastard/illegitimate, if his/her parents do not marry,but cohabit, because there is an assumption of "Kiddushim" (or "dedication").

Yes! As natural guardians of their minor children parents are under a duty to act in their children's good, and to make decisions jointly, even if they are divorced, and one has custody, and the other visitation rights.

Where one parent appears not to be acting in a minor's good, in this case your 'ex', who is willing to stop  your 15 year old daughter from performing overseas with her dance group ,and deny her the opportunity of the experience , the other, you, can apply to court asking it to intervene and rule on the dispute. If the court agrees to your application to allow your daughter to travel outside of Israel for a limited time for the purposes of this dance trip, it can give instructions directly to the Ministry of Interior concerning the issue/renewal of travel documents for your daughter.

Yes ! An independent plea can be filed, on behalf of the child, for an increase in child maintenance. A minor child is not bound by parental agreements concerning him,even if the mother undertook not to file for an increase in child maintenance, in a court authorised agreement. The independent child's plea for an increase in maintenance can be filed by the mother, as the natural guardian, representing the child, or by a 'close friend'.

No! Israeli courts have held that a minor child is not bound by parental committments in court-authorised agreements concerning him/herself. A minor child was not a party to agreements made by his/her parents concerning him/her and is free to file an independent plea/application which challenges the non-binding committment.

For example, if ,under a divorce agreement, the mother is  to have custody, but the child now wants to live with the father, an independent plea can be filed by the child, represented by the father, his/her natural guardian, or a 'close friend'. The child's own views play an increasingly important role as he/she grows older. As a rule of thumb children's views are given serious consideration from around the age of 10, though this can be lowered or highered, according to the individual minor's level of maturity.

Yes, it is possible to request that a solicitor ad litem be appointed  by the court, for the child, to represent his/her views. The parents' counsel can still put their points of views, and the child's solicitor will represent the minor's views.

Yes! A special application can be filed to the court requesting that the judge meet the children in person. The application needs to be reasoned, and detailed. The welfare officer's recommendation is not binding on the court.

Israel is a signatory to the International Convention on the Rights of the Child, and, as such, is committed to letting children have their say in proceedings concerning them.

Until they are 18, at which point the children become adults under Israeli law, and have full legal capacity, and their parents cease to become their legal guardians, as they are no longer minors.

Yes, she can file the alleged Israeli father for paternity and child maintenance, regardless of her status.

Only after court authorisation is obtained. The sale and transfer of ownership of real estate registered in the name of a minor (a child under the age of 18) is one of the activities requiring court authorisation, according to Israeli legislation (the 1962 Legal Capacity and Guardianship Act).

Even though  you are not the custodian, you are, as a biological parent,  an equal natural guardian of your minor children, and are jointly responsible for making decisions regarding their education and upbringing. Their mother cannot make decisions on these unilaterally.

If she continues to do so,  you can open a guardianship file in court, and ask for instructions about the number and scope of extra-curricular activities that the children should be take, and give evidence of the deterioration in their academic achievements,which you claim is a result of this overload. You can also raise the issue that as a result of too many organised activities, the children have too little free time for normal social interactions with their peers, which, in turn, is potentially harmful for their emotional development.