 |
Joel Bainerman has been thinking about Middle East political and economic subjects since 1983. His research studies and published archive can be viewed at www.joelbainerman.com.
|
|
|
|
By Joel Bainerman
December 16, 2007
 Bookmark to del.icio.us
In October 2006 I received the final decision of a Family Court judge on the matter of my request for custody of my son. My ex-wife had demanded full custody of him.
My son had been living with me since August-2004- four months before my ex-wife filed her claim. Three months before the first court appearance I had submitted a Letter of Defense in response to the Plaintiff's Claim which stated clearly and in extensive detail that my son was living with me because of a variety of medical/emotional issues that prevented the Plaintiff from being able to care for the 11 year old boy.
Then, when I appeared in Family Court for the first time I told the Judge directly- without the assistance of a lawyer -- that the boy had been living with me since August 2004- six months before that day -- and the reason was because his mother was suffering from another of medical/emotional issues which prevented her from providing adequate parental care for the boy. I assumed she had read my Letter of Defence which was submitted to her attention three months prior- and that she would be well informed of the facts of this case.
After just 20 minutes in court -- and not more than three minutes devoted to the subject of custody for my son -- the Judge ruled that she was giving full, permanent custody of my son to my ex-wife. As far as the Judge was concerned, the subject of which parent would be most suitable to be the custodian for the child was closed. She had chosen his mother over me- despite the fact that he was already in my physical custody for more than six months. (In fact, that ruling was illegal only from the standpoint of a Family Court judge by law- is not able to render a verdict of "full, permanent custody" even to the wife- unless a social worker has first visited her house to ensure it is a good environment for a child.)
Family Court judges favor the woman over the man
The Israeli Family Court system legally discriminates against fathers by denying the male gender their custodian rights as fathers of children. This is done legally as there is no law in Israel that enables a father to request from the Ministry of Justice- custody of his children.
About a month after the court appearance a social worker rang me and asked to come over to "see if my house was suitable for the weekly visits the Judge had ruled in her decision." I told her no problem- but he already lives with me. She was baffled- and after reviewing my local reality- saw that the initial court decision had to be changed. So she wrote a letter to the Judge asking that I be given the status of "temporary joint custody."
She- as well as the judge, knows full well that the concept of "joint custody" doesn't even exist in Israeli law- as the Israeli Family Law of 1952 actually forbids any other possibility other than custody of children being the sole domain of the mother. The Family Court doesn't give "joint custody" because it doesn't recognize that the concept exists as it is not based in any law. If the couple comes to the court with an agreement -- the court will agree to acknowledge any arrangement worked out in agreement between the two sides -- however even if that agreement states that the father shall have "joint custody" of the children -- in reality -- according to Israeli law -- they do not. But since nobody makes an issue out of it, most men do not know that this is the case.
So despite my son now having lived under my roof, in my home, every day of the week, on paper I do not have any custodial rights to him. These rights are the sole domain of my ex-wife -- who according to Israeli law -- received and maintains complete custodial rights to a child that does not live in her house.
The Israeli Family Court does not and can not recognize the concept of "joint custody" because that would contradict existing laws which award automatic custodial rights of children to the mother. That law has never been changed. That law that systematically and institutionalizes discrimination against all fathers.
The real question the Israeli public needs to ask itself is should fathers should have the same equal rights to a woman in all matters relating to the dissolution of their marriage and the future custody of the children -- or not. If laws exist that favor women in the allocation of custodial rights, then this law should be expunged from the Israeli legal code. Surely, a law can't be valid if it presupposes that one gender of a society is to receive automatic preferred treatment in the eyes of the law?
Views expressed by the author do not
necessarily reflect those of israelinsider.
 
|
|
|
|
Click on the blue headline to read a Talkback comment and respond to it. Click on the  icon to send a private email to the talkback writer. The icon appears only if the writer has decided to be contacted. If no popup window appears, please make sure your popup blocker allows israelinsider.com.
|
|
| |
|
|
