Ruling Against the Social Workers Opinions

This is no easy task. When a Judge in Israel decides to rule against the opinion of the designated social worker working on a case, this is news in Israel. This was the case decided by the Honorable Judge, Mr. Asaf Zagury from the family court on October 11th 2011.

This case is not only unique for the divergent opinion from the social worker but also by being a divergent opinion from the State of Israel’s designated lawyer (“Misrad Harevaha, Hayoetz Hamishpati Lamemshala”) and even more unique by the fact the Honorable Judge went further and analyzed the case based on facts and reality using common sense and statistics.

The Case:

The mother and the father of an eight year old girl that we will name “L” met in 2003. They were not married and from this romance L was borne. A few months after her birth, the parents registered her in the Ministry of Interior as their legitimate child.

Apparently the father is a Christian Arab and the mother is Jewish therefore the child is a Jewish child borne from an unmarried woman, a situation where there is no fear of being a “bastard” (“Mamzert”).

The parents separated and L’s mother sued L’s father for child alimony but then the father raised the allegations that this is not his child and someone else is the biological father.

The father moved to the UA and lost all interest in the child. They had no contact whatsoever. The father strongly believes that L is not his but the mother insists that this is his child. They both agreed and asked the family court to allow a DNA test but the State of Israel opposed the request!

Alimony:

The Honorable Judge emphasized that there is no fear of loss of child support because if the DNA test shows that L is not his (the father) biological daughter (therefore exempting him from paying further alimony) the INS will pay the mother the same amount of alimony with no financial damages to the mother or the child.

The psychological and emotional side:

The mother insisted on the DNA test claiming that she wanted L and her father to be sure that L was his legitimate daughter. She also claimed that removing the doubts would bring the father closer to L. The father agreed on the test but the State of Israel (The social worker and the Hayoetz Hamishpati Lamemshala’s office) refused to acquiesce to their request.

They thought that it would be better to “spare L from the pain and distress” if the test ended up negative. In the State’s opinion it is for the child’s best interest to “live in a secure world she built around herself – a world where she had a father, even if he was very distant and not present in her life, than having her world shattered by the discovery if the test showed that this man was not her real/biological father”. In other words: The State of Israel thought it was better for L to live a lie in a fairy tale world than have her know the facts!

The Judge believed that if the father finds out beyond a reasonable doubt that he is indeed the biological father of this child, he will eventually build an emotional and true connection with L – his daughter!

The mother was forced to undergo psychological tests that are very invasive and unpleasant.

The statistics:

No doubt that in this case one of the highlights was the statistics the Honorable Judge added to his decision to show the importance of a father figure in a child’s life.

I will therefore bring a transcript of the statistics as the Honorable Judge did.

• 63% of suicides among young people were those who grew up in a household without a father.
• 90% of all the homeless and runaway children are those who grew up without a father.
• 85% of children who have “unacceptable” behavior are from households without a father.
• 71% of all high school dropouts are from homes without a father.
• 75% of all youths who are in drug rehabilitation are from homes without a father.
• 85% of all youths who are in jail come from homes without a father.

The statistics further demonstrate that children from homes without a father are:

• Five times more likely to commit suicide;
• Thirty-two times more likely to run away from home;
• Twenty times more likely to exhibit “unacceptable” behavior;
• Fourteen times more likely to commit rape (applies to boys);
• Nine times more likely to drop out of high school;
• Ten times more likely to use drugs;
• Twenty times more likely to end up in jail

As for girls who grew up in homes without a father, the following additional statistics are relevant:

• 53% are more likely to marry when minors;
• One hundred and eleven times more likely to give birth while still minors;
• 164% more likely to be single mothers;
• 92% more likely to divorce, if they did marry.

Conclusion:

The Honorable Judge decided against all other opinions even though they (the judges in family court) generally side with the social workers and the Social Affairs Ministry and his delegates.

Using common sense and taking into consideration the child’s best interest does not mean letting a child build her internal world based on lies.

The parents should have a last word on what is the best interest of their own child especially when they finally agree (!) on something.

The damage to this child will be much worse if she discovers later in life that this man is not her biological father. And after going through all the invasive and often degrading tests the mother and child were already subjected to by the social workers, it is difficult to imagine “more emotional damage” could result by knowing the truth.

Our sages used to say: “There is no more happiness than the happiness of clearing the doubts and knowing the truth”.

Sincerely,
 

Tzvi Szajnbrum, Attorney at Law