Most of those coming to Israel do have good intentions and are good people who want to live, work, and assimilate into the Israeli culture and society. Most want to start their own family, or are coming to unite with family in Israel<\/a>. With that, there are also cultural differences that may cause various problems, even for those who have no intent to break the law. Newcomers, immigrants, and also representatives of communities in Israel, often think about physical punishment as a normal part of their children’s education, just as they did in their country of origin. That said, striking children, even for \u201ceducational purposes\u201d can cause various issues, starting from a simple warning conversation at the school, to legal issues taken to the police, to the breaking up of the family unit.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n This article, written by Michael Decker, a senior partner of our law firm’s Jerusalem branch, will examine a parent’s duty and right to educate their children, the legal limitations on this subject in the State of Israel, and the historical development of this important issue.<\/span><\/p>\n Section 15 of the Legal Capacity and Guardianship Law, 1962<\/a>, states:<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cParental guardianship includes the duty and the right to attend to the needs of the minor, including their education, schooling, vocational training, and employment, as well as the protection, management, and development of their property; it also includes the authority to hold the minor and determine their place of residence, as well as the power to represent them.”<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n A violation of this parental responsibility toward a minor is also considered a criminal offense under Section 323 of the Penal Code, 1977<\/a> (hereinafter referred to as “the Penal Code”).<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n “A parent or person responsible for a minor under eighteen years of age must provide for their own living needs, care for their health, and prevent abuse or injury. Failure to fulfill these responsibilities will be considered as having caused any resulting harm to the minor’s life or health.”<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n We can see here that according to the court ruling of the State of Israel, it is the parent\u2019s duty and privilege to educate their children. Along with that, it is strictly prohibited to educate children using any physical violence, ultimately banning the country itself from physical violence towards any person, even for punishment or disciplinary purposes.\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Take, for instance, the precedent of Criminal Appeal 4596\/98, Doe vs the State of Israel,<\/a> wherein t<\/span>he appeal of a mother who used to strike her children for educational and disciplinary purposes \u2013 as she claims \u2013 was rejected, and she was convicted of abuse and assault, matching various sections of the Penal Code.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n In this case, a mother is accused of physically assaulting her two children, aged five and seven. The allegations include striking their buttocks, head, back of the neck, and hands with force, either with her hand or a rubber band, leaving red marks on their skin. Additionally, the mother is accused of hitting her daughter once with a vacuum cleaner and punching her son in the face, resulting in a broken tooth. It is also claimed that she regularly slapped both children on the cheeks.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n While this case is quite extreme, the underlying principle remains the same. In the State of Israel, no law permits or allows the use of physical violence to discipline a child or exempts such actions from criminal responsibility, as is the case in some other Western countries. Instead, the Penal Code strictly prohibits assault and abuse, with heightened penalties for offenses involving minors.<\/span><\/p>\n However, the law does allow for the use of reasonable physical force in specific situations, such as preventing a child from immediately harming themselves or others (for example, stopping a child from running into a busy road). This kind of defense can be raised during an investigation or in court if charges are brought against a parent.<\/span><\/p>\n Additionally, per the defense’s argument in the Doe precedent above, it may be argued that the use of physical force for disciplinary purposes falls within the category of “trivial matters” or is of “no public interest.” This is similar to how minor offenses, such as stealing a pack of chewing gum from a store, might be dismissed on these grounds. Such arguments may be used as a defense if an investigation or indictment is brought against a parent.<\/span><\/p>\n The Social and Normative History of Physical Punishment for Educational Purposes:\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n In many countries and cultures, it is acceptable to resort to physical violence to discipline children and the accepted worldview became that punishment by physical violence (such as spanking with a belt, a whip, a ruler, or a shoe, and sometimes even harsher physical violence), was for the child\u2019s benefit, and such physical punishment will benefit the child in the long term.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Take, for example, in the Bible itself, the holy foundation of the Jewish and Christian religions, in the book of Progverbs 23, 13-14, is written as follows:<\/span><\/p>\n “Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you beat him with a rod he will not die. Beat him with a rod and you will save his soul from Hell.<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n Historically, Christianity often supported using physical discipline due to the religions views on human nature being inherently sinful from birth. Thus, physical discipline was accepted both in Christian schools and homes.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n In contrast, the Jewish perspective was somewhat more lenient, likely due to differing views on human nature. However, physical discipline was still permitted for educational purposes, as reflected in the teachings of Bava Batra (21:1).<\/span><\/p>\n Rav said to Rav Shmuel Bar Shilat: When you strike a babe (for educational purposes), strike him only with sandal straps (because it is soft and does not hurt much).<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n Even in the Muslim religion, physical violence is an effective tool for legitimate discipline, as we read in the Hadith (Ibn Abbas said that these words were spoken by the Messenger of Allah).<\/span><\/p>\n “Display the whip where family members can see it, as it it the whip that will educate them.<\/span><\/i>“<\/span><\/p>\n In contemporary secular Western culture, views on physical punishment towards children have evolved. Today, physical violence is generally considered detrimental to a child’s well-being and development. This modern perspective often clashes with more conservative viewpoints on child discipline and the perceived benefits of such methods.<\/span><\/p>\n For example, in the case of <\/span>Doe<\/span><\/i>, cited above, Justice Dorit Beinisch relies on research by K.K. Johnson, titled “Crime or Punishment: The Parental Corporal Punishment Defense \u2013 Reasonable and Necessary, or Excused Abuse<\/a>?” (U. Ill. L. Rev. 413 (1998)) (hereinafter: “Johnson’s Article”). According to Johnson’s research, physical punishment for educational purposes harms the child and is not beneficial. Historical View of Corporal Punishment in Israeli Law:<\/b><\/p>\n In the early days of the State of Israel, corporal punishment was more culturally accepted. For example, in Case 7\/53 Dalal Rassi v. the Attorney General , PD 7 790 (referred to as “the Rassi case”), Judge Shneor Zalman Cheshin stated:<\/span><\/p>\n “In this case, the attorneys for both parties agree that a parent and educator have the right to discipline minors in their care, including through corporal punishment. They are permitted to use physical punishment to educate and discipline in their children.”<\/span><\/p>\n This ruling reflected the fact that the Israeli legal system, influenced by British common law, traditionally allowed parents to use physical punishment for educational purposes without criminal liability, provided the intention was to instruct and discipline.<\/span><\/p>\n The Rassi ruling served as a basis for several court decisions years later that justified physical violence as a legitimate punishment tool for kids for educational purposes (look for instance Criminal Appeal (Tel Aviv) 570\/91 State of Israel v. Assouline, P.M. 35(1) 431, by Judge A. Straschnov).<\/span><\/p>\n In the Doe <\/i><\/span>case, Justice Dorit Beinisch explains that after the enactment of the Basic Law: The Judiciary, 1980<\/a>, the Israeli Legal System was no longer subject to British common law, and in addition to Johnson\u2019s article, she also provides support for her position from an article written by for Judge Chaim Cohen: The Values of the Jewish and Democratic Country – Reflections on the Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty,” <\/span>HaPraklit<\/span><\/i> Jubilee Volume (1994) 9.<\/span><\/p>\n The article draws upon the Basic Law – Human Dignity and Freedom<\/a> as well as the Convention on the Rights of the Child<\/a> signed by Israel in 1994. This foundational law emphasizes the protection of human dignity and freedoms. It is written:<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cMember states must take appropriate steps (in law, administration, social policies, education) to protect children from all forms of physical and mental violence, injury, abuse, neglect, and exploitation. This is especially important when they are under the care of parents, guardians, or other responsible adults.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n Below is a summary of retired Judge Chaim Cohen\u2019s article:\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n “To conclude all that has been stated, it must be determined that physical punishment of children, or their humiliation and degradation as a method of education by their parents, is strictly prohibited and is a remnant of a social-educational concept that has become obsolete. A child is not the property of their parents; they should not be used as a punching bag for parents to strike at, even if the parent sincerely believes they are fulfilling their duty and right to educate their child. The child depends on their parent and needs their love, protection, and gentle touch. The use of physical punishment that causes pain and humiliation does not contribute to the child’s personality and education but rather harms their human rights. It harms their body, emotions, dignity, and proper development. It distances us from our aspiration for a non-violent society. Therefore, we now know that the use of physical punishment or humiliating methods by parents as a means of education is prohibited in our society today.”<\/span><\/p>\n Additional backing for the claim that a parent should not be exempted from criminal liability when taking physical disciplinary actions against their child can be found in Section 49(5) of the proposed Penal Code (General and Preliminary), 1992.<\/span><\/p>\n According to the proposed writing of section 49, titled \u201cJustification,\u201d a person would not be held criminally liable for an act they committed if:\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cIt was done for the purpose of educating the minor under their authority, provided it did not exceed what is reasonable.\u201d (5)<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n In between the first and the second and the third readings of the bills in the Knesset, Section 49 (5) was omitted and did not become part of the amendment added to the actual text of the law.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n MK Yael Dayan articulated her stance on the issue during the Knesset debate on the proposal’s second and third readings.<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cIn our society, where child abuse and violence against the vulnerable occur, often within families, the concept of “reasonable” can be dangerously subjective. What one person considers reasonable discipline might be seen as severe harm by another. For instance, some may view three slaps as acceptable, while others might consider burns from an iron as form of discipline”. Dayan emphasized that there should be no ambiguous standards; violence and coercion should be strictly prohibited when dealing with minors or individuals under someone\u2019s control or guardianship.<\/span><\/p>\n (<\/span>Knesset Record, 25.7.94, pp 9847-9848).<\/span><\/p>\n Summary:<\/b><\/p>\n As seen above, societal views in Israel have shifted regarding the use of physical punishment on children. The prevailing belief now is that physical punishment is not in the best interests of the child and may cause harm.<\/span><\/p>\n However, it is important to recognize that various religious communities in Israel may not share this prevailing social view. <\/span>The Supreme Court’s ruling and the legislature\u2019s choice to not exempt physical punishment from criminal liability may not be accepted by all.<\/span><\/p>\n As a result, parents who use physical methods for disciplining their children could face legal repercussions, with welfare authorities potentially intervening in their homes.<\/span><\/p>\n As explained above, potential defenses may include claims of \u201ctriviality\u201d or \u201clack of public interest.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n Additionally, if the physical force was used when not used for educational purposes, but instead to save the child from danger, for example, even then the defendant may also raise a defense.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n In conclusion, as a general defense for those who believe that it is acceptable to use physical punishment for educational purposes, I will quote the words of retired Justice Dorit Beinisch in the <\/span>Doe<\/span><\/i> case (Section 30):<\/span><\/p>\n “Typically, an action that a normal-tempered person would not complain about does not constitute a basis for criminal liability. Therefore, for example, not every physical touch between individuals will result in criminal liability for the perpetrator, even if it seemingly falls within the formal elements of an assault offense. It is understood that parent-child relationships involve constant physical contact, and therefore, routine physical contact between a parent and child will not constitute a basis for a criminal offense.”<\/span><\/p>\n With that, all of these are only defense claims, and the legal principle, as it is stated, is that it is not permitted to educate children in Israel using physical violence and\/or physical punishment.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n For advice or legal assistance, please contact our law firm in Jerusalem and\/or Tel Aviv.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n This article was translated by Yamit Drotman & Yasmin Dabscheck<\/span><\/p>\n [author_and_contact_info]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Physical punishment is one of the most sensitive topics that can cause conflicts between the authorities of Israel and a parent who is immigrating to Israel or who is already living there. The law firm specializes in immigration to and from Israel. We often continue to assist clients that came into the country legally with…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":22,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[676],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-97364","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-education"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n![\"Physical](\"https:\/\/wpstaq-ap-southeast-2-media.s3.amazonaws.com\/lawfirm_updated\/wp-content\/uploads\/media\/2024\/09\/parent-child-2-300x300.jpg\")
<\/p>\nThe Duty and Right of the Parents to Educate Their Children, Along with the Current Limitations They Face.<\/b><\/h4>\n
The Duty and Right of Parents to Care For and Educate Their Children, and the Limitations That Exist in Israeli Law<\/b><\/h4>\n
![\"Physical](\"https:\/\/wpstaq-ap-southeast-2-media.s3.amazonaws.com\/lawfirm_updated\/wp-content\/uploads\/media\/2024\/09\/parent-hcild-1-300x300.jpg\")
<\/span><\/p>\n