It was also determined that the importance of the parenting agreement is that it anchors parenthood not only between the spouses but also towards the minor independently, which is no longer dependent on the continuation of the relationship.
- In order to examine the significance of the "best interests of the child" in light of this ruling, the Minister of Labor and Social Affairs appointed a professional team that examined the aforementioned threshold conditions and formulated recommendations that were fully approved in October 2021, as follows:
"As part of the professional examination, a response will be requested, first and foremost, to the question of the child's best interests and the reality of his actual life. At the same time, the report will examine the question of the minor's parenting story, the question of the existence of a relationship before the parents, joint planning in advance, and more. After receiving the report's recommendation, the team recommends that the state's position be given in each case according to his circumstances and in accordance with the best interests of the minor in each and every case...
The team's recommendation is that in circumstances in which the application for a judicial parenting order was filed in the shadow of a dispute and separation between the spouses, and there is an objection by the biological parent to the establishment of a parenting relationship with his or her former spouse, each case will be examined on its own merits according to its specific circumstances and taking into account the overarching principle of the best interests of the child in the circumstances of the case."
- The best interests of the child required, inter alia, an examination of the petitioner's being a significant parental figure in the child's world. In the claims after the settlement of the litigation 8095-04-18 Mami v. Mother (Nevo, 1/3/2020), I ruled that the various circles in the child's life should be examined, with the child's best interests at the top of the tower. In that case, the plaintiff was dealing with a parenting agreement with the biological mother (although it was not registered), served as a parental figure towards the minor, approached the biological mother a large number of times in order to hold meetings even when she announced that she was not interested in doing so, initiated a dispute resolution process immediately upon the termination of the relationship and petitioned for the renewal of the relationship already in the dispute resolution process. All the welfare agencies were under the impression that the minor saw her as a mother for all intents and purposes, and on the basis of this leading consideration, a judicial parenting order was issued, joint parental responsibility and even time of residence was determined.
- The best interests of the child were called "the crown jewels" in a family appeal (Haifa District) 46465-01-22 Anonymous v. Anonymous (Nevo, 22/7/22) by the Honorable Judge Silman. In the same matter, it was determined that the relationship between the minor in whose case the proceeding was conducted and his brother regarding the issuance of an adoption order should also be examined, when all the professionals reached the conclusion that an equal parenting relationship should be created for both siblings.
- This principle of examining sibling relations was also discussed in claims after the litigation settlement (Tel Aviv) 23073-01-22 Anonymous v. Anonymous (Nevo, March 3, 2024). In this case, three minors were involved, the couple went to the sperm bank together, chose the sperm donor together, registered as two mothers in the maternity ward, changed their surnames to a joint surname they gave to the three daughters, and contacted a lawyer together in order to draw up a parenting agreement. The couple raised the three minors together who are called "mother" while adding their first name.
The spouse, who is not the biological mother, initiated a dispute resolution process four days after the cessation of the meetings, and already in this framework she petitioned for the immediate renewal of the relationship, which was indeed renewed. Immediately after the end of the period of stay of proceedings, she petitioned for the determination of parental responsibility and time of stay. About two months later, she petitioned for a judicial parenting order.
- It was found that the claim for a judicial parenting order requires the existence of two cumulative conditions:
First, the question of the existence of a joint relationship must be examined;