Alimony in Israel – “You will sell a kidney” and the international holocaust of alimony in the world
Israel is the only country where there is no connection between actual income and the discontinued child support rate. It is also the only country where women are exempt from participating in child support. Even if the children are transferred to the custody of the man, the alimony for the woman in many cases still does not stop, and no one expects her to pay alimony.
Money growing on the trees
“Go sell a kidney”, a family judge told a divorced father. “I do not care where you get the money from”, said another judge. A judge wearing a kippah, Paul Stark, told a student who did the pro and con command, to leave the yeshiva and work and sentenced him to pay NIS 4,450 for three children, with the student’s salary being NIS 1,700.
Another secular father with three children and a salary of NIS 5,000 was awarded NIS 6,700 in alimony. How will I pay the father asked? “From prison,” the judge replied. This is the reality. what’s happening here? Where do family court judges think men are supposed to get the money from?
In the photo: Eli Daniel with the 2 children that the State of Israel and its feminist judges kidnapped. Today no one has any idea what the kids look like. They have new names and they do not know Hebrew, and also forgot that they once had a father.
Is the alimony money growing on the trees in Israel?
Apparently, in the training of the family court judges, someone taught them that money grows on trees, and in a divorce, the man just has to go out and pick up a handful of Swiss shekels, dollars, and francs. The judges’ treatment of men is as if men are padded with money, and they just do not want to pay their ex-wife because of personal revenge. To spur them to pay, the judges routinely add derogatory words and contempt for the man to the verdict, so that the man knows exactly what the judge thinks of him, and will not return. Of course, there are no appeals against alimony judgments, because of the rule that the appellate court does not interfere with the findings of the Family Court, and also because of the astronomical guarantee that men are required to deposit. When a judge knows he cannot be appealed, he simply does what he pleases.
The case of the heifer is strange because it is hard to believe that two parents and three children made a living from NIS 1,700 a month, but if this was the man’s income before the divorce, the woman probably knew how to support a family. The woman came to terms with the fact that her husband is a student whose teachings are fostered, and she chose to marry him and have children.
Why do women and the court suddenly expect the same man to go out and bring in a monthly income that is almost three times what it was, and where will the man live on his own when he has to leave the house? So it is true that the heifer was a “parasite” in secular terms, and also a brainwashing victim whose studies in the yeshiva are beneficial to someone, or the birth of 10 children fulfills the “pro and con” mitzvah, but it was part of the deal the woman signed when she married him. Even if he goes to work, how will Dos, who barely knows English and arithmetic, earn more than a minimum wage of NIS 4,000 and how will he pay NIS 4,450, and from what will he pay his rent? – There is no escape from the conclusion that the family court believes that money grows on the trees and one should only reach out and pick it up.
Anyone who believes that “deepening the collection”, imposing penalties and fines, or establishing a “register of those who refuse alimony”, will change the state of collection, is wrong. Alimony must be significantly reduced, at least by a quarter, because the calculations are unfair, unequal, contrary to international conventions, and are on average four times what is customary in the Western world.
The Israeli bluff “Each case on its own”
In Austria, we have seen that lawyers charge about 1,000 shekels for all alimony treatment because in total it is an arithmetic operation. In Israel, the food industry feeds thousands of lawyers who charge considerable sums. This is exactly the difference between a country that gives its citizens all the tools to know what comes and what does not come in advance, compared to Israel, a country where laws and rulings are secret from the public, inaccessible to citizens, and the justice system encourages the public to clash with each other. . This is exactly what advocates lawyers, and floods the courts.
The terrible slogan “each case on its own” also causes terrible damage and a burden on the courts. When Supreme Court justices encourage every judge to consider considerations and balance balances, there is no binding rule, and it forces everyone to go to court, because who knows what the judge will consider, or what the judge will balance. The same is true for insurance law, consumerism, and almost all civil and administrative law. Then Beinisch comes and wants more standards for the judges so that they can continue to consider and balance, each based on what they see fit, and based on feelings and intuitions.
Had the court been educated to write useful judgments in which there are clear rules, with boundaries, ceilings, formulas, which could be used even beyond the four walls of the specific case, many disputes would have been closed out of court. The mechanism has an interest in perpetuating the ambiguity and ambiguity, to fuel the inflation of the machine even further. The bluff of “each case on its own merits” produces a bonanza for the lawyers, when in the case of women, it is clear to them that they will rule in their favor thousands of shekels as a fee, even if the woman exaggerated her demands in the first place, and could not be reached with understandings.
A situation has arisen in which a non-plaintiff feels a sucker, and we hoped that the Shipman Commission would resolve this, but the problem is not only in the ambiguity of the trial and the lack of expectations. The problem lies in the decay, opacity, and gender hatred that has pervaded the family courts. Fathers earning about four thousand NIS net for a living, are required to transfer all their salary to their ex-wives.
They receive automatic temporary custody and temporary alimony without a trial and no evidence but based on a collection of fantasies. The judges, for their part, postpone the trial itself for a few years, so that the alimony accumulates, and then the woman can seize the alimony from half of the property belonging to the man. This is how to wholesale property is transferred from men to women, and this is how anyone who stays married feels that she is a sucker.
Execution in the role of national executioner
Execution does not bury its hand in the dish. The OTZLF files are opened without checking at all the size of the debt or whether a debt exists. Requests for foreclosures, cancellations of licenses, and arrests are submitted in the presence of one party at the push of a button in an online system, without justifications, and without the debtor even knowing. Just to know what the debtor is asking for, the husband has to physically get to the hotspot to wait in line, and pay hundreds of shekels for a photo, with the wife’s lawyers producing encyclopedias to inflate the cost of the photo to the husband.
The corny claim is a shortage of manpower for collection, backed by the portrayal of men as alimony refusers. The truth is that from the outset the collection was doomed to failure, because the sums decided are outrageous, impossible to meet, and they will probably continue to reach the OT even if they add manpower, and especially if they aggravate the punishment, cancellations of licenses and imprisonments. Expected to pay. Totzlaf claims that the total alimony debt is NIS 12 billion. How is it that in Finland with 5.5 million inhabitants, there are only 1.330 billion shekels in alimony debts? The answer is simple: when alimony is fair, equal, and normal there is a more voluntary payment.
In a country where there is discrimination, irrational rulings over income, and the full exemption for women, debts accumulate because there is nothing to pay. It’s like trying to get water out of the rock, using a thicker whip. It just will not happen. What’s more, the numbers in Israel are probably inflated in the first place. For example, it is known about someone who took an alimony ruling from ten years ago, who returned to her husband and decided to divorce again.
She went to the Hotzlaff and there they opened a case for her for retroactive alimony in the amount of NIS 700,000 at a time. Other women are advised to open a case even when there is no debt, to collect money, and to wait for the fictitious debt in the OTZLP to swell. A report by the Knesset Center from 2006 reveals that of the alimony debtors in the National Insurance Institute, 40% of them have no chance of collection at all: 7% died, 8% abroad, 1% prisoners, 1.5% bankrupt, 9% recipients of benefits, And 10% in a payment arrangement. Even among the remaining 60%, there is a third who pays in part. Let us not forget that much of the global alimony debt includes murderous interest rates. See for example in Austria where the interest rate is 3% (and there are almost no Jews there).
We were informed that 6,682 Hotzlaff cases were opened each year. There are about 9,000 divorce cases with children. Hence 75% of alimony stops are doomed in the first place to non-collection due to your inability. One in four judges knows that the alimony he rules will not be paid. Does the question arise for what are they doing this? Probably so as not to disappoint the women, who pumped their brains out because they deserve a bonanza of foods. It has already been saying: “There is no decree on the public that it can not abide by.” In Israel, this is an ancient proverb that once interested someone.
Feminist hypocrisy and the illusion of alimony
Women, who for many years fought with all their might to gain the equality they deserve, today live in the State of Israel, not according to the spirit of equality that has pulsated in them. All this, under the auspices of an old-fashioned, archaic law, which does not in any way reflect the tremendous revolution that took place in the status of women, their rights, their income, and their transformation from a housewife to a man and only mother, equal rights and value in the modern age. The woman today, builds for herself a fascinating career and fulfills herself, as a person. The above inequality causes serious damage to the entire population, women and men alike.
It is not clear what benefit Israeli feminists derive from their insistence that a woman deserves alimony at levels that did not exist at all at the time of the marriage, and the man will not stand them when women are planted with illusions that they will get the money through penalties, license revocation, credit card blocking and what not. All these decrees will not bring money that at the time of marriage could not have been produced. Yet the food illusion industry continues to destroy men day in and day out and bring them turnips. The problem is that when a person gets married, his tassels are not checked to see if he can finance the bill presented to him when he divorces. It’s like going into a restaurant and eating as much as you can, without asking in advance how much it costs. When the bill arrives, 6 times what you expected, you freak out.
Shipman Committee: More work in the eyes
In 2006, Haim Ramon established the Shipman Committee to examine the issue of child support in the State of Israel. Shipman and the committee are supposed to offer formula in light of the experience abroad, which will redeem us from the arbitrariness in which alimony is stopped in impossible amounts in Israel. Six years have been waiting for this committee. The committee included mainly women and people identified with female agendas. It’s just like the Trachtenberg Committee with Zehavit Cohen, Ofra Strauss, and the owners of Osem, Thelma, Shufersal, and Mega as committee members without representatives of the disadvantaged sectors. Toto silenced the men, a committee was formed 6 years ago, and it was promised that the committee would submit interim recommendations within a year. It did not happen. The committee was asked to compile an egalitarian formula for calculating alimony. A press release issued by Justice Minister Haim Ramon at the time stated: “Along with the initial responsibility of parents to take care of their children, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child also enshrines the state’s direct duty to ensure this responsibility, and to assist parents”. For the collection of alimony. In recent decades, legislative models have developed in the countries of the world that express the state’s responsibility for child support and ensuring their collection. These include determining the amount of child support and ensuring their collection, while striving to reduce litigation regarding child support and in particular, removing the issue from litigation between parents in divorce matters”.
Thus, half-heartedly, the Ministry of Justice admitted that in examining the distribution of alimony between the parents, there was a Convention on the Rights of the Child. According to the Convention, Article 27 (d), both parents are liable for child support. Thus, Ramon, instead of admitting that the law in Israel discriminates between parents in light of the exemption for women from alimony, decided to set up a committee, laundering Israeli words for burying hot potatoes. Shipman has been incumbent on his committee for years, each time releasing a new deadline that has been postponed time and time again.
Meanwhile, the female lobby in the Knesset and the Ministry of Justice artist waiting for Shipman. The Knesset is inundated with “femininity” bills to “deepen collection” and “benefit with divorcees”. Only recently have they talked about a bill to allow women who collect alimony from the National Insurance Institute based on a statement that they earn less than NIS 7,000 to fly abroad without losing their monthly benefit. The hypocrisy is that women who claim to have no money, want to spend their alimony money abroad, and men are supposed to keep waiting for the Shipman Commission. The Ministry of Justice is promoting a memorandum on a bill to establish a special route for collecting alimony. No one is waiting for Shipman except the divorced fathers.
What is religious law, why does it apply to alimony and who is it?
A man who has been sued for alimony does what everyone else does and starts surfing and gathering information. On the Internet, he will not find anything useful to him. The State of Israel does not bother to gather all the laws, laws, and rulings in one clear place, from which the reasonable person will be able to learn the law and what is expected of him. An ordinary man looking for answers will get a night of terms from religious law, from which nothing clear arises: the obligation of alimony from charitable law, necessary alimony, alimony for the little ones, and all sorts of obscure expressions.
The standard answer is that in the State of Israel, by law, the man must bear all the necessary child support up to the age of 18 and, yes, alimony from a charitable state. This is disproven though principles of equality have been recognized as a supreme principle in the State of Israel, except in family law, and it is interesting why. Yet this answer does not answer anything other than the fact that it is clear that religious law applies to child support, under the heading “personal law”.
This is by the provisions of section 3 (a) of the Family Law (Alimony) Amendment Law, 5719-1959, according to which: This law will not apply to these alimonies. ” Necessary alimony is considered economy, food, clothing and footwear, payment of health tax and the child’s share in the maintenance expenses of the apartment which include his share in the section as well as basic education expenses. Beyond that, depending on the child’s age, a “care fee” is also paid to the mother, who is almost always determined to be the custodian of the minor. Also, “according to his ability”, the father pays even half of what the child needs from a charity policy and the necessary medical expenses.
The parent who owes alimony to his children, according to Hebrew law, is the father only. Regarding the absolute obligation of the father to support his children up to the age of 6, it is stated in the book of Rabbi and lawyer Avishai Grady and lawyer Nissim Shalem, “Child support in practice”, as follows: Children as a legal obligation on the father appears as a regulation enacted in Usha. And so it is written in the Gemara in Tractate Ketubot:
Based on Usha, the Chief Rabbinate enacted a regulation in 2004, according to which: The father must pay child support until the age of 15, according to the general authority, which is before the court in special situations that require correction, according to Shulchan Aruch. The regulation created an absolute legal charge on the father for the alimony of his minor children, from the age of growth to the age of 15, and equalized the validity of the charge and its execution against children from the age of 6 to the age of 15 – for small children up to the age of 6”.
According to the Osha regulation, the father should be ashamed. Rabbi Yehuda would call them “beasts of prey”, and Rabbi Hassada would call them “crows” (like the blackbirds) until they paid. This is exactly what is done in the family courts today, except that in the days of Usha the divorce rate was not 33%.
Prof. Menashe Shava, who has educated generations of students at Tel Aviv University, claimed that “the system of personal law in every period and period has a sociological explanation, to facilitate the life of the population, which consists of different religious and ethnic groups within the same territory”. But at Shava’s time, there were no 33% divorces, some a second time, and some a third time or more. There has also never been a social need to apply personal law in divorce.
This is simply one of many elements of religious coercion. In the universities, they studied the books of Shava and Shereshevsky. Those who wanted to get an employee score on the test had to agree with them that “in light of the existing legislation, it is inevitable to apply the personal law to Jews, according to which the man must bear the full alimony of the necessary minors.” And so a generation of jurists grew up here who fed them a collection of medieval hallucinations, and to this day they fail to break free from what was written in those books. Today they would call it to gender hate books.
Nevertheless, it is worth noting that Prof. M. Korinaldi wrote an article entitled “Should the principle of equality be applied in parent and child law?” (Kiryat Hamishpat, Yearbook of the Academic Campus, Vol. II, p. 131). Among the sources of Hebrew law reviewed in the article is the Talmudic Halakhah, as agreed in Rambam (Ishut, 21:18), according to which the divorced mother has the authority to dispose of her duty towards her children (to breastfeed them), by giving them to their father or “To the audience, if they do not have a father, and they take care of them”. Explain to students at the time that this meant that a woman was completely exempt from the alimony burden of her children. But in modern reading, we find that personal law has recognized that if the lady has difficulty raising the children due to financial burden, there is no reason not to give them to the father or throw the children to the public (and nowadays the reference to the Ministry of Welfare).
What do divorcees do with their children abroad?
In every other country, alimony is calculated according to a formula that deducts a percentage of disposable income. For example, in New York, the husband pays pro-rata (the percentage between his income and her income) 17% of the combined salary of both parents, minus the social security contributions, for one child, 25% for two, 29% for three, 31% for four, and 35% for five or more, With slight changes that are all quantified in the formula. In Virginia, the payment starts at 12% for one child, and of course, in all states, the woman’s income is perfected, and there is usually a subsistence allowance for a man so that he can live with dignity. We do not look at all at what is called in the country the “needs of the children”, because what the children need is what they received at the time of marriage, that is, the needs of the children are expressed as a percentage of disposable income.
In contrast, there is blatant discrimination in the country. There is no connection between the man’s income and the amount of alimony he is ordered to pay. Every woman comes and inflates her demands. The girl wants ballet, and the boy wants judo. Entire pages of judgments are wasted on silly calculations like the cost of diapers, or optical glasses. All this is appallingly wasteful, and of course, it is also completely painted. Where did the audacity come from to demand that the man bring money for “needs” that were born after the separation, and did not exist while the couple ran a household?
In France, a family judge determines alimony without a binding formula. This is usually 150 euros to 170 euros per month per child or about 15% of the net male income per child with reductions for several children. In 70% of cases of joint custody (Garde Alternee), week-to-week, there are no alimony payments, unless there is a significant economic gap between the woman and the man in which case a small amount of up to about 100 euros per child will be paid.
In Virginia, the income of both spouses is connected (say 10,000 for a man and 5,000 for a woman, together with the marital income – 15,000. We examine the ratio between the two (33.3% -66.6%) and deduce the percentage of alimony (12% for one child). In this example, The man will pay two-thirds of the amount of alimony derived from the couple’s income.
Federal law requires each state to publish alimony calculation guidelines, and most publish an official calculator. We checked, compared, and found out: Suppose the man earns about NIS 7,000 and the woman makes NIS 3,500. For one child he will pay NIS 1,500 in Israel with a low estimate, not including a section, and in Virginia, he will pay NIS 690. For two children, NIS 3,000 in Israel and NIS 1,074 in Virginia. For 3 children in Israel NIS 4,500 and Virginia NIS 1,346. It turns out that in Israel, between 2.17 and 3.34 times more alimony payments are decided. In other examples, the higher the woman’s wage or the lower the man’s wage, we obtained results between 3 and 6 times in Israel. The minimum is $ 65 per month or NIS 227. Compare to Israel where the minimum is at least NIS 1,200, this too is just the beginning, considering that “section” is also required here.
In Arizona, too, the income combination of both parents is calculated, and from them, the alimony is deducted, which each party owes according to its share pro-rata. In Arizona, not every child is paid a “minimum” but there is a graded table: the second child will receive 42% of the first. Two more children will receive 65% of the first together, and three more children will receive 85% of the first together. There is a table for calculating alimony reduction for “parenting days”, ie days of custody or supervision by the father according to the number of days in the year: between 4-20 reduce 1.2%, between 21-38 reduce 3.1%, between 39-57 reduce 5%, between 58- 72 reduce 8.5%, between 73-87 reduce 10.5%, between 88-115 reduce 16.1%, between 130-142 reduce 25.3%, between 143-152 reduce 30.7%, between 153-162 reduce 36.2%, between 163-172 reduce 42.2%, and between 173-182 reduce 48.6%.
For this purpose it is possible to accumulate units of hours: between 12-24 hours are considered one day. Between 6-11 hours it is half a day and between 3-5 hours it is a quarter of a day. The reduction for parenting time is deducted as a percentage from the double child support basket, and the amount received is deducted from the total child support set for the non-custodial parent.
There is no alimony in Equal Custody, except in cases of a considerable gap in the income of both parents, and the result is a rather small amount to compare the opening conditions. In any case, the judge is obliged to check that the non-custodial father can indeed meet the payments (Self Support Reserve Test).
The test is whether the non-custodian can afford to pay financially and whether he will be able to maintain a minimum subsistence level, with a reserve of $ 775 for self-subsistence. There is also an allowance for travel expenses for the implementation of visits if the parent is required to travel 160 km in one direction.
See in this comparative table this examination of the differences in alimony calculations in the United States for a typical case where there are 2 children aged 7 and 10. The division of custody is 65% for the mother and 45% for the father. The mother earns $ 45,000 a year (144,000 NIS a year or 12,000 NIS a month, and the father earns $ 55,000 a year (176,000 NIS a year or 14,500 NIS a month).
Notice if the woman earns more, she is the one who will pay the father. Here the assumption is that the woman earns less.
In Florida, the next will pay for the 2 kids the total including everything including halves and section, $ 544 = $ 1,740.
In California, the father will pay for the 2 children, including everything including halves and medio $ 566 – 1,810 NIS.
In Oregon, the father will pay for the 2 children the total including everything including halves and section $ 421 = 1,350 NIS.
In Israel…. Two children can easily reach 5,000 NIS a month, which is on the low side.
In Finland, the state provides free mediation services. In the absence of consent, the court will decide based on ability to pay, as long as the alimony is not unfair to either parent. There is an alimony exemption for students, the unemployed, and prisoners. From the non-custodial parent income the following amounts are exempt from alimony and are considered disposable income: there is a subsistence reserve of 500 euros, all reasonable living and housing expenses, travel expenses to and from work, housing loan repayments or mortgages, and loan loans, regular and significant medical treatments, refunds Shared with the woman.
If there are travel expenses for visits with the children over 100 euros, the 100 euros above are also deducted. Expenses for keeping in touch with the children according to the table, as well as expenses for the days of accommodation with the non-custodial, if there are more than 7 overnight stays per month up to 54 euros. If that is not enough, in order not to sabotage the chances of remarriage of the non-custodial, when he or she remarries, an additional 420 euros can be deducted from the payment capacity attributed to the non-custodial.
At the same time, the custodian receives a reduction of 250 euros for children up to age 6, 290 euros up to age 12, and 390 euros up to age 17. Final results in Finland: in 23% of alimony cases up to 68 euros, in 10% of cases up to 101 euros, 33% cases Up to 135 euros, up to 170 euros, in 9% of cases up to 235 euros, in 2.5% up to 302 euros, and 0.60% over 302 euros. The country’s open alimony debt for 2005 is 267 euros, (243 million euros for Social Security, and 24 euros open debt for custodial parents).
In Austria, there is no enforcement for alimony. Alimony is paid directly to the woman. The maximum arrears interest rate is 3%. The foods are calculated according to a simple table. The lawyers charge about 6% of the product of 12 months’ alimony, which is about 200 euros (1,000 shekels) for the entire alimony case.
Compare to Israel based on NIS 2,000 per month, the attorney will not charge more than NIS 1,440. Court fee 16 euros or 80 NIS.
The basic salary for calculating alimony is net, from which 16% is deducted for each child up to age 6, 18% up to age 10, 20% up to age 15, and 22% up to age 18. There is a “discount” for those who have previous children.
There is also a small discount of 2% for 2 children. The minimum is 160 euros per month or 800 shekels. If the children sleep with the father for at least two days, they are reduced by 4% from 16%, which means that he will pay 12% of the net. If they are older, the savings for a woman should be calculated. If the woman brings a new man into her home, alimony decreases by a quarter (4% from 16%). If the man brings a new woman into his home, even then alimony decreases by a quarter (4% less than 16%), to encourage the establishment of a new family unit. There is a minimum disposable income that must remain in the hands of the man, 75% of the minimum wage.
See OECD Comparative Table – Although the table is old, much can be learned from it.
The most important thing to learn is that alimony is derived from the father’s disposable income. In Australia 14.2% of a father’s net disposable income. In Finland 10.7%. In the US 19.4% – and Switzerland 35.1%. In Israel, the figure is much more than 35% and can reach 100%, 200%, and 300%.OECD-דוח-מחקר-השוואתי-של-פסיקת-מזונות-לילדים-בעולם
Want to calculate how much alimony you will pay abroad ??? Please courtesy of OECD
What did Ohana and Tsinoboy do to Usha?
Slowly, several rulings emerged that challenged the secular humiliation before Usha and the rabbinate. If we are not mistaken, the first prophet in his city was Judge Gifman. In 82010/96 dated 08/12/1997, the Honorable Justice Geifman ruled that “at the desired level, the transition in Israeli law to the application of the principle of equality in the division of property between spouses should also lead to closing gaps in alimony law of personal law. The principle of equality should also be applied in alimony law in the division of the burden between the spouses”.
Judge Yehuda Granit, who himself tasted the comfort of his ex-wife, sitting as a family court judge in the Tel Aviv district, argued that the provisions of section 3A of the Alimony Law should be adopted, according to which “(a) a minor’s father and mother owe alimony. (B) Regardless of the fact by whom a minor is held, the alimony will apply to his parents at a rate proportional to their income from any source ”. The person who thwarted and thwarted Granit’s rulings was Yehudit Shtofman, a graduate of the Family Court, to whom the appeal reached (p. 1150/03). It is no secret that Judge Stuffman even today rejects any appeal of a man who comes to her.
Immediately afterwards, Granit replied to her in 24650/02 (23/2/2004), “In determining the amount of alimony to which the father will be charged, the court will take into account, among other things, the amount of the father’s income and his financial capacity. Furthermore, the ruling stated that in a claim for alimony of a minor from his father, the court may also take into account the income of the mother and reduce the father’s obligation to pay alimony from his children… by the principle of equality and justification as interpreted by the Supreme Court One of the two parents bears in the alimony of the children a proportion of his disposable income to the total disposable income of both.
Later, on February 15, 2005, Judge Hanna Ben-Ami (District Court of Jerusalem), p. 590/04, ruled: A. 1951, in which he added a purpose clause that is his language: “This law is intended to establish principles to ensure full equality between women and men.”
Meanwhile, a small number of conscientious objectors have dealt with the distortions and inequality by way of a creeping erosion in ingrained indoctrination while seeking a way out in religious law for the absence of equality. For example, reduce the component of necessary alimony, to a minimum, or apply the “laws of honesty” in Hebrew law, (“and you did right and good”), as a tool for correcting distortions, in “exceptional cases”.
Then came Ohana and Tsinoboy. The Supreme Court Justice, Ayala Procaccia, ruled in Law 5750/03, Ohana v. Ohana dated 8/6/2005 that: And its economic capacity. In this context, the mother’s financial ability is also taken into account in any case, and this affects the extent of the child’s needs and the extent of alimony that the father has to pay”.
In Ltd. 2433/04, Tsinoboy v. Tsinoboy, (02/10/05), Judge Procaccia ruled that the principle is that in assessing alimony that a father must pay to his children, the needs of the children must be taken into account, as well as the amount and capacity of the father. Economic. In any case, the financial capacity of the mother in whose custody the children are kept is also taken into account in this context. The alimony ruling is made through a total balance of the family’s income from all sources, taking into account all the capabilities in the face of the needs, and determining the reasonable rate of alimony accordingly”.
Also, “as part of the appropriate balance in assessing the amount of alimony that a father must pay to his children (beyond their necessary needs), weight must be given to his financial ability and his own needs”. Unlike abroad, where the public is informed of what is being used through formulas, in Israel things have remained a worthless decoration between a collection of cruel rulings.
It is time to rewrite the judicial consciousness that only the father owes alimony to his children. Those who want equality must show that it is not “equality only when it comes to me”. The alimony obligation is a mutual obligation of both parents. We are waiting for the brave Supreme Court judge to come and admit that applying a personal-religious law to someone who is not religious is manifestly unconstitutional coercion.
It is time to part with the outdated and forced interpretations of the law, and treat both parents without gender distinction. No more women relying on the man as he goes out to make a career. The phenomenon of sperm theft proves that many women do not rely on the man for the sake of having children. No longer the small and needy woman, but rather, a woman with diverse abilities, who is not dependent on anyone.
The outrageous alimony ruling must stop. Even the huge debt in execution must be written off. It was accumulated illegally as a result of discriminatory and predatory policies. The new generation must be educated to be careful with whom they enter the bed, and with whom they enter the canopy. Religious law must not be applied to anyone who is not religious. It is time for Israeli feminists to stop whining that men do not pay child support. Finland also has feminists, and they get along well with equal and reciprocal alimony distribution.
In Israel, alimony is not paid because in the first place it is stopped at rates that cannot be met. The women come to lawyers, especially those from the legal aid, who do not check their income and yet approve free aid. Lawyers are starting to compile a list of needs that reaches thousands of shekels a month. These are needs that did not exist and have no reference. This is accompanied by an affidavit that “this is the high standard of living to which I am accustomed”.
The women believe that what the lawyers write is really what they deserve. That is, convincing the women that they deserve compensation for having children and that it is the duty of the man. The judges also wink at the women, “Whatever you ask for, let it be!” When the time comes for payment, and there is nothing to pay, reality slaps her in the face, and the woman gets upset that she has to open a case in the Hotzlaff. Every day she gets upset again. Why does he not pay? I deserve it. After all, even the judge said I deserved it. Still, it does not bring money that does not.
The obvious result is female revenge: the woman disconnects the children from the father, goes to the police and complains that they are threatening and following her, and gives instructions to the Hotzlaf to confiscate everything possible, revoke driver’s licenses, sabotage professional licenses, and of course, arrest warrants. Too bad the seducers believe the lookers who sell them. The man is on the boards, has already spent between 50,000 shekels and 100,000 for lawyers. He runs every day to the execution or the relief clerk for compulsory care, which he must attend to see his children. He had to look for a job that allowed him to take time off twice a week at 3:00 p.m. so that the relief clerk would allow him to see the children. Such jobs with flexibility in working hours are almost non-existent.
In the meantime, he lives with his parents or just disappears underground. Every time a policeman passes by, the man is afraid that they will come to him, because who knows what the woman complained about? Even when the man meets someone new and children are born to her, he still has to finance the children of the previous woman and does not get a discount (as in Finland). In the meantime, it is recommended that every single person follow in the footsteps of Yoram Kaniuk, and delete the religion section in the ID card. Also, do not let women live in your home. Always rent a separate apartment. Maintain private accounts. Let’s hope for a miracle from Professor Shipman’s committee.
With loneliness will dwell with outrageous and impossible foods
Israel is the only country where there is no connection between actual income and the discontinued child support rate. It is also the only country where women are exempt from participating in child support. Even if the children are transferred to the custody of the man, the alimony for the woman in many cases still does not cease, and no one expects her to pay alimony. It is also the only country that does not take care of a minimum subsistence budget for a man who is exempt from alimony calculations and foreclosures. Here you simply double the amount of about 2,000 NIS double the number of children and add babysitters, classes, kindergarten, rent, medical expenses, psychological treatments, and more and more. The woman’s income is not checked at all.
The dry law requires the woman to present 12 payslips before the date of the statement of claim. In practice, the family court is not at all interesting. Judge Tova Sivan, for example, said in such a case: “I do not know that a statement of claim is deleted because a woman does not issue payslips”.
Suppose a man earns NIS 5,000 and is sentenced to pay NIS 6,000 for 3 children (average number of children in an Israeli family), where will he get the money from ?, and in general, if before the divorce the couple lives on the salary that was ), So where does the right to take the husband’s entire salary, plus NIS 1,000 that is not the National Insurance benefits, and also to keep the wife’s income unreported come from? This means that divorce is an industry for printing money that does not exist and did not exist. All the debts in the OTZLP are not due to refusal, but simply because the amounts decided are outrageous and impossible.
We forgot that the man had to finance 30% of the woman’s rent for one child, 40% for two, and 50% for three (except for victims of sperm theft, in which case the lady did not “rely” on her victim for housing). Hence a man’s housing expenses are 130%, 140%, and 150% respectively compared to any other man. The woman chooses for her where she wants to live, presents the bill, and claims this is the standard of living to which I am accustomed. For example, one woman presented Judge Tova Sivan in the family court in Ramat Gan with a salary slip for NIS 3,000, and a rent agreement for NIS 3,500, and without batting an eyelid demanded a 30% participation without having to explain how she had met the payment so far alone. No wonder 200 divorced fathers commit suicide each year. Even the son of the great court judge, Zion Boron, committed suicide with a gas cylinder in a barrel.
There is no logic, fairness, or justice in extorting alimony from men who simply do not have and had nothing to pay for. Only misogyny, harassment, and cruel exploitation explain the opacity in the family courts. The practice is that the money the man earns is defined as the “joint money” of both spouses, and we all know that the woman spends about 90% of the money at best, but the money the woman earns is her private money.
Feminists in women’s organizations take care to maintain this privilege for women, and along the way they threaten the judges not to deviate from the outline, otherwise, they will lose their jobs.
There is no limit to the state’s cruelty towards men. It was reported, for example, that a divorced father who, following an alimony debt of about NIS 20,000, broke into the house of a police officer, sawed the bars with flames, and caught him just like a terrorist, just on the eve of Independence Day.
Sperm theft – a state epidemic
Sperm theft is the terror of state singles. A torn condom can cost NIS 500,000 as alimony for 18 years, not including lawyers, and a waste of 3-4 years of life in the family court, and with the welfare clerks. The court does not care that the condom was torn, that the lady stabbed the condom, that she “forgot” to take pills, or refused to take Fostinor, or that she refused to have an abortion. In this story, the father is an ATM, and here no court will not glorify the right of a teenage bachelor to choose the ATM that will accompany her for the next 18 years.
The theft of semen also prevents the man from starting a family of his choice, and from calling another woman, when she serves as the mythological tick, which constantly produces problems: another hearing, another cancellation of visits, and another complaint to the police. Those who drafted the Domestic Violence Law made sure to define sperm theft as family members in advance, so they have free access to the Colonel section of the police, where they can teach the man a lesson as a “spouse”, even though sperm theft is inherently the rejected women in the story. He did not want to tie his fate to them. Tel Aviv singles today talk about freezing semen and voluntary sterilization in order not to fall into the trap, and this is indeed the proper way.
These increasingly numerous sperm thefts drop the ground beneath the feminist claim that the woman is weakened, that the woman is harmed as a result of agreeing to tie her fate with a man, or that the woman relied on the man and is above faith.
Here everything is upside down. The stealing mother is elevated in the training of the sexual partner, steals sperm, and refuses to have e an abortion. She already has a ready-made apartment with a crib and baby stroller. She also has a nice salary, since so far she has supported herself on her own. Sperm theft is a real antithesis to the weak and poor woman’s script of the women’s lobby. Still, sperm theft gets VIP treatment in the courts.