Peer-reviewed article
Child neglect from a legal perspective: A quantitative analysis of Israeli court judgments over half a century
Daphna Gross‐Manos, Michal Segal ·
Summary
Written by AI, not yet AICS's view · claude-sonnet-5-5This study analysed 62 Israeli court judgments on child neglect from 1975 to 2024. It looked at how courts describe and decide neglect cases. Neglect rarely appeared on its own and was usually linked to abuse or to high-conflict family disputes. Emotional and physical neglect were the most common types. Court outcomes were mostly protective, but children had limited participation in the proceedings.
Key points
- Judicial neglect cases were relatively rare (N = 62 judgments, 1975–2024).
- Cases clustered around two profiles: co-occurring abuse and high-conflict family disputes.
- Physical neglect was significantly associated with abuse, and emotional neglect was more closely linked to family conflict.
- Economic hardship was less emphasized than expected, and most cases involved multiple risk factors.
- Judicial outcomes were mainly protective, with limited child participation, and the threshold for court intervention was unclear.
Limitations
The study covers only the court judgments available to the researchers, so it cannot show how neglect is handled in cases that never reach court or are not published. It describes patterns in judgments and does not test any intervention or show what happens to children afterwards.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Child neglect is a prevalent but complex and multifaceted form of maltreatment, with definitions that vary across legal and cultural contexts. Despite its well-documented harm, it remains underexamined in judicial decision-making. OBJECTIVE: This study examines how child neglect is conceptualized and adjudicated in Israeli courts, focusing on how cases are structured and how neglect is interpreted in judicial judgments. METHODS: A systematic analysis was conducted of all available Israeli court judgments involving child neglect. Cases were identified based on jurisdictional relevance and substantive discussion of neglect between 1975 and 2024 (N = 62). A structured coding scheme was applied to capture general case characteristics, types of neglect, child consequences, and features of the legal proceeding. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and distribution of the cases, as well as inferential tests. RESULTS: Judicial neglect cases were relatively rare and clustered around two main profiles: co-occurring abuse and high-conflict family disputes. Emotional and physical neglect were most prevalent, with physical neglect significantly associated with abuse, and emotional neglect more closely linked to family conflict dynamics. Most cases involved multiple risk factors, while economic hardship was less emphasized than expected. Common child outcomes included developmental delay and emotional distress. Judicial outcomes were primarily protective, with limited child participation. CONCLUSIONS: The main findings underscore the context-dependent and multifaceted nature of neglect in legal practice, where it rarely appears as a standalone category. Emotional neglect emerges as a particularly central dimension, while the overall pattern highlights persistent conceptual ambiguity and an unclear threshold for judicial intervention.