Israeli Family-Law Forum - Children/Minors

The family court has wide jurisdiction about if, how and where to hear the child’s point of view, directly, in custody proceedings . For example, in November 2017, in a custody battle relating to an 8 year old, in which our office represents the father, and there is a high level of parental conflict, and mutual claims of incitement, Nazareth Family Court paid a surprise visit at the minor’s primary school, so it could meet with the minor himself. The surprise visit was aimed to minimize the possibility/extent to which either or both parents might try to “prepare” the child for the occasion, “influence” him and prevent either of them escorting him to the meeting , thereby gaining a possible advantage/opportunity to pressurize the minor. The court had made a decision that it would hear the child directly, at short notice, and forbade the parents from telling the child this, or preparing him for the meeting. This unusual and creative step was designed to allow the court to hear the authentic, and spontaneous reaction of the child, in a neutral , but familiar atmosphere, where he felt comfortable.
Quite possibly -children's views can be heard and their wishes and viewpoints will be taken into account, subject to their age and maturity, and exercise of the court's discretion in this matter. Israeli family law procedure allows for children above the age of 6 to be "heard" by a neutral professional (usually a social worker) at the family court assistance unit or directly by the court (in the judge's chambers, often in the presence of a social worker). Alternatively, the court has powers to appoint an expert to make recommendations within custody proceedings and the child's viewpoint can be ascertained within that process. In certain cases, a court can order that a child younger than six, can be "heard" , too, though this may be via an expert such as a clinical psychologist for children who can ascertain the minor's preferences via age-appropriate tests designed to reveal his views/opinions in an indirect manner. Of course, the decision about whether a child is to be heard, and how, is subject to the court's discretion. In November 2011 Nazareth family court agreed to a request of a father, represented by our law office, for his minor child, aged 8, to be heard directly by the court (in private), after a therapist (a clinical psychologist) , whom he had been seeing, with the consent of both parents, following court instructions, recommended this, in a report filed to the report.

Apply to the family court to rule on the issue, as a matter of urgency. An application regarding registration of a child at a school is regarded as being an urgent matter,and the court will request reactions from the father, in writng, and your son himself, whose voice can be  heard  confidentially, at the court assistance unit, through a social worker or pyschologist there, or even by the judge in his/her chambers.

The court will give a ruling, in the child's best interests, where the parents cannot reach a decision by mutual consent, so that your son can be offiicially registered to attend an educational establishment. The court  will decide which junior high school your son should attend, and will give appropriate instructions, so that he will be registered, on the basis of its decision.

 

File an urgent application to the family court, as an exception to the regular preliminary process to first check out the possibility of a mediated solution.. Even though your ex-husband is the non-custodial parent, and you have custody, his permission is still needed to renew the passports and take the children out of Israel on holiday, unless his decision making parental  powers have been taken away by court,which is very rare.

After opening the fle at the family court, you should  try to deliver the documents to your ex-husband, or another adult at his home address, as the court will probably request his reaction, which necessiates him being served the papers beforehand .The court can give an order to the Ministry of Interior to renew your childrens' passports on the basis of your signature alone, and to allow you to travel overseas with the children, even  if their father objects, or doesn't respond, if  it  considers that this would be in their best interests, but usually only after it is satisfied that the children's father  has received the material, and is given the opportunity to react, and have his say.

 

In exceptional cases, the court may grant a decision , ex-parte (without the father knowing) , and order that the father is to  be notified later..

 

 

By applying to the family court in Israel for  two forms of legal relief - the first ,an order requring the Ministry of Interior to issue a new passport for your child and the second, for permission  for your daughter to leave Israeli jurisdiction on a temporary basis, for educational purposes, both of which are issues of guardianship concerning your minor daughter. In principle, parents must agree on such issues but the court may intervene and adjudicate when there is no agreement, or when the other parent cannot be traced or will not co-operate, even if there is no active opposition,but where the signatures of both parents are required.

The court has jurisdiction to grant both of these legal steps, and will do so if, upon hearing the necessary evidence, if it is satisfied that the trip would be beneficial to your daughter, and she wishes to participate in it, even if her father does not respond, or objects, but subject to proof of service, directly to him, or via alternative means, as ordered by the court. 

You are liable to support your child, even though you live abroad permanently and under rules of private international law your obligation is according to the laws of Israel, because that is where the child lives, and his needs are to be met, and can be best assessed, and the dispute heard. You cannot escape that financial obligation because your child's mother has remarried, and you do not live in Israel. 

As you are not in contact with your child either, it would seen advisable, and in the child's best interests,  to either enter into negotiations to reach an agreement to deal with both issues i.e. the re-establishment of contact and the rebuilding of your relationship with your child, including virtual contact and meetings, in Israel and overseas, and the issue of child support. This can be done via direct negotiations between lawyers, or via opening a family dispute file at the Family Court, although this is not practical, if you are not intending to visit Israel to attend at least one meeting, in which case you can initiate matters, by applying for contact, or she can, by applying for child support, and shorten the default  pre-court procedure for alternative dispute resolution, which came into force in July 2016.

Our office represents fathers resident overseas in such negotiatons and it is possible to reach an agreement that can be authorized in court without you having to attend in person, if necessary.

 

 

 

 

Your husband can notify the court assistance unit, that he wishes to stop the voluntary process there, in favour of  adversarial proceedings at the family court. There is no obligation to complete the four meetings, in accordance with the new family dispute regulations that came in to force in the Summer of 2016. He can  initiate proceedings for the elder child to be returned to his custody, and take various other appropriate action against the mother, including if necessary, an application to temporarily suspend contact between the mother and the younger child (or restrict it to only supervised meetings) , orders for therapy for the elder child  , and  parental guidance . If necessary, an application can be made for the appointment of a neutral professional (such as clinical child psychologist) who can make a report and recommendations.  You would be advised to seek individual legal advice.

 

 

Not necessarily! A family court in Israel will not recognize a foreign ruling even if it is final (no longer appealable) if it contradicts a final family law judgment lawfully  given in Israel, by a court with jurisdiction, and the overseas judgment is designed to by-pass the Israeli ruling. For example, in January 2017, Nazareth Family Court rejected an application to enforce a final foreign judgment given in the U.SA, which ordered the return of a minor child, who had been physically present  in Israel since 2010, to her father in the U.S.A . The Supreme Court in Jerusalem, Israel, had  previously  rejected proceedings the father himself had initiated in Israel, under the Hague Convention,  after accepting the mother’s defences to the civil child abduction suit. The family court held that enforcing the foreign judgment would be unreasonable, illogical , devoid the final ruling given in Israel of all content, and contradict public policy and the child’s welfare. It further held that the father had acted in bad faith and  abused the legal process, and ordered costs against him.

 

No, you do not necessarily have to fly out to Israel in person to attend a court hearing in order to get a UK child arrangements order mirrored there. If the order is final and you co-operate and consent to the Mirror Order proceedings, and the appropriate affidavit is obtained from you , both parties’ U.K. counsel, and all the other requirements under Israeli law are met, it may be possible to obtain a Mirror Order in Israel without a hearing.

For example, our law practice obtained a Mirror Order of a UK child arrangements Order  from Petach Tikva Family Court in January 2017 on the basis of an application by consent, without the need for a hearing at all. 

Apply to the local Israeli family court for alternative dispute resolution via the family court’s assistance unit. If this fails, you can open a guardianship file, and ask the court to rule on the matter, in which case it will normally ask the court welfare officer to meet all the parties involved and prepare a report. Depending on your child’s age and maturity, his voice will be heard and taken into account, as part of the process.

 

By applying for a "Mirror Order" at the Israeli family court in a judicial process under the 1958 Recognition and Enforcement of a Foreign Judgment Act.

Yes, an application can be made to the family court, and may be successful, depending on the circumstances. In May 2016, Tel Aviv Family Court (File 28398-10-12) accepted a plea for sibling contact between two half-sisters, daughters of a former Lesbian couple, each of whom used the same sperm donor to bear their respective biological child. Their mothers had cohabited for six years, during which time the children were born. Each mother had changed her name to the same, new surname, and both children were given this name, too.

Yes! You would be advised to wait and see whether your “ex” is going to fight the order by appealing and/or applying for a stay of execution to delay implementation of the order. This is because in order to obtain a “Mirror Order” of an overseas family law order in Israel, you will have to prove not only that the foreign order was given by a court with jurisdiction but that it was final i.e. that that it is no longer appealable. Alternatively, if your “ex” decides not to oppose the Order, and co-operates, or appeals , is unsuccessful, but co-operative, you can make a joint application, or an order by consent, at the family court in Israel, to get the New York child arrangement Order recognized and enforceable in Israel. This will streamline and simplify the process in Israel.
If you have the relevant backing of the doctor/s who treat your son, in writing, to the effect that the flight and trip overseas do not pose any special medical risk to him , then you can apply to the family court for permission to travel outside Israel with him, despite the mother's concerns and objections. Under Israeli law, when  parents of a minor child disagree on a matter such as this, the family court can intervene, and make a decision, in the child's best interests, after examining the relevant evidence and hearing the arguments of both parties, and the viewpoints of relevant professionals, such as doctors.  In June 2016, Haifa District Court rejected a mother's appeal against a family court ruling allowing a child who had undergone liver transplant surgery as a baby to travel overseas with his father, from Israel, to visit family in the U.S.A. It did so after being guided by expert medical opinions of two professors, both of which rejected the mother's claims that the flight itself could be harmful to the child's health.  
Yes! A custodial mother cannot make unilateral decisions such as moving the children’s place of residence where there is no agreement between her and the father, and then expect him to have to fit in with the new reality, which may be against their best interests, and will most probably infringe negatively on his contact with the children because of the geographical distance and travelling time and costs. These points were emphasized by Beersheva Family Court in November 2015, when it ordered a divorced mother with custody, who had moved with the children from Dimona to Ashdod, to return them, accepting an emergency application filed by the father. The mother, the custodial parent, had followed her boyfriend ,whom she intended to marry, and who had found work in Ashdod, and moved there ,but the court ruled that she should have asked for and have obtained the children’s father's permission first, and apply to court for permission if he refused, rather than taking the law into her own hands. Without asking for and obtaining the father’s permission in advance, she was not entitled to move the children ,and ordered the mother to leave them with their biological father in Dimona, meanwhile, if necessary ,while she organized the move back, particularly if she had to rent a new apartment there, though it understood that she had not yet vacated her apartment.

In principle from the age of 6, according to special civil procedure regulations governing the participation of children, with non-participation or participation before the age of 6 being exceptions. This was stressed in a decision given on 1st November 2015 rejecting the mother’s request for the Nazareth Family Court (File 5075-04-15) to reconsider its earlier decision ordering the court assistance unit and /or the judge to meet the child (aged 6) . The minor  had  consistently expressed a preference to live with his father from a young age , in age-appropriate testing conducted by experts.

A joint custody arrangement had existed between the mother and the child’s father (represented by our law practice since he was a baby) for several years from the time the child was six months old . However, despite this and recommendations of several court appointed experts that the minor should live with the father, the mother had been awarded custody, due to a controversial appeal ruling ( reversing the order awarding custody to the father) , based on the inbuilt advantage  of mothers , as preferred custodian of minors under the age of 6.

In its 1.11.2015 decision, the court held that due to the special history of the case it could not “skip” the important stage of forming its own impressions of the child’s views in a personal meeting (through the court assistance unit, or even directly) .

 

Yes, you and your wife can make a joint application for you to be appointed as an additional temporary guardian for her elder child, for whom  you seem to have acted as a pyschological father for many years. The family court has the power and discretion to grant such an order, to protect a child.  It may also be wise for your wife to sign a detailed affidavit explaining her wish for her elder child to continue living with you and his  half-sibling, should she die.

If she does, indeed, pass away, it is likely that a battle will ensue for the custody of the elder child, with you filing for custody and/or permanent guardianship and the child's biological father or his parents also filing for custody. The court will hear the case and appoint neutral experts to give their opinion and recommendations and the child himself will be heard, and his views taken into account, depending on his age and maturity. The outcome will be based on a best-interests decision.

 

In September 2014 Tel Aviv Family Court found in favour of a child's "psychological" father rather than her biological father (who was found to be worthy as a parent ) in a custody battle that took place after the death of the minor's mother, between her widowed husband and her subsequent partner ,with whom the child had lived, together with her mother, since the age of 4. The court heard and respected the child's views and wishes - to remain living with her step-father and half-siblings- and the court ruled that transferring her to her biological father, and separating her from them would be extremely harmful to her emotionally. (Family Cases 8096-02-10 and 16203-02-10).

By opposing any application to relocate them within Israel that she may file, or by taking the initiative and filing for an order preventing their move. Where parents cannot agree on an issue concerning their mutual children,the court can determine the outcome. If,after hearing all the evidence, the court decides that the move would be harmful to the children, and is designed to further the mother's personal agenda,at their expense, it will not approve it.

Such was the case in December 2012 when , on appeal, Jerusalem District Court upheld the family court's decison rejecting a custodial mother's proposed move with the children,to Tel Aviv, to give her privacy and allow her to start up a business. The move would compromise their needs and interests,which demanded stability and preservation of existing schooling and visitation arrangements. These should come before the mother's interests, it held.

Yes, though this is unusual. In File 5134-05-12, where our law practice represented the father, Judge Samara of Tel Aviv Family Court, spoke to three minors, together and separately, at a specially arranged meeting at the court assistance unit,and expressly referred to their statements and views, in his judgment in July 2012, ordering the immediate return of the minors to the U.S.A.

Yes! For example, in July 2011, Tel Aviv Family Court exercised its jurisdiction to intervene concerning a minor's health and gave an order permitting an operation to amputate a child's arm, in order to remove a cancerous growth and save her life. The mother, the child's sole parent and custodian, had objected.

The Tel Aviv hospital and the Ministry of Health had applied for permission to perform the life-saving operation, which they considered necessary to save the minor's life. The court overruled the mother's objections, saving they clashed with the minor's good. It ordered the operation, after receiving the opinions of several medical experts, ruling that it had "no choice", as the child herself acknowledged , and agreeing with their conclusion that without the operation the cancerous growth would spread from the bone to soft tissue and to the lung, and would result in the child's death.

Yes! You can apply to court for permission to take your son out of Israel for a visit overseas, for a specified period. You may be required to provide financial guarantees to ensure the child's return, if there is a risk of child abduction.

No! The 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of Child Abduction still does not apply to legal proceedings for the return of children abducted between Israel and Russia.

Although the Russian Federation acceded to the Convention in 2011, its accession has to be approved by other "Hague Countries" for it to be in force. So far, only four Hague Countries have accepted Russia's accession - and Israel is not one of them. From 1.12.2011 the Hague Convention will apply to child abduction between Russia and Estonia, or Argentina, and, from 1.1.2012, to child abduction between Russia and France or Greece.

Yes, as the father and natural guardian of  your child under Israeli law, you certainly can bring legal action to get your child innoculated, according to the  recommended programme, as it is your parental right and duty to act in the minor's best interests,and for his/her good.

Issues of health still remain the responsibility of both the child's parents, as functions of their guardianship, even after they separate or divorce, and even if only one of them, in your case, your ex-wife, has custody. Decisions of a child's health are supposed to be made jointly, by mutual consent, and if this is not possible, you, as the child's father can bring legal action, against the child's mother,and  ask the court to intervene and rule on the dispute. You can specifically  request an order that will oblige her to get the child innoculated. The court may appoint an expert to give an opinion on the matter to see whether, in your child's circumstances,it is in his/her medical interests to be innoculated, before making a decision.

Such legal action can be taken before the family court, unless there is any reason for approaching a religious court (e.g. if the parents are religiously observant). Jurisdiction over matters concerning a child's guardianship usually lies with the family court, even after divorce,unless there is a specific mention of continuing, exclusive jurisdiction of a religious court, in the divorce agreement, once the marriage ends. Outside of this situation, if one parent brings the dispute before a religious court, after the divorce, and there is no exclusive continuing jurisdiction, the other parent would need to consent to the matter being dealt by it, rather than by a family court , for it to gain jurisdiciton.

No- you need advance court permission to effect the move if your ‘ex’ objects. If you act unilaterally,in spite of his objections, you are exposing yourself to legal action from him to get a court order preventing you from moving the children,and to make sure the status quo is preserved. Deciding where children live is an issue of guardianship which is supposed to be made jointly,by mutual consent, by the parents,even though one of them may technically be custodian. The court will decide whether the move is in the children’s good, or not, and will probably appoint a court welfare officer , or even a clinical psychologist, to make a report and recommendations in the matter. In the Summer of 2011 our law practice successfully represented a father in emergency proceedings before Tiberias Family Court and got appropriate orders against the mother ,who it held had acted in bad faith, against the child’s interests, and had taken the law into her own hands by moving their child ,in her temporary custody, from the North to the centre of Israel, despite his objections,in breach of the visitation regime which allowed father and son almost daily contact. The mother was ordered to move the child back up north. The decision withstood both applications to delay the implementation of the decision, and permission to appeal, filed on behalf of the  mother at Nazareth District Court , which were both struck out, at the recommendation of the court, which was very clear about the mother's wrongful behaviour.

 

Yes, even if your ex-wife and the mother of your joint child has custody, you still have equal rights of guardianship over issues relating to how he is raised, including choice of school. If the mother acted without your knowledge and express consent ,then her unilateral act would appear to be illegal, on the face of it. You should get professional legal advice immediately, to see whether you can act to get court orders to cancel the registration, and re-register your child at his existing school, for the coming year.
Recently, our legal practice successfully represented a divorced father whose newly religiously ex-wife had registered two of their children ,who had been studying at a secular Moshav school, at an ultra orthodox private school in Petach Tikva, without his knowledge and consent . In August 2011 orders were obtained on his behalf at Kfar Saba Family Court against the mother, obliging her to cancel the illegal registration, and re-register the minors at their previous school, shortly before the start of the school year.   

Yes! You can apply for a temporary court order prohibiting the move and ask the court to rule on the issue. Even if your 'ex' wife has custody of your mutual child, you still have rights of guardianship that include the right to decide jointly with her about where your child lives. If she fails to respect those rights, then you have the option of applying to court to rule on the matter and would be advised to gain medical evidence on how the move would adversely affect the child's health. If you can persuade the court that this is really the case, then it can prevent the move, if it would be harmful to the child's health, and not be in his/her interests.

Yes, you can apply to court for an order preventing her from moving with the child, even though she may be the formal custodian, if the move will jeopordize your visitation rights,and your relationship with him, and be against his interests. Under Israeli law both parents have equal right in issues of guardianship relating to their minor children - including determining his/her place of residence - and are supposed to make decisions jointly. Where the parents disagree on the move, it is possible to ask the court to decide,and meanwhile, to forbid the move.

The Supreme Court held in a petition in 2004 that minors are not “bound” by the contents of agreements made by them as part of divorce settlements between their parents,and, as a rule are not stuck in the legal instance chosen by them either. Minors are bound by such agreements  where the court authorizing the agreement was really satisfied that it served the minors’ interests , but without a substantial hearing as to the minors’ interests, separate from their parents’ agenda within the divorce process, they cannot be seen as being “parties” to agreements concerning them,regarding custody, visitation or maintenance.

This position was underlined recently by Jerusalem District Court in January 2011 when it heard an appeal against the decision of the Family Court to cancel terms of a divorce agreement affecting children that had been authorized at the rabbinical court a few years previously.The appeal court held that the family court had been correct in cancelling the agreement, and stressed that in general parents are often preoccupied with their own agenda when they divorce and tend not to put enough emphasis on the children’s interests,even if unintentionally.

It should be pointed out that sometimes, though, very rarely, divorce agreements authorised at a rabbinical court have clauses giving exclusive, continuing jurisdiction concerning the children.

Firstly, assuming there are no specific arrangements in any court-authorised divorce agreement regarding the mother's right to take the children abroad on holiday, then the general principle applies that the children cannot leave Israel to travel without the consent of both parents. 

 

In other words, a parent , as a biological parent and a natural guardian, has the  the right under Israeli law to prevent his/her children leaving Israel, though this veto can be overriden by court . Removing the children from Israel , the country of their habitual residence, without your consent would, prima facie, be an act of child abduction, according to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of Child Abduction, even if your 'ex' is the custodial parent. The status of custodian gives her no right to make unilateral decisions about the children travelling overseas - she still needs your consent.

If you refuse to let the children travel, then the family court can rule on the dispute. Your ex would have to apply for and obtain court permission to take the children on holiday, to make their departure legal. The court would have discretion about allowing or refusing their trip. Your opposition  could be overriden, by court order, if this was considered to be in their best interests, subject , if necessary, to suitable financial guarantees of the minors' return.

You could initiate legal action for an order to prevent their exit from Israel, based on reasoned and reasonable opposition, especially if there is a risk that she will not return them. You would be advised to see specialist legal advice on this. In emergencies, temporary ex-parte orders are granted, but afterwards a hearing is usually set before both parties.

Having or not having foreign citizenship will not be the deciding factor in any custody or relocation battle that might develop between you and your husband concerning your mutual child . In order to relocate legally to the States with your daughter,should your marriage break down, your husband would either need your consent, or , if he objected, you would have to persuade a court that it was in the child's best interests to be in her father's custody, and be allowed to relocate abroad. 
 
Furthermore, only having one  passport and not two for the minor,  is no guarantee against against child abduction. Parents can abduct children on an Israeli passport only, if they so wish. Precautionary measures exist - whether your daughter has one or two passports.If your relationship with her father, breaks down, and you feel there is a risk of abduction, you could always apply for an order preventing your minor child leaving the country. If granted, the order would relate to any passport issued in her name,including a foreign one - subject to the details being supplied.

Normally, not - unless there was also a court order in force preventing the minor's exit,as part of legal proceedings between the parents. The border police check a child's passport/I.D. details against computer records which register any court orders preventing their exit. If there is no such order, then there would be no way of discovering this, as a routine matter,as records of conditions in divorce agreements in this connection are not kept.

No!Contrary to popular belief,according to Jewish law your grandchild will have normal personal status, and will not be a "Mamzer" or bastard/illegitimate, if his/her parents do not marry,but cohabit, because there is an assumption of "Kiddushim" (or "dedication").

Yes! As natural guardians of their minor children parents are under a duty to act in their children's good, and to make decisions jointly, even if they are divorced, and one has custody, and the other visitation rights.

Where one parent appears not to be acting in a minor's good, in this case your 'ex', who is willing to stop  your 15 year old daughter from performing overseas with her dance group ,and deny her the opportunity of the experience , the other, you, can apply to court asking it to intervene and rule on the dispute. If the court agrees to your application to allow your daughter to travel outside of Israel for a limited time for the purposes of this dance trip, it can give instructions directly to the Ministry of Interior concerning the issue/renewal of travel documents for your daughter.

Yes ! An independent plea can be filed, on behalf of the child, for an increase in child maintenance. A minor child is not bound by parental agreements concerning him,even if the mother undertook not to file for an increase in child maintenance, in a court authorised agreement. The independent child's plea for an increase in maintenance can be filed by the mother, as the natural guardian, representing the child, or by a 'close friend'.

No! Israeli courts have held that a minor child is not bound by parental committments in court-authorised agreements concerning him/herself. A minor child was not a party to agreements made by his/her parents concerning him/her and is free to file an independent plea/application which challenges the non-binding committment.

For example, if ,under a divorce agreement, the mother is  to have custody, but the child now wants to live with the father, an independent plea can be filed by the child, represented by the father, his/her natural guardian, or a 'close friend'. The child's own views play an increasingly important role as he/she grows older. As a rule of thumb children's views are given serious consideration from around the age of 10, though this can be lowered or highered, according to the individual minor's level of maturity.

Yes, it is possible to request that a solicitor ad litem be appointed  by the court, for the child, to represent his/her views. The parents' counsel can still put their points of views, and the child's solicitor will represent the minor's views.

Yes! A special application can be filed to the court requesting that the judge meet the children in person. The application needs to be reasoned, and detailed. The welfare officer's recommendation is not binding on the court.

Israel is a signatory to the International Convention on the Rights of the Child, and, as such, is committed to letting children have their say in proceedings concerning them.

Until they are 18, at which point the children become adults under Israeli law, and have full legal capacity, and their parents cease to become their legal guardians, as they are no longer minors.

Yes, she can file the alleged Israeli father for paternity and child maintenance, regardless of her status.

Only after court authorisation is obtained. The sale and transfer of ownership of real estate registered in the name of a minor (a child under the age of 18) is one of the activities requiring court authorisation, according to Israeli legislation (the 1962 Legal Capacity and Guardianship Act).

Even though  you are not the custodian, you are, as a biological parent,  an equal natural guardian of your minor children, and are jointly responsible for making decisions regarding their education and upbringing. Their mother cannot make decisions on these unilaterally.

If she continues to do so,  you can open a guardianship file in court, and ask for instructions about the number and scope of extra-curricular activities that the children should be take, and give evidence of the deterioration in their academic achievements,which you claim is a result of this overload. You can also raise the issue that as a result of too many organised activities, the children have too little free time for normal social interactions with their peers, which, in turn, is potentially harmful for their emotional development.