Lawyers request additional review of 'fight baby's' case

Child's lawyers request Supreme Court hold additional hearing, say child's best interests were not taken into account.

Contact Editor
Shlomo Pyutrikovsky,


Lawyers specializing in the representation of minors have requested Israel's Supreme Court reopen the discussion regarding the cancellation of the adoption order and the transfer of a baby to his biological father.

The request was submitted after the lawyers representing the child decided the Supreme Court had not taken the child's best interests into account when making their decision.

The case began when a baby was placed for adoption upon birth, and immediately placed with adoptive parents.

Four months later, the baby's biological father found out about his son's birth and the fact he had been placed for adoption. The father then requested the family court cancel the adoption order and give the child to him.

In October 2016, the family court ruled the child should be given to his biological father. This decision was overturned in November, when the court ruled the child should stay with his adoptive parents.

On February 28, 2017, Israel's Supreme Court at the father's request ruled by a majority of four out of five justices that the child, now 14 months old, should be transferred to the care of his biological father.

According to Israel's Justice Ministry, those representing the child felt an obligation to request an additional hearing, since the Supreme Court's ruling did not take the child's interests into account, and did not take into consideration the negative consequences of their ruling. In addition, the court does not usually deal with adoption cases.

Before submitting their request, the child's representatives spoke with child development experts in Israel and in the US, and decided there was no option other than to request an additional hearing to allow the Supreme Court to re-examine the case and decide what was best for the child.

The lawyers specializing in the representation of minors emphasized they have no opinion on the subject, and their only goal is to ensure the Supreme Court examines the case more closely.