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.