Removed from guardianship over her husband: "Controls his soul"
The wife of a 78-year-old man suffering from Parkinson's and cognitive decline conditioned his meetings with their children on her presence. Consequently, two courts ruled that his affairs should be handled by an external body.
The Tel Aviv District Court has upheld the removal of a woman from her guardianship over her 78-year-old husband, who requires nursing care. Judges Naftali Shilo, Einat Ravid, and Iris Ilatovitch-Segal rejected an appeal filed by the woman against a lower court ruling that transferred responsibility for her husband's affairs to an external company, "Shai Sherutei Apotropsut." The court determined that "his well-being is not at the forefront of her mind."
The man suffers from various illnesses, including Parkinson's disease, and is experiencing cognitive decline. Last November, the Family Court revoked the wife's appointment as guardian for personal and property matters, noting that the man's will appeared to be "completely dictated" by her without regard for his best interests. The ruling stated that the woman exercised "limitless" control over her husband, including conditioning his meetings with their children on her presence and that of her lawyer.
The judge determined that a third-party guardian was necessary to allow the elderly man to maintain contact with his children. In her appeal, the woman claimed the ruling unfairly stigmatized her and insisted that her husband had chosen her to care for him. She further alleged that since the ruling, her husband has been depressed and cries frequently due to the legal process initiated by his children.
The children denied these claims, arguing that the court's decision was justified and essential for their father's well-being. The District Court judges ruled unanimously that the initial decision required no intervention. According to Judge Shilo, the woman controls the elderly man's soul, leaving him unable to express himself freely. The court concluded that his stated desire for his wife to remain guardian was not an expression of free will, but rather a result of his dependence on and fear of her.
The ruling highlighted that the woman's refusal to allow regular contact between her husband and his children and grandchildren demonstrated a significant conflict of interest. Judge Shilo clarified that conditioning family visits on her presence was illegitimate and harmful to the man, who is entitled to warm and loving contact with his family. Consequently, the appeal was rejected, and the woman was ordered to pay 30,000 shekels in legal costs and attorney's fees.
