%2009.48.45.png)
Background: Law, Family, and Everyday Conflict
In our daily lives, we constantly navigate relationships, responsibilities, and disputes - often without realizing how often legal principles are already at play. This is especially true in family law, where legal frameworks intersect directly with emotion, identity, and the realities of everyday life.
In this special episode of Closing the Loop, we were honored to host Hon. (Ret.) Judge Yaakov Cohen, former Vice President of the Family Courts in the Central District, alongside Adv. Merav Felda and Adv. Tal Kaufman.
The conversation moved beyond doctrine and landmark rulings, opening a deeper discussion on judicial philosophy, mediation, parental conflict, and the human responsibility embedded in legal decision-making.
Since retiring from the bench in 2014, Judge Cohen has continued working in dispute resolution through mediation and arbitration, bringing with him a rare combination of judicial experience, human insight, and practical problem-solving.
About “Closing the Loop”
Closing the Loop is a weekly radio program that connects law, business, and society. In each episode, Adv. Tal Kaufman, Partner and Head of the Wealth Management and Intergenerational Transfer Department at ABADI & CO, hosts leading professionals and decision-makers for open and insightful discussions on the legal, economic, and social issues shaping Israeli society.
The program’s goal is to make complex legal topics accessible, create clarity and peace of mind, and provide listeners with practical tools to protect their rights, assets, and interests.
The Judge Who Became a Mediator: Where It All Began
The episode opened with a reflection on Judge Cohen’s personal journey and the origins of his mediating instinct.
From an early age, he described a natural inclination to step into conflict and seek resolution - an instinct that later evolved into a professional judicial philosophy.
One central question emerged: is mediation a learned skill, or an inherent trait?
The discussion highlighted the ongoing tension between strict legal reasoning and human reality. From the moment he joined the bench, Judge Cohen faced an ongoing challenge: how to weigh legal doctrine against the human realities of the people before him. This raised a fundamental question: whether a good judge is defined solely by legal expertise, or also by a deep understanding of human nature.
When the Legal Model No Longer Fits Reality
A key moment in the conversation focused on the evolution of family law in Israel and the growing gap between traditional legal frameworks and modern family structures.
From the bench, Judge Cohen came to a gradual realization: long-standing legal models, particularly in child support, were falling increasingly out of step with the realities of shared parenting and modern economic life.
In family court, this disconnect often becomes visible in its most painful form: litigants leaving the courtroom in distress, expressing fear about their ability to cope with the financial consequences of judicial decisions.
This reality highlights one of the core tensions in family law: how to remain faithful to legal structure while responding to human consequences.
The Child Support Revolution: Judicial Courage and Legal Change
At the center of the conversation stood the transformation of child support doctrine in Israel, culminating in the landmark development known as HCJ 919/15, which reshaped the principles of parental responsibility.
Judge Cohen reflected not only on the legal outcome, but on the intellectual and institutional process behind it.
The discussion explored the concept of judicial courage—the willingness to challenge long-standing assumptions when they no longer serve justice in practice.
The ruling became a turning point in Israeli family law, influencing how courts understand shared parental responsibility and financial obligations after separation.
Parental Conflict and the Complexity of Post-Divorce Reality
The conversation then turned to one of the most sensitive issues in family law: parental alienation.
Judge Cohen addressed the difficulty of distinguishing between genuine cases of alienation and the complex breakdown of parent-child relationships following divorce.
The discussion emphasized the importance of judicial restraint in emotionally charged disputes, where conclusions must be based on evidence rather than assumptions.
It also highlighted a common pattern in family litigation: early conflict escalation that shapes long-term outcomes for both parents and children.
Behind the Robe: The Emotional Weight of Family Judging
One of the most reflective parts of the episode focused on the emotional dimension of judicial work. Judge Cohen described “judicial temperament” not as a technical requirement, but as a daily human responsibility.
Family court judges must constantly balance firmness with empathy, legal reasoning with sensitivity, and structure with human awareness. The conversation also addressed the emotional burden of decision-making in family disputes—cases that often continue to resonate long after the judgment is delivered.
This segment exposed the less visible side of judging: the internal weight of decisions that legal language alone can never fully capture.
Conclusion: Law, Responsibility, and Human Awareness
The episode concluded with a broader reflection on the role of law in society.
A central theme emerged throughout the conversation: legal systems are not only frameworks of rules, but living structures that shape human relationships and define responsibility.
At its core, Closing the Loop continues to explore this intersection between law and life—where every legal decision carries a human story, and every resolution carries lasting impact.
One Team. Committed. All the Way.
