This article examines Israeli juvenile courts as sites where poverty is present yet systematically denied as a cause of child neglect. Drawing on focused ethnographic observations, I show how factual reports routinely document material deprivation—housing shortages, lack of food, utilities cutoffs—yet court actors reject poverty as a legitimate explanation for neglect. Instead, they insist that “good parents” should be able to cope with scarcity, thereby displacing structural conditions onto individualized parental failure. I frame this configuration as part of “criministrative law”: an administrative forum that adopts criminal-style rituals of blame and correction while deferring to welfare agencies, leaving families without the protections of either criminal or administrative law. This criministrative denial of poverty produces epistemic marginalization of parents and legitimates punitive interventions. As a normative remedy, I propose adapting the poverty-aware paradigm from social work to law, reframing protection as solidarity rather than surveillance.

The purpose of the present research was to examine the perceptions of risk regarding falling held by older adults and their adult children. Using a focused ethnographic approach, older adults and adult children were interviewed in depth. Thematic analysis was conducted to identify themes within groups and to compare the perspectives of older adults and adult children. Findings highlighted differences in perceptions and approaches to action between older adults and their adult children. There were three approaches to action adopted by these families, which focused around whose actions were dominant: parents' actions, shared actions, and children's secret actions. The results emphasize the value placed on independence by older adults and the impact of multiple family relations taking action to prevent falls. The present study points to the importance of including multiple family perspectives in research concerning injury prevention for older adults.