This chapter explores advance directives in Israel. Specifically, the background behind legislation of the “Dying Patient” Act is articulated, which constitutes the main legal framework for advance directives in Israel, with an emphasis on the role that a combination of religion and politics has played in shaping this law. Then, the main aspects of the law in relation to advance directives are explained, including the (narrow) definition of the “dying patient” and its implications, actions that are forbidden and allowed, with respect to not prolonging the dying patient’s life, how emphasis on advance directives may go both in the direction of prolonging or refraining from prolonging the dying patient’s life, etc. These main legal aspects are also compared to the manner in which they were addressed before the law was enacted. Finally, the chapter shows how the restrictiveness of Israeli regulations for advance directives has actually led to their under-regulation in practice from various facets. This includes practical difficulties in their implementation, the many “shades of grey” in interpreting the law by healthcare providers, as well as legal critique and precedent questioning the Dying Patient Act. Possible cultural influence(s) in the Israeli context are also stressed.

This chapter outlines a possible explanation for the overall stability of the Israeli regime based on the concept of state capacity, namely, the ability of the state to use coercive and administrative capabilities to “get things done.” It therefore emphasizes the role of the state itself in explaining the regime. The first section provides a short conceptual clarification of the concept of state capacity and its relationship with regime stability. This is followed by a presentation of the historical origins of Israeli state capacity and some measures of its capacity. The main part of this chapter discusses the ways in which state capacity sustains the regime’s stability in light of three challenges: the internal aspect of the conflict, the challenge to state authority from political tensions among its Jewish citizens, and the ways in which the zones of control have shifted according to the limited ability of state capacity to ensure direct control of the entire Occupied Territories.

It begins with preliminary matters: an opening section dealing with policy context and related guiding principles, then an outline of the governing legal framework, international and domestic legislation, courts and regulatory bodies, with some references to international reports. This leads into the first of two contemporary case law sections, which examines the state–religion relationship in relation to the most relevant fundamental human rights: the freedoms of religion, assembly/association and expression. The second and largest considers the church–state relationship as it intersects with equality rights in relation to: marriage, family life, divorce and death; healthcare; education; employment; service provision; and security.