Between Law and Practice: The Gap in Social Protection in Family and Mental Health Cases

Amid the increasing prevalence of disputes related to divorce, alimony, and domestic violence—together with the escalating psychological and social burdens they entail—the recent incident in Alexandria, involving the suicide of a mother of two, reflects an alarming level of vulnerability affecting wide segments of families, particularly female-headed households and their children.

Reliance on official statements that focus solely on raising awareness of the risks of suicide, without addressing the underlying economic, social, and legislative factors that drive individuals to the brink of despair, reflects an inadequate approach that falls short of the scale of the crisis. Awareness, while important, cannot substitute for equitable public policies that alleviate living pressures and ensure effective protection for families facing crises.

This situation underscores the need for a more proactive role by relevant national institutions, foremost among them the National Council for Women and the National Council for Childhood and Motherhood. Their role must extend beyond general statements to include concrete interventions—monitoring, direct engagement, support mechanisms, and advocacy for legislative and policy reforms that ensure the protection of women and children and provide effective remedies in personal status matters.

These incidents cannot be treated as isolated cases; rather, they are the direct result of structural deficiencies in the social protection and family justice systems, both at the level of legislation and the enforcement of rights. The gap between rights recognized in judicial rulings and their actual implementation on the ground has become a major source of undermining the rule of law and weakening protection guarantees for vulnerable groups.

In this context, the issue of maintaining a low cap on alimony payments disbursed through Nasser Social Bank constitutes a serious concern. This cap fails to keep pace with economic changes and does not meet the minimum requirements for a dignified standard of living, thereby undermining the social protection rights of women and children and depriving judicial rulings of their effective enforceability. This, in turn, exacerbates the vulnerability of divorced women and their children.

The Egyptian Center for Economic and Social Rights filed a lawsuit before the Administrative Court against the Prime Minister, the Minister of Social Solidarity, the Minister of Justice, the Minister of Insurance, and the Chairperson of Nasser Social Bank, seeking annulment of the negative administrative decision represented in the authorities’ failure to increase the maximum alimony disbursed by the Family Insurance Fund affiliated with the Bank to divorced women and their children entitled under court judgments. The Center further requested that the competent authorities be compelled to raise the cap in line with economic developments and to link it to exchange rates, wage levels, or inflation indices, in order to guarantee beneficiaries a minimum standard of dignified living. This is particularly warranted given the significant expansion in the Fund’s financial resources over the years through fees and taxes allocated for this purpose.

To date, the Bank continues to disburse only EGP 500, the ceiling set by Minister of Justice Decree No. 2722 of 2004 as the maximum alimony payable per family—regardless of the value of the judicial ruling, the number of children, or current living conditions. Moreover, beneficiaries are required to surrender the original enforceable copy of the alimony judgment in exchange for receiving this amount, thereby depriving mothers of the ability to pursue additional enforcement measures to recover the remaining amounts due. This approach disregards economic developments, as the cap no longer covers even the most basic needs, despite nearly two decades having passed since its adoption and despite the substantial growth in the Bank’s financial resources.

Disputes concerning custodial housing further reveal regulatory gaps that allow for abuse of rights, threatening family stability and exposing children to multiple forms of insecurity, in clear contradiction to the principle of the “best interests of the child” as a governing standard in all matters affecting them.

On another front, decisions increasing the cost of mental health services impose an additional burden on individuals and families, particularly in the absence of affordable alternatives. This significantly restricts access to treatment and undermines a core component of the right to health, especially in light of the growing psychological harm resulting from family disputes, which in turn threatens social stability and increases pressure on affected families.

The Egyptian Center for Economic and Social Rights has challenged these decisions, emphasizing the State’s obligation to ensure access to mental health services without discrimination or exclusion on the basis of economic capacity.

In this regard, the Center filed Case No. 86235 of Judicial Year 79 before the Administrative Court in Cairo—acting on behalf of a number of affected individuals, including guardians of patients, as well as professionals and stakeholders in the field of mental health—against the Minister of Health, the Secretary-General of the General Secretariat for Mental Health and Addiction Treatment, the Chairperson of the National Council for Mental Health, and the Director of Abbassia Mental Health Hospital, challenging the Minister’s decision to increase the cost of care and treatment in mental health facilities.

The Center emphasized that mental health treatment is no less important than physical healthcare; rather, it constitutes an essential component of comprehensive health. It plays a critical role in addressing anxiety disorders, phobias, and obsessive-compulsive disorder, as well as mitigating mood disorders associated with depression and schizophrenia. It also enables patients to understand their emotions, adapt to circumstances in a healthy manner, and improve their overall quality of life and interpersonal relationships. Furthermore, individuals suffering from psychosis—characterized by an impaired ability to distinguish between reality and imagination, including delusions and hallucinations—may pose a risk to themselves and others. Research indicates that schizophrenia affects approximately 1% of the global population, meaning that Egypt alone has over one million affected individuals, in addition to those suffering from other disorders and addiction. This underscores the urgent national obligation to provide adequate care.

The continuation of these conditions without serious intervention will lead to far-reaching consequences extending beyond the individuals concerned to the fabric of society as a whole, reinforcing patterns of vulnerability and instability and eroding confidence in the effectiveness of justice and protection institutions. Accordingly, the existence of a clear political and legislative will—one that genuinely prioritizes human dignity and family stability—is an urgent necessity that cannot be delayed.

In this context, the Egyptian Center affirms the following:

The necessity of reviewing the legal and regulatory frameworks governing alimony to ensure fairness, alignment with economic developments, and effective enforcement.

Strengthening the role of the State as guarantor of the enforcement of judicial rulings, rather than leaving such enforcement contingent upon individual capacity or procedural complexities.

Protecting the right to safe housing for custodial mothers and their children, and preventing any abusive or arbitrary practices in the exercise of rights.

Reconsidering pricing policies for mental health services to ensure their availability as essential services that must not be restricted by financial barriers.

Expediting amendments to personal status laws to reinforce principles of justice and equality, placing the interests of the family and the child at the forefront.

Initiating a comprehensive societal dialogue involving all relevant stakeholders to achieve legislative and institutional reforms addressing the root causes of the crisis and establishing a more equitable and effective system for protection and the safeguarding of rights, with the best interests of the family and the child as a central priority.