00:15 — Two possible futures in one conversation
Nadav Nishri explains what he calls a “shalom bayit, alternatively divorce” agreement: a framework for couples considering whether to rebuild their relationship while also planning a possible separation. This solo episode addresses people who are unsure or arrive at different stages of deciding. It describes Nadav’s approach, not a universal legal instrument available on identical terms in every country.
01:40 — Why consider another attempt?
Nadav says that some couples he meets have lost connection under work, children and repeated stress without finding a helpful way to address it. Others tried support but still feel stuck. In his experience, a facilitated conversation sometimes reveals a reason to try again. This is an opportunity to explore, not proof that people who separate failed to try hard enough. A wish to rebuild must be freely shared; an unwilling or unsafe relationship cannot be repaired by a document.
03:07 — Build the future’s shared base first
In New Partnership mediation, Nadav moves the discussion toward the future the parties want rather than organizing everything around conflicting accounts of the past. They may discover similar values and hopes for themselves and their children. Establish that shared base before working through individual needs and possible arrangements. Betrayal, hidden finances or an undisclosed job loss may still need acknowledgment and practical attention; future focus does not erase facts or make trust immediately return.
04:16 — A new chapter with the existing partner
“Chapter two with chapter one” is Nadav’s image for learning and rebuilding with the person already in the relationship. He asks what each person can do differently and how they can face difficulty alongside one another. Shared experiences—holding a baby, a first school day and family milestones—may carry value. They do not create an obligation to stay. The aim is to make a considered choice rather than assume that a new partner automatically removes one’s own recurring difficulties.
06:03 — Care without threats
Nadav contrasts wanting the other person’s wellbeing with threatening destruction if they leave. Later he gives the example of “stay and you will have everything; leave and I will fight you.” The episode calls these different relational foundations. Its language of unconditional love should not be read as unlimited access, compulsory friendship, loss of boundaries or accepting harm. One can act with consideration while saying no, protecting oneself or deciding to separate. Goodwill also cannot force reciprocity.
08:29 — What the separation plan covers
Nadav describes a full practical discussion of assets, pension interests, the home, parenting time, parental responsibilities, education and health decisions. Where appropriate, it becomes a written settlement rather than an unexplored threat hanging over the couple. Legal effect and any required approval depend on the applicable law; signing a mediated document does not automatically make every clause a judgment. Property, inheritance-related proposals and children’s arrangements need qualified, case-specific review. The episode’s page counts are examples from a practice, not a standard everyone must follow.
10:40 — A relationship covenant is a different layer
Nadav explicitly separates legal provisions from a personal covenant that he does not present as legally enforceable. The covenant may address intimacy, shared time, dates, parenting and communication. It can remain private or be summarized as a reminder of the couple’s direction. This distinction matters: a shared aspiration is not a court order to feel love, have sex or stay married. Even where a settlement receives appropriate approval, formal dissolution of a marriage is a separate question under the relevant system.
12:37 — Discussing separation need not choose it
Some people fear that planning an exit will itself destroy the relationship. Nadav argues that separation is already a real possibility and that clarifying it can reduce uncertainty for some couples. He uses the ketubah as a cultural comparison, not a substitute for current legal advice. It is still reasonable to feel anxious or need more time. Planning may support a voluntary attempt to stay together, but neither certainty nor renewed romance is guaranteed.
15:16 — Introduction, information and emotional room
The process he describes begins with an introductory meeting, then an agreed mediation framework covering the process and handling of information. Participants can think before committing. They discuss what brought them and imagine a future in which life is better; a shared vision becomes the lighthouse for subsequent decisions. There is room for pain, fear, frustration and pauses. This supportive setting is not the same as claiming clinical credentials or promising to eliminate anxiety.
17:58 — Make the alternative understandable
After setting direction, Nadav prefers to clarify the separation arrangements early so the couple understands what each possible route involves. With less unknown, they may choose to try rebuilding or decide to part. The legal terms need current advice, and circumstances can change: a plan cannot promise complete certainty for all future events. Children may find separation difficult even with considerate parents. Responsible planning aims to support adjustment, not guarantee that no child will be affected.
20:49 — Translate headings into everyday decisions
The relationship conversation names intimacy, money, time together and apart, parenting, housing and extended family. Then it gets specific: joint or separate accounts, contributions to the budget, unemployment, study, development, possible inheritance, relocation and holidays. Some couples prepare a family budget together for the first time. The exercise is to understand real costs and feasible responsibilities, without assuming equal resources or making financial dependence a reason to pressure someone to remain. Choose suitable professional advice where needed.
23:04 — The past may need its own supported conversation
Nadav warns against accusation loops in which neither person listens. Importantly, he also says a couple may later choose a contained narrative conversation to understand both experiences and possibly build a shared account. This is not a ban on discussing betrayal or unresolved hurt, nor a rule that remembering the past makes repair fail. Some issues require attention before trust is possible. The closing invitation is to explore both routes thoughtfully and maintain constructive actions, with a process and outcome suited to the people involved.
Original episode audio in Hebrew
Watch the original episode (Hebrew)
Read the original Hebrew episode page
Official Israeli information: approval of an agreement · Official Israeli information: agreement approval and divorce