On 4 February 2011, Ha'aretz published an article on the police's handling of central-region youth suspected of drug use. According to the article, all the minors questioned in the matter, most of whom were about 17 years old, were interrogated without their parents present, although some parents requested they be allowed into the interrogation room. One of the young girls was informed by the "intelligence officer" that the interrogation was not even being recorded.

In 2009, Amendment No. 14 of the Youth Law took effect. The purpose of the amendment was to enshrine in Israeli statutory law international-law rules on adjudication of juveniles. The amendment increased the age at which minors are entitled to have their parents present during interrogation: prior to the amendment, the relevant provisions applied only to children under age 14, and now minors of all ages are included. Also, the amendment prescribes that minors may consult with their parents prior to interrogation. The amendment, enacted by the Knesset in late July 2008, took force twelve months later, giving the police time to ready itself to comply with its provisions. The Ha'aretz article by Or Kashti quotes a senior police officer at National Police Headquarters who deals with youth, who admitted that the police were operating in breach of the statute: "It is hard for the officers in the field to accept the amendment to the statute. Anybody who thinks that enactment of a statute means that the next day everybody will act accordingly will find that reality is a bit more complicated. But we're doing everything we can."

In December 2010, B'Tselem published a report on violation of the Youth Law in the course of arrests of minors in Silwan, in East Jerusalem. The report shows that, even in the case of children under age 14, the police do not always allow the youth's parents to be present during the interrogation. The law forbids the parents to interfere with the investigation, but the interrogators stretched the limits of this provision beyond reason: parents were compelled to sign an undertaking not to speak with their children, or were seated behind their children to prevent eye contact between the parent and child. In one case, a father was removed after he asked, at the beginning of the interrogation, why his son's face bore signs of violence. Also, children were not allowed to consult with their parents before the interrogation as the law requires.

The Ha'aretz article indicates that, in Tel Aviv like in Silwan, the interrogation has one purpose: to obtain additional names. The young Israeli boys and girls who were questioned for the article related how the interrogators pressured them to provide additional names of acquaintances involved in drug use, and promised that if they supplied information concerning others the charges against them would be dropped. In one case, the officer stated a specific number of names: "Give me five names and you'll save yourself from punishment." One youth said that he suffered social problems after informing on his friends. Others had been frightened into incriminating all their classmates. Some of the youths realized they were summoned for interrogation after friends had informed on them.

Jerusalem police interrogators work the same way with youth in Silwan. In its report, Caution: Children Ahead, B'Tselem described the incrimination method, and how youths are arrested solely on the basis of confessions of their friends. While in Tel Aviv, the interrogated youths had almost reached the age of majority, in Silwan, young persons and children, sometimes under the age of criminal responsibility (12), were questioned.

The minors, Israelis and Palestinians alike, are forced into an impossible situation: choosing between punishment, which will disrupt their lives and future, and informing on friends and the repercussions it brings. It is doubtful that reliance on the sweeping use of questionable testimonies – incriminations supplied by minors questioned in breach of the statute, and under threat of harm to their lives and future – will uncover the truth.

The Ha'aretz article and B'Tselem's report indicate that the police are not acting in accordance with the amendment's provisions even now, after the police had a year for its implementation. B'Tselem calls on the Israel Police to assimilate the Youth Law and act in accordance with its wording and spirit, both in Tel Aviv and in East Jerusalem, over which Israel has applied its sovereignty.