Thursday, June 21, 2012

4 views of the Rabbinic role in abuse cases

The discussion of the role of the rabbi in dealing with abuse - reveals that there are four basic views. Without being aware of these different views - people tend to talk past each other even when they are using the same terms and citing the same halachic sources.

1) Rav Menashe Klein wrote a teshuva about how only rabbis know what to do. Rav Yitzchok Zilberstein asserted at a conference of psychologists (Click for recording) a year ago  that only a rabbi knows and understands what abuse is and only he can is competent to judge whether someone is an abuser. He apparently views that psychologists have a limited understand of abuse as well as guilt because they have a secular viewpoint. In short an exclusive Torah background is the prerequisite for being qualified to deal with abuse and identify abusers. However not every rabbi who feels this way is willing to admit it - especially in the face of complaints from the secular authorities

2) The Aguda rabbis  don't claim competence in understand the nature of abuse. But they do claim authority based on halacha to be the gatekeeper of the process. Thus the rabbis and only the rabbi is to decide based on reports or questioning of alleged perpetrator and victim and  possible consultations with psychologists and lawyers - whether the police should be contacted or whether the matter should be dealt with exclusively within the Jewish community. This group manifests various degrees of fear.Some are afraid to say to go to the police - while others are afraid that it become known that they have permitted going to the police. There are also rabbis who are in group one but publicly assert this view - when under pressure from secular forces.

3) There are a number of rabbis - such as RCA 2011 Rav Herschel Schachter 2006,   Crown Heights Beis Din ,  Vaad haRabbonim of Baltimore 2007 who have clearly stated that rabbis have neither the knowledge, competence or authority to deal with abuse. Those rabbis have stated that the secular authorities need to be contacted to investigate and punish the alleged or suspected abuser. These rabbis assert there is no prohibition of mesira in these cases and that the perpetrator has the status of rodef and thus it is simply an act of self-defense to contact the police. In addition - even if they are in agreement with view two - in the fact of mandated reporting laws = they publicly advocate compliance with the law of the land . Many of rabbis who accept this position -  ask not to be named - although others aren't afraid.

4) Various combinations of the above three positions.

25 comments:

  1. why do you think these Rabbis have such different views? Is it that they truly see things differently, or is this just a question of their integrity, and some Rabbis are just distorting Torah to fit their subconcscious needs.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Who is Rabbi Zilbstein?

    ReplyDelete
  3. when I read menashe Klein's t'shuva about sexual abuse allegation, I was appalled at the poor arsenal he used to find the truth.

    If rabbinic competence just consist of saying "he is shomer mitzwot (as far as I can see), so the allegations cannot be true", it is certainly inappropriate to deal with abuse cases, and severely biased to boot, since the credibility of adult jewish men (shomrei mitzwoth) is automatically deemed highter than that of oter categories of people.

    If rabbinic competence went along the lines "heve marbeh lachkor et ha haeidim", etc... it could be of some use...

    I am quite disappointed to learn that daas torah operates with cookie cutter formulae as demonstrated by R. Menashe Klein. I expected more from them.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Could you kindly name the Rabbis that secular authorities need to be contacted? I'd like to study their works and perhaps contact them to learn what their parameters are.

    I wholeheartedly agree that a "perpetrator has the status of rodef and thus it is simply an act of self-defense to contact the police". I would like to find out if they would allow any accuser to act as "judge" in every case, especially in cases preceded by family discord.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Those willing to state it publicly include Rav Herschel Schachter and Rav Moshe Soleveitchik

      Delete
  5. las - could you please offer a citation for Rav Menashe Klein's Teshuva that you are referring to? I'd like to study it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2009/06/abuse-strict-din-according-to-torah_01.html

      Delete
    2. Ploni I don't understand why you feel so confident to make extesnive remarks and criticism regarding the issue of abuse = when you obviously are unfamiliar with the basic literature in the field. I posted a translation of Rav Klein's teshuva 3 years ago - and it is now well known by those in the field.

      Delete
  6. Who are the rabbis that say to go straight to court? Besides for a miscquote from Rav Elyashuv you don't have one true halachic authority who give an open heter of mesira.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Those willing to state it publicly include Rav Herschel Schachter and Rav Moshe Soleveitchik

      Delete
    2. Do you have a tzeuva that I can study?

      Delete
    3. Both of the above are available on the internet. Rav Soleveitchik presented his views at the Chicago conference on abuse which is availabe on Youtube

      Try the Survivors for Justice site

      http://www.sfjny.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=311&Itemid=65

      See JBACC conference in Chicago

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdCVWQ6pDcc&lr=1

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apGcxfhZ01U&feature=relmfu

      Delete
    4. See RCA declaration of 2011

      http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2012/06/rca-must-report-abuse-to-police-secular.html

      Delete
  7. Dear Rabbi Eidensohn;

    I'd like to repeat a request I made earlier: Can you kindly post the names of the Rabbonim that DO permit immediately going to secular authorities (the third type you mention above)?

    I'd like to study their works and understand what their parameters are.

    Thank You

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You can start with Rav Ovadia Yosef, he gives a Teshuva in Yehave Daat... can't remember the Helek and number. But he is fairly clear that any potential threat to society one should immediately go to the police.

      Likewise the Crown Height Beit Din recently ruled the same way. I think their teshuva is floating around on the internet somewhere.

      To say they don't exist is to stick your head in the sand.

      Delete
    2. http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2011/07/crown-heights-beis-din-says-to-report.html

      Delete
    3. RCA 2011 Declaration

      http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2012/06/rca-must-report-abuse-to-police-secular.html

      Delete
  8. not droshos - teshuvohs. A Teshuva usually illuminates the intricacies of the Psak much more than a drosho, which I believe is all-important in this case. Not to mention that I'm unable to watch videos on my computer.....


    I also couldn't find anything about a Chicago conference mentioned on the SFJ website.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Adding something concerning the Agudist "shita", from the SFJ website:

    "Rabbi Shmuel Kamenetsky, the vice-president of Agudath Israel of America's Moetzet Gedolei HaTorah, Supreme Council of Rabbinic Sages, ... surprised that rabbis and community activists have allegedly threatened victims and witnesses forcing them to remain silent, agreed that these rabbis and activists would also be endangering children."

    So they ARE against intimidation, it would seem.

    ReplyDelete
  10. My focus is on determining if one may call Police simply because they "feel" abused, as opposed to abuse involving unequivocal physical evidence.

    No. I'm not sticking up for abusers. But I feel strongly that overreacting from one side only weakens the hand of those that want to stop the terrible Chillul Hashem of abuse.The intimidators will always say that the reason they're so adamant against reporting is because it was just a touch, etc.

    The Crown Heights BD"S psak clearly refers to "severe incidents of CSA". That tells us nothing about "borderline" abuse, esp. were familial strife preceded. They also state that we need רגלים לדבר ואומדנא דמוכח. For what - that the accuser "felt abused"? Surely not. Theyre speaking of something more concrete and provable.

    After looking through some of the mekoros on the Crown Heights BD"S psak, it seems to contain several other highlights. (I couldnt find the ציץ אליעזר).

    They quote the Shach in ס' שפח סק"ס וסקמ"ה. They seem to deduce TWO halachos from his words: a - From סקמ"ה we see that authorities may be notified to save oneself from present danger. b - from סק"ס we see that authorities can be notified to save from probable future danger, based on the fact that the accused is רגיל להכות.

    Still no heter: In cases where the abuse itself isnt well defined, or if the abused is surely not in danger of being abused again + the abuser did not show a pattern of abusing.

    BTW, based on their criteria Rav Menashe Klein might also have agreed to certain parts (except for his עדים thing). His Teshuva says that removing from a job is enough to make the abuser stop having the din רודף. It could very well be that if there was a PATTERN of abuse he would agree that more stringent measures are necessary.

    I don't understand Rav Kleins עדים requirement. It seems to contradict the שואל ומשיב often quoted on this matter. He seems to say that for removal from employment a רגלים לדבר is enough.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "The intimidators will always say that the reason they're so adamant against reporting is because it was just a touch, etc."

      Why "just a touch"? They go to extreme lengths to enforce tzniut, gender separation, what have you. They censor pictures of perfectly dressed, rather unattractive women. They build fences upon fences to avoid any kind of sexual misconduct, and then, all of a sudden, they say "Well, as long as it is not "penis-to-vagina" or "penis-to-Anus" penetration it does not count??? As long as the victim of male-on-female rape is neither married nor engaged nor related, it does not count...???

      I get the impression that they embrace the tafel and forget the ikkar.

      They would have no qualms in ousting a female teacher who does not comply with all their tznius chumrot.

      Delete
  11. Its plain and simple. The reason why the average run of the mill chareidi rav whether litvish or chassidish will never come out publickly and say to go the police in a case of raglayim ledavar is because they are afraid of the bullies and intimidators. Just to pprove my point, take a look who hynes arrested this morning. Hynes knows of this problem but failed to act because to a certain degree he is also scared of them as well as his voting block disappering. So he has to use a balance of when he will pounce. Many rabbonim have told me in private that its the goons who run things in town and its the goons who force lettes to be signed or forged by raboonim. Its all a hefker velt

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The problem is: even though they were arrested, they still will make good on their threat to ruin the boyfriend's business: it's not illegal to boycott a business - so nothing can be done about this anyway...

      Delete
    2. Turns out three of the four thugs are the sons of a rebbe... so who is wagging whom???

      Delete
  12. Thanks for posting the video of Rav Shechter's drusho.

    What a Surprise! Rav Shechter seems to clearly state that Rabbonim SHOULD first be consulted. Please listen at approx. min. 36-39.

    Two questions relate to making decisions without going to Rabbonim. He bemoans the Rabonim that dont know the halachos and encourages one to go to those that DO know how to pasken.

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.