Friday, March 15, 2013

Rav Hershel Schacter's views on reporting child abuse

Forward   A top rabbinic dean of Yeshiva University has warned rabbis about the dangers of reporting child sex abuse allegations to the police because it could result in a Jew being jailed with a black inmate, or as he put it, “a schvartze,” who might want to kill him.

Rabbi Hershel Schachter, one of the most respected faculty members of the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary, also said that children can lie and ruin an innocent man’s life.
“It could be that the whole thing is a bubbe-mayse [tall tale],” Schachter said.

Schachter said Jewish communities should establish panels of rabbis who are also psychologists to first hear such allegations and decide if law authorities should be informed.[...]

Schachter told his audience that reporting abuse to the police or family service agency does not constitute mesirah — the traditional Jewish prohibition against informing on a fellow Jew to the secular authorities.

But Schachter emphasized that Jewish communities nevertheless had to first make sure children were telling the truth before going to law enforcement authorities. He cited several instances in America and in Israel in which he said false accusations were made.

Every community, said Schachter, needs a board of “talmida chachamim” —Torah scholars — who are also qualified psychologists who could interview victims to see if there is “raglayim la’davar” — or reasonable suspicion — of abuse.

He added: “Before you go to the police and before you got to family services, every community should have a board…to investigate whether there’s any raglayim la’davar or not.”[...]

75 comments :

  1. Is the issue here that:

    a) he uses a yiddish term, which is also applied to Haredi Jews, not as a pejorative, but as a description of their frum attire.

    b) That he recommends due diligence and analysis of claims before going tothe authorities

    c) that it is RHS, and since he is connected to ORA, then we must find another avenue to bash him?


    Sending an innocent man to jail is not a good thing, and it seems that is all he wishes to prevent. he doesn't say that reporting is mesira.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with you and there is no steera. If you see somebody doing something get on the phone and call the cops . But there is a culture among the victims that because they had the tragic experience of not being believed and there was a cover up so now any kid making a claim is automatically to be believed.If we have let this happen we have turned into Stalinist Russia.They shut down when you point out the obvious.Kids lie and do it all the time.That doesn't mean they always lie so you have to know when it is true and when it is a lie.A child of mine told me he saw an alien outside his window.He was seven when he made the claim.Jail is a place where people are murdered.I knew an ex-inmate (he was arrested for assault) who told me that there where forty murders in the prison every year.I doubt Rav Sternbuch or Rav Schacter would agree that innocent people should be murdered in jail.

      Delete
    2. I don't believe the issue here is what Rav Schechter actually practically believes should be implemented. I believe the issue is a) specifying the dangers of being imprisoned with a black person as opposed to just being imprisoned in general, and b) that as a huge authority figure, Rav Schechter must realize that most of society will just read the tabloid of 'Rav Schechter warns against claims against alleged child abusers so as to protect them from "shvartzas"' and never actually get to his point. If Rav Schechter is going to make a statement like this, he must ensure that there is nothing that it is as clear as concise as possible, with no additional things that can detract from his actual point

      Delete
  2. Once agsain this shows how unfit RHS is to be classified as a godol or posek or dayan, regardless of his alleged immense knowledge of Torah. ORA sides all the time with women who are guilty of mesirah and who go ahead and get their husbands arrested on trumped up charges and get put with the same criminals which in the case of child molestation he objects to but in the case of divorce he favors. He has got it totally the wrong way round.

    Wiaitng for Eddie and james to justify the unjustifiable.

    PS: I protest your previous censorship of my remarks.

    Let RHS stick to academia and being a "professor of talmud" where he can do less damage.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Stan, see my comment c) above. This is just a springboard to attack RHS, because you and DT don't like his ORActivity.

      He actually says in all cases that a BD must judge carefulyl what people are claiming. Also, he is opposed to the use of toeinim in front of a BD, do you allow them Stan?

      And do ORA throw men in prisons for not giving a get? There is no such law in the USA as far as I am aware - correct me if I am wrong.

      Delete
    2. Stan you defending Rav Menashe Klein when he said exactly the same thing. Seems that to you the only difference is the mouth from which the words come.

      PS. I find the stance of RHS reprehensible just like I did Rav Menashe Klein's.

      Delete
    3. Actually, Rav Menashe Klein said it is forbidden to go to secular authorities. Stan says it is forbidden to go to arkaos - and sexual abuse doesnt kill, so, in Stan's world, it is forbidden in such a case too. however, since RHS is saying it, then Stan attacks him.

      RHS is not forbidding going, he is permitting going, but that first you must verify the allegation.

      I don't know what the US laws are, but in UK, it should be reported to social services or the police.

      Delete
    4. Putting aside the reprehensible views of the Stan's of this world, who are imbued with a Sinah that is unspeakable and seemingly wouldn't recognise a Talmid Chacham, Gaon Olam if he stood in front of him, you've all not understood the context of RHS comments. You need to have heard him speaking about this on many occasions. He recently told the story of a Rebbi who had his name and face plastered all over the internet as an alleged offender, and the person who made the allegation on the blog got it completely wrong. It was someone else entirely. I destroyed the Rebbi's family and name. There have been a number of such cases. All Rav Schachter is saying, is that the Yeshivos better get Rabbonim who also have a psychology degree on their staff so that when and if someone comes with an allegation, that you aren't dealing with someone with an obvious mental/psychological problem. Everyone knows there are some Talmidim who have issues and those issues are known. He's not talking about the regular normal kid who comes in with an allegation. This is no different to the Goyishe Headmaster who has training and when a kid comes and the kid is known to be not the full quid, and one who is known to manufacture all manner of babkes, that you check the kid professionally. You really need to hear his many shiurim where he talks about this and not this short sound byte to understand what his view is. He is miles away from R' Menashe Klein. He is not at all suggesting Rabonim do this. He is suggesting that there needs to be staff who are Rabonim but also professionals to hear such things when they are made!

      Delete
    5. We need to broaden the scope from students to all people.Wealthy people are targets of extortion attempts and abuse claims are so common in the American court system in divorce cases.Kids lie sometimes and they tell the truth sometimes.Kids aren't stupid.There are some really rotten ones out there that no how to work the system to get teachers in trouble.Not all are men teacher and not every accusation is of a sexual nature.It could be "She called be a Chink"."She smacked me.There is never a price for the police .There is never a price for the prosecution. There is never a price for the child and always a price for those who are falsely accused.

      Delete
  3. I agree that we need to determine if there's raglayim la'davar or not however, there is no such board in my community and we need to be cautious with boards. We should consult experts if they are available, if not, we'll just have to use seichel.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Somewhere along the line Jews seem to have forgotten seichel.
      My Rav is amazed at the klutz kashes he is asked.

      Delete
    2. Thank God I had the opportunity to learn in Yeshiva. Now when I ask my Rav a shaila, he doesn't know how to answer.

      Delete
  4. Has he examined the DT Child and Domestic Abuse books and sources?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Rah Hershel Shechter's position seems very reasonable to me. What is the fuss about?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In the Forward's article there is a story about a young fellow named Simion Weber. He spoke to the rabbi about abuse while in high school.From a clinical point of view can anybody explain the following question.Please do not take this as an attack.It is just a question.The guy is being abused in high school.He later turns 18 and decides to stay in the same school as the abuser.This is where people begin to take the accusations with less seriousness. Why would he stay in close proximity to his abuser when he is free to go anywhere in the world.Would the person's first reaction not be to get as far away as possible?

      Delete
  6. No. No! NO!
    First of all there are children who will make allegations. Heck, I've dealt with divorcing couples where one parents accuses the other falsely to ensure sole custody. And yes, when a person is accused it makes page 1 in the news and when it's proven he's innocent it's put on page 14.
    BUT
    Cases of false accusation are in the definite minority. Rabbonim are, as a rule, not trained in doing proper assessments of children in cases like this.
    How many children will pay because of our fear of false accusation?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Eddie wrote: c) that it is RHS, and since he is connected to ORA, then we must find another avenue to bash him?

    You are accusing me of bashing RHS simply because I accurately reported what he said?!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, I asked what the issue is here -
      Stan is doing the bashing.
      Ramatz points out the contradiction in Stan's position.

      Delete
  8. Full disclosure, I work for YU. But I think this response is instructive. http://finkorswim.com/2013/03/15/the-forward-doesnt-understand-r-hershel-schachter/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The comments at the end are much better than Rabbi Fink's essay.

      Delete
  9. Don't Orthodox Jewish leaders realize that public racist statements about blacks do lots of harm to the Jewish community and the Torah? Especially, when there are lots of black Jews. And especially, when you live in a country with a black president.

    Why should anyone take anything he says seriously?

    ReplyDelete
  10. RHS is a hippocrit by worrying about molesters being in jail and not about the false accusations that women against their husbands in matters of divorce.. His rherotic is typical of medern day rabbis whether MO or chareidi. They are not consistent in their rulings, but say what appears right and good for this moment.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Shmuel.I find your comments interesting.Can you please direct me to where Rav Schecter made these comments.Thank You,Flave

      Delete
  11. Eddie, Rav gestetner does NOT allow toanim in his bais din.

    Rav Elyashiv already paskened that one may go to the police as did Rav Shlomo Zalman I believe. However, if it is done not for safety reasons but is false then no doubt it is ossur and retzicha mamash and the moser will be yored le'gehoinom le'dorei doros.

    Of course one needs some kind of raglayim le'dovor, just inventing lies as do all the divorcing rashantas do is despicable. yet somehow RHS supports Tamar Epstein who not only abductyed her chid but also refused to continue in the Baltimore Bais Din. Something that is entirely illogical, irrational and unhalachic to say the least.

    Rav Menashe Klein is big enough to argue with Rav Elyashiv. RHS is not.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Rav Menashe Klein is big enough to argue with Rav Elyashiv. RHS is not."

      That is false. Any Rav is big enough to argue with R Elyashiv. The question is whether their argument is good enough. You are saying that RMK is big so he can say something , but if RHS said the same thing, it is despicable. Here is the perversity of your words.
      Also, R Gestetner is not big in any sense, so according to your logic, he cannot argue with anyone.

      Delete
  12. I am proesting the reappearance of michael tzadpok on this blog. He gave an undertaking not to return. What is he doing here? He was repeatedly shown to be inaccurate and was always disproved.

    He is an apologist for and possibly an emplee ofthe rabbanut which is the israeli branch of ORA and the mafia.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "He is an apologist for and possibly an emplee ofthe rabbanut which is the israeli branch of ORA and the mafia."

      No, he wished to end his discussions with you stan.

      your ORA/mafia comments are laughable and show how detached from reality you have become.

      Delete
    2. is it possible to discuss an issue without getting into ad hominem attacks?

      Delete
    3. Yes this is very important because people pay attention to the attack and not the substance of the argument.

      Delete
  13. When I first learned of Daas Torah I realized the the question for me was,whose Daas and whose Torah.

    There are many more people who have mastered Torah if anyone truly masters it. But, not all of those people have the wisdom in how to apply it,teach it and lead.

    RHS truly has Torah knowledge. However he is missing the Daas.


    RHS clearly does not understand anything about investigating child abuse. Different interrogation techniques are needed for different age children. Unless one has been trained in forensic questioning techniques, it is very easy to taint the evidence so that the perpetrator can no longer be successfully prosecuted.

    I never investigated child abuse, butI do have experience in prosecuting white collar crime. However,I do have a friend who is a therapist trained in forensic interview techniques relative to molestation and has been called as a witness many times.

    Bate Din around the country will never have that ability.

    Shavua tov to all.

    ReplyDelete
  14. compare RHS views to those written in this letter by R' Shterhbuch

    now, those who attack RHS, eat humble pie (before Pesach).

    http://daattorah.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/rav-sternbuch-reporting-abuse.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Eddie you apparently did not read the comments to that letter - including the ones that I made. the letter is not the required preconditions for reporting but what to do in a specific case since there was testimony for a confession and a major rav agreed that their was reasonable evidence etc.

      Rav Schachter on the other hand was announcing halacha and procedure in general for everyone

      Delete
  15. "He recently told the story of a Rebbi who had his name and face plastered all over the internet as an alleged offender, and the person who made the allegation on the blog got it completely wrong. It was someone else entirely. I destroyed the Rebbi's family and name. There have been a number of such cases."

    Pitputim, I'd be curious to know more about the cases you describe. It seems to me I would know about at least one of them, but I don't. If Rav Schachter spoke about the case publicly, naming names, I hope you can too. If not, please feel free to email privately at efpasik@aol.com.

    ReplyDelete
  16. "Putting aside the reprehensible views of the Stan's of this world, who are imbued with a Sinah that is unspeakable and seemingly wouldn't recognise a Talmid Chacham, Gaon Olam if he stood in front of him, you've all not understood the context of RHS comments. You need to have heard him speaking about this on many occasions. He recently told the story of a Rebbi who had his name and face plastered all over the internet as an alleged offender, and the person who made the allegation on the blog got it completely wrong".

    DT I cannot believe you published this drivel from Pituptim. If instead of a Rebbi in the above drivel, the words divorced father was inserted then all of a sudden RHS's concern goes out of the window. But this happens all the time and yet the Pitputim and RHSs of this world npot only couldn't care less but side with the rashanta making the allegations.

    RHS may know a lot, who cares. he is the same person who is the mora d'asrah of ORA who supports women in arko'oys. Your brother has repeatedly exposed RHS as someone who does not believe in the mesorah when it comes to Gittn. He doesn't believe in the mesorah when it comes to arko'oys, bais din and genaivoh either. How else does he support tamar epstein who disengaged from the Baltimore Bais Din?

    Ye i am accused of sinah by pitputim. Who do i hate? I hate the corruption of the modern orthodox world and the Agudah. Getr real pitputim- it is you who loves those who veer from the Torah. Stop making false accusations which are despicable.

    I have no idea why all the modern orthodox are allowed to post personal attacks on this blog by DT. I am not sure why he bends over backwards to please them.

    RHS is causing a churban. Instead of falsely accusing me, pitputim should look in the mirror and ask himself why YU has broken from the mesorah.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Stan, your claims are becoming less and less believable. You are simply contradicting yourself all the time.

      a) You claim to oppose "arkoyos", but you are happy for R' Elyashiv and R Shternbuch to permit going to secular law for abuse (despite R Klein forbidding).

      b) You attack RHS regardless of his position, all the time making ad hominem jumps to ORA, and wild allegations that ORA is an all powerful mafia that is bigger than al qaeda, zionism, and international communism. These are signs of paranoia.

      c) You first claim that RHS id despicable, yet when his position is in line with that of other gedolim, you suggest that he is not a Gadol, hence he cannot have any position. These circular arguments show that you have no regard for Emes only that you have sina for anyone who is associated with YU and Zionism.

      Delete
    2. Stan.I am sympathetic to your views on YU but not on Rav Shechter.There are people who can divide the two but you do make a lot of good points.

      Delete
  17. DT, I am extremely concerned about your one way censorship and may decide to stop posting if this continues. Eddie is clearly having a very hard time understanding subtle points because he is so superficial and shallow. I actually never expressed a personal opinion on whether it is muttar to report an alleged molestor to the police unless you catch him red-handed in the act because it is a serious machlokes between the Gedolim and don't have to please Eddie or the other MO who are allowed to post such nonsence on this blog. What I did do is call out rHS for his hypochricy on this matter which once again was way too subtel for Eddie obviously namely that according to rHS its mesirah when it comes to molestation but its NOT mesirah when it comes to a divorcing couple. I would have thought that Eddie could have understood the argument but he obviously cou;ldn't.

    Ad-hminem attacks on ORA. Laughable. It has been repeatedly pointed out how this organization violates halocho and needs to be destroyed because it is creating mamzeirim in klal yisroel.

    "and wild allegations that ORA is an all powerful mafia that is bigger than al qaeda, zionism, and international communism" DT how do you allow such a post on your web site? Eddie is the one who is paranoid. Shame on you!

    By the way Eddie I asked you in Ellul to explain the corruption of the Beth Din of America. You came up with an excuse it was Elul. Now please answer the 4 questions I asked. You know you can't - you were just obfuscating.



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Stan, you are showing how foolish you are.

      This post is about RHS on when to go to the authorities.

      His position is close to that of the letter i cited by R Shternbuch. It is similar to that of R Elyashiv but with some precautions. It is not like that of R Klein's.

      So how exactly are his views despicable? Yet, you accept the haredi gedolim, even though they disagree with each other. Thus your attack on RHS is entirely false, If you wish to debate ORA, then do so in an ORA post.

      Delete
  18. Since you believe in sickening one-sided censorship DT, here are facts about who Eddie really is and what he represents and stands for anmd then you will realize all my remarks are totally well founded.

    Eddie told us he would go to the rabbinic court of Rabbi Marc Angel if he had to go to bais din for a divorce. Well here is what this Rabbi stands for:

    http://www.jewishideas.org/minhamuvhar/rabbis-no-more-alibis-center-womens-justice

    I quote from the above article:

    Rabbis: No More Alibis - Center for Women's Justice

    Thursday, January 10 2008

    Rabbis: No More Alibis
    by Rabbi Marc D. Angel

    2) The Center for Women's Justice, in Israel, is doing remarkable work to advance the cause of Agunot. It not only engages in important public education work, but fights for women's rights through the Israeli court system. It has achieved important victories, and is a growing force in confronting the inadequacies and injustices of the rabbinic court system. The following material describes the Center's work, and provides a link so that you can learn more about the Center and become a supporter and advocate

    See what type of organization this centre for women's violation of halocho is:

    1) It essentially supports unmarried women having sex.

    2) It disagrees with the Torah in the case of adultery that k'sheym she'ossur le'baal ossur le'boyel.

    http://www.cwj.org.il/cwj-blog/supremecourtpetitiondoestherabbiniccourthavejurisdictionoverquestionsofsexualintimacywhenacoupleagreestoadivorce


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, I was asked which bet Din in America I would go to, and I mentioned the sephardic Rabbis who I know there. I was not asked about divorce, and I would most likely avoid America in case of a divorce.

      Rabbi Angel is entitled to propose solutions to Agunah problems. And I am not answerable to an unknown "stan" who is satmar/Neturei karta, a group who collaborated with Hamas and who had a minster for "Jewish affairs" in Yasser Arafat's government.


      Neither DT nor any Gadol can or want to dictate to me which Bet Din I should take my affairs to. And the attack against R Angel is ridiculous, where does he say unmarried women can have sex? This is just a fiction created by stan.

      Delete
    2. " sickening one-sided censorship DT"

      Not one sided. I have made many posts which were censored. I never complained. Nor did I attack DT for not publishing them. Grow up. DT has responsibilities to be objective, and filter out certain things.

      Delete
  19. Actually it is eddie who is so foolish. Kol haposel bemumo posel. Please eddie show us where rav elyahiv and rav sternbuch support not going to bais din in the case of divorce and pulling out of bais din and abducting a child like tamar did.
    i am sure many athiests hold one should report molestors to the police. All this alleged psak of rHs shows is what a hypochrite he really is. Mesirah is fine when it involves divor ce and is more likely to involve false allegations than in a regular case. Eddie is unfamiliar with the US divorce system. Every divorce lawyer advices the woman to ask for an order of protection if he knows what he is doing. Yet mesirah according to the RHS needs to be verified in all other cases. RHS has shown his contempt for the mesorah eddie. No chareidi posek holds it is muttar to issue a siruv against a husband whose wife is in arko"oys without a hetter. RHS issued one in this case against meier kin. Please eddie enough. You are clueless.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Again stanley is diverting attention from the discussion on abuse. I provided a letter from R Shternbuch above, which was published on this blog, on the procedure before going to secular authorities. That is all that we discuss on this one. Now, if you call RHS despicable on this case, then you must also imply the same thing about the head of the Eda?

      Delete
    2. Eddie you apparently did not read the comments to that letter - including the ones that I made. The letter is not describing the required procedure before going to the secular authorities but what to do in a specific case since there was testimony for a confession and a major rav agreed that their was reasonable evidence etc.

      Rav Schachter on the other hand was announcing halacha and procedure in general for everyone

      Delete
    3. Yes, I did read the comments. Rav Shachter was also talking in a specific conference, and there have been no clarifications made of him, unlike yours made of R Shternbuch. Furthermore, whereas in R Shterbuch's case, a written letter has been produced, RHS was talking to a conference, and was taped and leaked by failedmessiah.

      Delete
    4. Eddie I really don't understand what you are saying. Rav Schacter was speaking at a rabbinical conference- setting out the procedure for reporting child abuse. It was not a private confidential meeting he had with someone.


      On the other hand Rav Sternbuch was answering a reply in a specific case and simply said the facts as you have presented them indicate that you should go to the police. He was not describing or specifying procedure in general. You can not generalize from it.

      Delete
    5. If you listen to the recording rather than the Forward's story, you will see in what context he was speaking.
      First he goes at length to describe halachos of mesira.
      Then he points out several cases where false allegations of sexual abuse have been made, and innocent people end up destroyed or in prison.

      Now he simply sets a procedure for verifying the claim before reporting. And the full discussion is not available, hence there may be points which the sensationalists missed.

      There is no general procedure - it is dependent on the facts of the case.

      Now, I am not advocating RHS' viewpoint. But it important to be clear about what he said, and not through a 3rd hand source, i.e. failedmessiah->FWD .

      Just as an illustration, in the UK, the social services are like a gestapo, they take people's children away for any excuse, eg a woman gave birth, and the SS took her newborn away because the woman had mental illness 10 years previously. So the ss are not infallible, and have their own crazy manifesto of how to destroy families. I assume that RHS was talking about this kind of mentality.

      Delete
    6. this post from 5 years ago also suggests that there are similar views to those of R' Shternbuch, esp RHS:

      http://daattorah.blogspot.co.uk/2008/06/rav-moshe-sternbuch-shlita-guidelines_12.html

      Delete
    7. Eddie that post dealt with the commonality regarding that there is not a problem of mesira in reporting a child abuser to police.

      However Rav Schachter is suggesting setting up a committee in each community to evaluate whether the police should be called. As far as I know such a thing is illegal. Mandated reporting requires that reasonalble commonsense suspicion - not just certainty requires calling the police. If the rabbis were also psychologist it would be prohibited for them to carry out investigations rather than calling the police and they would probably lose their licenses and have other punishmet. In addition these rabbi/psychologist don't have any legal authority to conduct investigation.

      This in fact was the program advocated by the Aguda - without requiring that the rabbis also be psychologists. After a year they acknowledged that they had not set up a single beis din and that would not because of fear of mandated reporting laws. Originally they claimed - falsely - that there was no conflict between such a program and mandated reporting.

      Similarly Lakewood lost its beis din dealing with these issues when someone they gave a psak to leave teaching threatened them with a 10 million dollar lawsuit.

      On a practical level it simply is not viable. Whoever participates is open to criminal charges as well as civil law suits for protecting or at least allowing molesters to continuing making more victims. No one is going to publicly acknowledge that they are serving as this type of gate keeper.

      Perhaps a more realistic possiblity is having rabbonim officially working together with the police and social services and providing support to community members who want to file complaints or testify but are afraid of being ostracized by the community. They simply can't be independent gatekeepers.

      Delete
    8. I pretty much agree with your points - the idea of having a board of rabbi/psychologists is impractical. the issue of mandated reporting in US law makes the RHS position untenable.

      Delete
    9. BTW, there is not yet mandated reporting in UK, where the rabbinic conference was held:

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/dec/03/child-abuse-mandatory-reporting-to-lado

      Delete
  20. Please Eddie, you don't look at a single psak in isolation but the overall track record of RHS which is one of utter contradiction and frankly utter hypochrisy. Why this psak by RHS is despicable is because if instead of Rebbi you replace it with husband, all of a sudden mesirah according to RHS is not just permissable but laudable.

    This is the organization that Rabbi Marc Angel says one must support. The only fiction is the fiction you and your MO friends post Eddie. And don't try accuse me of accusing guilt by association. Marc Angel never put any caveats on his call to support this organization which has only one purpose, namely prikas Ohl malchus Shomayim.

    I am pretty sure that if you saw asomeone calling for the public to support hamas with no caveats because it does such great charitable work for the poor in gazaq, you would be appaled.

    Really Eddie is this fiction?

    Directive from Israeli Supreme Court to State-funded rabbinate: Explain why women can’t use the mikvah without being questioned as to purpose
    posted Sep 6, 2012, 1:09 AM by Ma'ayan Alexander [ updated Sep 6, 2012, 1:46 AM ]






    September 6, 2012:This week, in response to a precedent-setting petition brought by the Center for Women’s Justice (CWJ), the Supreme Court directed State religious bodies to respond within 45 days as to why it will not allow ritual immersion without intrusive questioning as to purpose.

    The petitionwas filed in December 2011 by CWJ on behalf of two women, CWJ and Kolech-Religious Women’s Forum. It calls upon the rabbinate and local rabbinic authorities to issue a directive stating that mikveh attendants refrain from questioning mikvah users about purpose or status. A favorable ruling would allow single women, widows and divorcees to immerse in mikvahs, and would cancel an existing policy that bars mikvah use by unmarried women.

    The respondents named in the petition are Minister of Religious Affairs, Yaakov Mergui, Chief Rabbi Yonah Metzger and the Chief Rabbinate Council, the 16-member body which determines policy on many religious issues in Israel.

    One petitioner is a young woman who was refused entry to a mikvah when the attendants discerned that she was single. The other is an unmarried recent immigrant who was prevented from using the mikvah on erev Yom Kippur. Affidavits attesting to other such incidences were included in the brief. Testimonies cited brides who sought to use the mikvah before their wedding but were turned away because they were to be married by conservative and reform rabbis. In another, an orthodox married woman who wanted to undergo ritual immersion prior to ascending the Temple Mount was prohibited from using the mikvah because it wasn’t for the purpose of marital relations.

    for full article, please go to link.

    http://www.cwj.org.il/cwj-blog/directivefromisraelisupremecourttostate-fundedrabbinateexplainwhywomencan%E2%80%99tusethemikvahwithoutbeingquestionedastopurpose
    Contact:

    Susan Weiss, CWJ Founder & Executive Director

    Email: Susan@cwj.org.il

    Phone: 972 54 655 5470


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So you wish to prevent women who are not yet orthodox from keeping the Torah? This mikve business has many personal cases, which you are insinuating to be all sinful. However, if you accept there is a chiyuv for a woman to go to mikve, regardless of whether her rabbi is Orthodox or conservative, then you are increasing the sinners of Israel. There was a heter by RMf which said that reform/conservative marriages are not valid, but this was an innovation, to reduce mamzerut. Regardless of the validity of a non orthodox kiddushin, if a man and woman live togetehr, the women must still keep taharat hamishpocha. You are trying to add to the sins. Shame on you stanley.

      Delete
  21. "And I am not answerable to an unknown "stan" who is satmar/Neturei karta, a group who collaborated with Hamas and who had a minster for "Jewish affairs" in Yasser Arafat's government." if this is not just paranoia but a despicable ad hominem attack then I don't know what is? Please provide proof that I am not just Satmar but am Neutrei Karta. I advise you to be careful as i am sure I can obtain a hetter to sue you in the High Court from Padwa and Chaim and Chuna Halpern.

    "Neither DT nor any Gadol can or want to dictate to me which Bet Din I should take my affairs to."Of course no one can dictate to you anything, you live in a democracy. You can go to the Catholic Church as far as we are all concerned. But this sums up your respect for the gedolim, the real gedolim like the Chazon Ish, the Brisker Rov and even your own Chacham, Rav Ovadia.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Satmar/Nk means either/or,

      Thus, you have admitted that you are either/or one of them, hence there are no raglayim b'davar.

      Get a heter to sue me in arkaos. Then apply your own logic to those who go to arkoyos.

      If you actually listen to what RHS says in the recording, he clarifies the laws of mesira, and where in cases of Hillul Hashem it is not mesira to go to the authorities.
      Furthermore, he gives examples of people who have been sent to the authorities on false charges, and families have been destroyed. he tells an exmaple of a sephardi who was in a mixed marriage, and his lakewood family didnt like him becasue of his sephardic heritage, and thus made up lies about him.
      Thus all RHS is saying is that before you send someone to the police , make sure there is sufficient evidence for it. These are quite reasonable statements.

      "But this sums up your respect for the gedolim, the real gedolim like the Chazon Ish, the Brisker Rov and even your own Chacham, Rav Ovadia."


      There is nobody of the stature of the Hazon Ish alive today. And in any case, I do not follow his derech, and am not obliged to.
      Again you are talking nonsense. You cannot dictate to me which Bet Din I should go to. To put it better, even a Rav whom I respect, such as RDE cannot dictate to me to go to a particualr BD. he could give me advice which i would consider.

      Now let me put the shoe on the other foot.

      If, hypothetically, I had to deal with the painful issue of divorce, and I wanted to get the best benefits and protect my own finances etc, perhaps I would go to R Gestetner's BD. Perhaps I would avoid a pro-feminist BD, because they would make life more difficult for me. You see, it all depends on what the case is, and what each side is trying to achieve.
      Or I would got to R Karelitz' BD, in Israel, because I know he is Gaon. But there is no halacha saying I should go to one or another.




      Delete
  22. Eddie do you deny that I repeatedly asked you to explain the violations of Halocho that i allege the beth Din of America is repeatedly guilty of in Elul last year and you refused to answer, obfuscating that it is Elul and that you don't have the time? A simple yes or no will suffice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't deny that stan - and I am not the BDA's representative to explain their side of your allegations.
      Stan, since you have now come out of the Satmar closet, do you accept that there is no halachic basis in being moser a community to the Nazis, rather than to be pikuach nefesh, and send them to America or Israel, even if there is a risk of some losing their emunah?

      Delete
  23. Would RHS say the same if the child was his relative, G-d forbid?

    ReplyDelete
  24. "Satmar/Nk means either/or,

    Thus, you have admitted that you are either/or one of them, hence there are no raglayim b'davar."

    Eddie you need help, seriously. Where and when exactly did I make such an admission? You have lost the plot mate.

    Trust me Eddie there is no such a thing as just getting a hetter to sue you in arko'oys. I first need to summons you to bais din and you would need to refuse to appear and I can only claim al pi halocho what the halocho entitles me to.

    As for your claims that you arbitrage across botei din depending on whether you are a male or female doesn't speak very highly about your integrity. The halocho is what it is regardless of which side of the fence you sit on.

    You may not be the official spokesman of the BDA but you seem to support their nonsence including their innovations or frankly distortions of halocho but when asked to defend them you won't because you can't.

    As to your sickening story about a Lakewood person being falsely accused and destroyed I don't have reason to doubt your side of the story. Regarding mesirah which is by definition true the halochoh is yordim le'gehenom le'dpore doros ve'ainom olim so if it was false kal ve'chomer. yet you continue to defend RHS and his hypocrisy about mesirah being a terrible aveiroh except when it comes to women making the false allegations and going to arko'oys so I think you are highly confused.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Stan: stop joking about arkoyos

      since these are anonymous identities, there is not recourse to law unless serious threats are made.

      "As for your claims that you arbitrage across botei din depending on whether you are a male or female doesn't speak very highly about your integrity. The halocho is what it is regardless of which side of the fence you sit on."

      On the contrary. I am making a hypothetical case. Ican choose the paramters of the case as I choose.

      For example, if I had a business case against someone in Satmar, I might avoid r Gestetner's BD, since he could be biased.

      The halacha can vary from each locailty, something that a closed minded such as yourself would fail to understand.

      The halacha at a Sephardic BD would be differnt from a litvish,and also from a chassidic BD.
      What if I were married to a Yemenite and she wishes to go to a yemenite BD (Rambam style) who might beat me to give a get? Suddenly I might feel very ashkenazi and go to see Gestetner.

      So you are saying r Gestetner is pasul as far as I am concerned?

      Also, please tellme , stan, what is Rav Gestetner's position on reporting child abuse?

      You are accusinig me of obfuscastion, but if you want answers from the BDA go them directly. As usual you are trying to distract attention by the red herring of BDA etc.

      I do not support any false accusations made by women, or men. I have seen no evidence that RHS supports fasle accusations. If he does so knowingly then I condemn him, as I would condemn anyone else.






      Delete
  25. "Regardless of the validity of a non orthodox kiddushin, if a man and woman live togetehr, the women must still keep taharat hamishpocha. You are trying to add to the sins. Shame on you stanley."

    Actually Eddie the supreme obfuscator, it was the rabbanut who refused to allow these women to use the mikveh, so le'shitoscho, iut is shame on your holy rabbanut, i am just the messanger.

    Seriously though, this is a matter for the gedolei hador (which by definition excludes any YU, mizrachi, modern, hesder type rabbi) to decide. It spounds to me like lifnei iver and basically to turn frum women into unpaid prostitutes but the gedolim can decide.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Stan, yes, according to my logic it is shame on them too.

      "(which by definition excludes any YU, mizrachi, modern, hesder type rabbi) " By haredi definition, but I am not haredi

      There is no obfuscation stanley. The same principle applies. Rav Shach criticised secular people for eating chazir, and told them what is wrong with cow or chicken. Thus, if the Rabbsnut or the Stan refused to sell kosher meat to them, it is the same aveirah.

      Now, Mr Obfuscator, you were attacking Rav Angel, becasue he may have supported an organisation, and you made false claims agasint that organisation. they were not giving a heter for certain sexual relations, but were ameliorating the aveiros of people, who were prevented from keeping taharas mishpocho.

      Delete
  26. please change to stan. i posted the above. apologies.

    ReplyDelete
  27. There is no committee/panel solution to the real problem of having far too few rabbonim who truly understand these matters. These include the intricate halachic and secular legal issues and the psychological issues, whether the rabbonim have a secular degree or profession or not. So, if each community (whatever that is defined to be) needs a screening panel, the chances of it being fully competent at its task are not great. Not to mention that rabbonim can be too reticent about reporting accused rabbonim to the authorities, even when the need for that is clear-cut.

    ReplyDelete
  28. @Eddie - "your ORA/mafia comments are laughable and show how detached from reality you have become":

    No, Eddie, it's YOU who has become completely detached from the reality of the outrageous evil being committed by the YU feminist organization ORA ( the Organization for the Resolution of Agunot ). You're also quite oblivious to the complicity of ORA's boss, Hershel Schacter, in ORA's atrocious halachic violations.

    Assisting women who moser their husbands in archaos is standard fare for ORA, but is just the tip of the evil iceberg. Decent, non-criminal, Jewish husbands in the US have been forbidden by court order any communication with their children in any way, on pain of incarceration. Their wives obtained these court orders while being assisted by ORA. In the perverse feminist ideologies of ORA and its fellow travelers, Jewish fathers are strictly optional.

    My knowledge of ORA's malevolence is derived both from numerous personal conversations with the Jewish husbands victimized by ORA's thugs and ORA's vicious tactics, and also from personal conversations with some of the many rabbinic authorities who denounce in no uncertain terms ORA's anti-Orthodox, anti-Torah, and anti-male feminist agenda.

    Eddie, where did you derive your knowledge of ORA? From Jewish Press propaganda articles?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ELY- you did not read Stan's comments - he said that ORA controls the rabbanut in Israel, that it is one mafia system.

      That statement is ridiculous. Do you have any evidence LeYaakov that ORA controls the rabbanut?

      Delete
  29. "Now, Mr Obfuscator, you were attacking Rav Angel, becasue he may have supported an organisation, and you made false claims agasint that organisation. they were not giving a heter for certain sexual relations, but were ameliorating the aveiros of people, who were prevented from keeping taharas mishpocho."

    Please Eddie the gedolim and the rabbanut disagree with you. And by freely allowing any woman to go to the mikveh they would be oyver lifnei ivver of encouraging women to have pre-marital sex who are not in relationships.

    And what about there claiming that bais din has no right to prevent a woman from marrying her lover after she committed adultery which I believe is a de'oraisah although I haven't learned the sugyas for a long time?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ Stan: "And by freely allowing any woman to go to the mikveh they would be oyver lifnei ivver of encouraging women to have pre-marital sex who are not in relationships."

      If someone wants to be oiver, they can find ways, . Most dont bother with mikveh.
      Besides, this specific case was about a woman who was being married in a Conservative ceremony. So she shoudl be disallowed from Mikveh?

      Delete
    2. Stan, stop diverting attention, who is saying that a woman can marry someone after adultery? I never said that.

      What is r Gestetner's position on reporting molesters? can you please advise us?

      Delete
  30. from another blog

    http://theantitzemach.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/defending-harav-r-herschel-schachter.html

    ReplyDelete
  31. "If someone wants to be oiver, they can find ways, . Most dont bother with mikveh.
    Besides, this specific case was about a woman who was being married in a Conservative ceremony. So she shoudl be disallowed from Mikveh?"

    Really Eddie it was not. It was about single women using the mikveh as well, if not predominantl. Good job misleading the readers of this blog Eddie - deliberately as well. One of the 2 cases involved a 19 year old who has been having sex since 16.

    http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/anglo-file/daughter-of-u-s-immigrants-wages-legal-battle-against-mikveh-ban-1.407052

    "One petitioner is a young woman who was refused entry to a mikvah when the attendants discerned that she was single. The other is an unmarried recent immigrant who was prevented from using the mikvah on erev Yom Kippur. "

    http://www.cwj.org.il/cwj-blog/directivefromisraelisupremecourttostate-fundedrabbinateexplainwhywomencan%E2%80%99tusethemikvahwithoutbeingquestionedastopurpose

    Eddie you owe the readers of this blog and myself an aplogy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Stan, you are obfuscating. Can you tell us Gestetner's position on child abuse,a nd reporting it? I have asked u 2x and u refuse to answer. Not that his view has any validity, after all, R Tauber shlita, Rosh Kollel and Av bet Din of Monsey tells us to ignore that Mickey-Mouse beth din.

      Regarding the discussion on the feminist group, it says :
      " solely for the purpose of conjugal relations and brides being married by orthodox rabbis "

      Your logic is not very good. If you claim that Mikveh is d'oraita, but the kiddushin is d'rabbanan, then you are preventing people from keeping Mitzvos D'oraita. In Israel the sea is available, so a determined person can immerse pretty much year round.

      Your argument is like having a kosher food store, but refusing to sell to people who might not be frum in other areas.

      Do you think rav Shach would have prevented secular people from buying kosher meat?

      Delete
  32. "Stan, stop diverting attention, who is saying that a woman can marry someone after adultery? I never said that."

    Eddie if she is not punished in accordance with halocho hamevin yoovin she can marry anyone except a cohen, her ex husband and her lover midoraissah.

    but Rabbi marc Angel's darling rgsanization doesn't hjold of d'oraisahs Eddie"

    http://www.cwj.org.il/cwj-blog/supremecourtpetitiondoestherabbiniccourthavejurisdictionoverquestionsofsexualintimacywhenacoupleagreestoadivorce

    ReplyDelete
  33. Eddie I have no idea who "Gestetner" is so if you know someone called "Gestetner" you can give him a call. I am not your messanger boy.

    "Not that his view has any validity, after all, R Tauber shlita, Rosh Kollel and Av bet Din of Monsey tells us to ignore that Mickey-Mouse beth din."

    Clearly you are clueless Eddie. Who appointed R tauber Ab Beis Din of Monsey? There are many Botei Din there! And you never took his advice either because you said if you were a man involved in a divorce you would go there yourself.

    Eddie the problem with the logic is with you. You made a claim that the organization that R Angel supports was fighting a case for a woman who was married under a conservative rabbi. I showed that you were totally wrong, it was not. it was talking about a young girl on a fling and a humble person after being exposed would apologize but not you.

    As far as lifnei iver, even the Rabbanut disagrees with you. You are entitled to your opinion but it is not part of the Torah world. The problem is if you let anyone into the mikveh you are encouraging premarital sex and that is lifnei iver.

    ReplyDelete

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