Monday, December 16, 2013

What to do if the marriage is over - but one party refuses to end it?

@ DT- Thank you for responding at length. While many were critical of my assumptions and questions I don't think you addressed the issue at hand. As a psychologist I am sure you realize more than most, that not every marriage can be saved. There exists the possibility that one comes t the conclusion that the marriage is over before their soon to be ex-spouse. If the person is leading a religious lifestyle they will in consult with pastoral as well as psychological counsel. Everyone wants shalom bayit, but not every marriage was made in heaven. I find it hard to believe there is a magic formula to heal every marriage. I also think it is irresponsible to force every spouse back to their partner. Once a person availed themselves to pastoral and therapeutic services and through their competent guidance seeks divorce should he/she remain trapped? Really? If the child is young should the mother not take the child to live with her. ( I am not advocating for denial of visitation / joint custody) however child support is for the child and should be maintained by the B"D if they use it for binding arbitration.

As to the challenges made that this isn't halachically tenable approach because it is modern it must be wrong.--There are many times that times changed and the Chachamim made takanot to address the problems they faced from antiquity to modern times. At some point we as a society realized slavery is wrong, polygamy is not for us and we don't engage minors. There are so many more examples but the point is obvious. This isn't about picking and choosing "chafing," or any other disparaging comment "Dvar Torah" feels the need to insult people who might disagree with him/her.

In this regard the rabbanim of the BDA, the largest B"D for gittin in the US supports takanot like the halachik pre-nup. Before you jump down my throat, please let me know of one case that the BDA gave a p'tur, even with a get that was assisted by ORA and/or the husband felt pressure to give the get and the p'tur was not recognized. While many may critizize R'Stern or R' Shachter, l'maaseh the gittin are kosher and the women are able to go on with their lives and their future kids are able to marry.

Lastly, the idea that a husband automatically gets full custody of a boy over six is equally preposterous. Every case is unique and should be decided on it's own merits.

As i asked before what is your solution? You told me what you are not prepared for- quickie divorces. I did not advocate that position. When is a marriage over? How many psychologists do they need to see? Which rabbi do they need to consult? Is there a list? once one side consulted with a competent rav, and they agreed that the marriage was over and encouraged going to B"D is that not enough. I don't believe there is a simple solution to such complex issues. If you do, i look forward to reading about it.

32 comments :

  1. Dan The BDA is a huge part of the problem. They break halocho. Ask them the following questions:
    1) Where it says in shulchan oruch you bifurcate the get and monetary matters and hence if a woman goes to secular court despite her husband insisting on bais din she is not a mesarev l'din and he is chayav to give her a get
    2) where it says in shulchan oruch you may use secular law if both parties agree. the rashbo says just the opposite and it is brought down l'halocho by the bais yosef as such. do they inform the man that he would be far better off not aplying secular law.
    3) allowing mechalelei shabbos lawyers as toanim when the lawyer's job is to teach its clients to lie.
    4) never awarding custody to a father ever or refusing to confirm this ever happened.
    5) never issuing a siruv against a woman for being in arko'oys.
    6) issuing fake siruvim against men who are willing to be in bais din and whose wives won't go.

    if this is the best MO can produce, then no wonder we are in trouble.

    Rabbbi Dovid Eidensohn knows of a case where the head of this organization mattired a women to the shuk without a get.

    Their pre-nup is so one sided only a fool would sign it. Why is there no requirement for the woman to go to bais din to adjudicate matters. It would appear as if this group has divorced itself from parts of choshen mishpot and even ho'ezer. To quote them is a joke. No fines in the pre-nup for going to arko"oys.

    This is a new fangled religion and frankly they are not only on the same slippery path as r osher lopitan's open orthodoxy they are michutz l'machaneh. do you think rav nissim karelitz cares ki who ze about this organization whose practices are a complete distortion of yiddishkeit.

    As R Shachter he allegedly converts Ivanka Trump, he issues fake siruvim on someone who is tzias dina (mier kin) and then again aharon friedman.

    please rather quote from the reform.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Why do you automatically conclude that the mother has an absolute right to unilaterally relocate the child?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Or why do you even automatically conclude that the mother has a default right to custody of the child?

      Delete
    2. The mother will generally obtain custody by first unilaterally relocating the child and unilaterally declaring when the child can see the father.
      When the case is finally adjudicated months later, the mother will argue that the mother should have custody because that has been the case before the matter was adjudicated.

      Delete
  3. “D.P. Moynihan”December 16, 2013 at 3:33 PM

    Your underlying premise that the “modern” view is that a spouse should have the absolute right to declare the “marriage is over” and walk out on a marriage with children is an outdated relic of the radical cultural revolution of the 1960s, which is being rejected by the better educated segments of American society. And in some of the cases discussed on this blog, the mother availed herself of pastoral and/or therapeutic services, which concluded that the marriage was repairable, but the mother decided that she nonetheless wanted a divorce.
    If the wife leaves a marriage because she has serious grounds for divorce, than beis din will rule that a get must be given, and kfiah is appropriate. If she leaves without serious grounds, and there are children involved, than the marriage can generally be repaired and there is no reason why the husband should be absolutely required to give a get. To the contrary, it is she who should be pressured not to harm the children by walking out on the marriage.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/19/fashion/how-divorce-lost-its-cachet.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
    ...
    Ever since her divorce three years ago, Ms. Thomas said, she has been antisocial, “nervous about what people would say. … All of a sudden, this community I’d lived in for 13 years became this spare and mean savannah,” she said.
    That a woman who has been divorced should feel such awkwardness and isolation seems more part of a Todd Haynes set piece than a scene from “families come in all shapes and sizes” New York, circa 2011. But divorce statistics, which have followed a steady downward slope since their 1980 peak, reveal another interesting trend: According to a 2010 study by the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia, only 11 percent of college-educated Americans divorce within the first 10 years today, compared with almost 37 percent for the rest of the population.
    For this cross section of American families… divorce, especially for mothers with young children underfoot, has become relatively scarce since its “Ice Storm” heyday.
    Teresa DiFalco, a 41-year-old mother of two… recalled being shocked when her husband wanted to split up three years ago.
    “I had this sense of: ‘You’re kidding me. We have children. It’s not allowed,’ ” she said. Divorce was not a part of her children’s landscape, Ms. DiFalco said. Her son had just one acquaintance whose parents were divorced, her daughter none.
    Similarly, Molly Monet, a professor of Spanish at Mount Holyoke College who separated from her husband in 2007, said she felt out of sync, “like the ultimate bad mom.”
    “Now my children were from a ‘broken home,’ ” she said. “My first response was, Is this going to devastate the kids?”
    “In the 1970s, when a woman got divorced, she was seen as taking back her life in that Me Decade way. Nowadays, it’s not seen as liberating to divorce. It’s scary.” …

    ReplyDelete
  4. “D.P. Moynihan”December 16, 2013 at 3:33 PM

    In the 1970s, “the feminists, the hippies, the protesters, the cultural elite all said, It’s O.K. to drop out.” In contrast, “We made up our minds, my brother and I and so many of the grown children of the runaway moms, that we would put our families first and ourselves second. We would be good, all the time. We would stay married, no matter what, and drink organic milk.”
    “One of the hardest things about divorce today is that you feel like you have to explain or apologize for it…
    “The notion of divorce has become one of failure again,” said Ms. Morrison, 42, a resident of Park Slope. “It used to be, ‘You’re free, rock on!’ Now it’s, ‘You couldn’t make it work, you failed.’ ” Ms. Morrison described people’s reaction as “the two-second blink” when she says something along the lines of, “Zack is with his father today.”Among a certain demographic, marriage is viewed as something that … needs to be continually worked at and improved upon. When Ms. Dolgoff tells others about her divorce, their response, with disquieting frequency, is “Yes, well, marriage is hard” as in, “You knew that getting in.”
    Blogs and child-rearing books suggest a subtle — and sometimes not-so-subtle — social pressure to tough it out. From the 1970s to the 2000s, the percentage of highly educated Americans who believe that divorce should be made more difficult rose from 36 to 48 percent….
    [S]plitting up with tender, vulnerable children in the mix is seen as a parental infraction.
    “I’ve definitely experienced judgment,” said Priscilla Gilman, author of a new memoir, “The Anti-Romantic Child,” which deals in large part with her 2006 divorce. “Everyone said: ‘Isn’t there anything more you can do? Your kids need you to be together. They’re so little.’ ” At the time, Ms. Gilman knew only one other person who was divorced. “I had progressive, feminist friends. None of them were getting divorced, none of them.”
    “There has been a striking shift in both beliefs and behavior towards marriage among educated and affluent Americans,” said W. Bradford Wilcox, an associate professor of sociology at the University of Virginia and director of the National Marriage Project. “There’s a tacit or explicit recognition among well-educated parents that their kids are less likely to thrive if Mom and Dad can’t be together.”

    ReplyDelete
  5. @Dan - To answer your questions, based on the invented ORA/BDA/YU feminist religion you're advocating:

    "When is a marriage over?" - By using the anti-halachic financial coercion of the BDA "prenup" to force a pasul Get, the Torah marriage can appear quickly over whenever the wife decides it's over. In this new age of feminism, the husband has no say in the Get matter. All your arguments about marriage counseling are really unnecessary.

    "the idea that a husband automatically gets full custody of a boy over six" - You have nothing to worry about here. As long as the husband was foolish enough to sign the BDA "prenup", the wife can force a Get and then proceed to family courts who will in most cases deny the father any custody of his children.

    "At some point we as a society realized slavery is wrong" - You're not exactly correct here. There are many Jewish husbands who have been enslaved to their "ex"-wives with long term alimony payments, and child support payments well beyond halachic requirements. So slavery is fine as long as divorced husbands are the slaves.

    "the women are able to go on with their lives" - You're very correct here (as long as you're not concerned about adultery and mamzerim). Only problem is that the Jewish husbands destroyed in archaos cannot go on with their lives.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Lastly, the idea that a husband automatically gets full custody of a boy over six is equally preposterous. Every case is unique and should be decided on it's own merits.

    The idea seems to have some traction (which is not to be confused with wisdom.) What is the source for this?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Dear Dan Eisenberg,

    I'd like to answer some of your very good questions:

    if the marriage is over - but one party refuses to end it?

    We have a Torah. The Torah has laws. These Torah Laws are codified in Shulchan Aruch and related commentaries. We are obligated to use it and strictly follow Jewish Law. And that is the answer to this question. If there is a dispute, we follow the dispute resolution mechanisms outlined in Jewish Law. Shulchan Aruch has a whole bodies of laws dealing exactly with the questions you are asking regarding disputes in matters of divorce. Including when a marriage is over if one party wants it over while the other does not.

    There exists the possibility that one comes to the conclusion that the marriage is over before their soon to be ex-spouse.

    Sometimes Jewish Law will demand the marriage be over despite the objections of one of the spouses. And sometimes Jewish Law will deem the marriage must continue despite one of the spouses wanting out.

    We follow the laws of the Torah as codified in Shulchan Aruch. And the arbiters of disputes is Beis Din and Beis Din only. This point, too, is specified in Jewish Law. If one party wants out of a marriage they open a Beis Din case asking for a divorce and Beis Din will decide if they have standing in Jewish Law or not for their demand.

    If the child is young should the mother not take the child to live with her... the idea that a husband automatically gets full custody of a boy over six is equally preposterous. Every case is unique and should be decided on it's own merits.

    Per Jewish Law, if the child is nursing the mother retains custody for duration of the nursing, If the children are above nursing age or age six, Jewish Law specifies who has primary residential custody. The mother does not get automatic or even default custody under such circumstances. Boys over age six are in the custody of the father.

    Of course Beis Din is obligated to take the welfare of the children into account. This point, too, is a point in Jewish Law. But in all things being equal, where the child could go either way as far as custody, boys over six are in the custody of the father who has the halachic obligations of their chinuch.

    child support is for the child and should be maintained by the B"D if they use it for binding arbitration.

    How much child support and what items a father needs to support a child and until what age a father needs to support a child are all points addressed in Halacha. And Halacha must be followed for these points. And Halacha differs greatly from secular law on this point.

    continued...

    ReplyDelete
  8. ...continued

    As to the challenges made that this isn't halachically tenable approach because it is modern it must be wrong.--There are many times that times changed and the Chachamim made takanot to address the problems they faced from antiquity to modern times.

    And only the great rabbonim are qualified to make takanos. Not the hamon hoam. And even when they make takanos, they do not change Torah Law or Halacha. They may make things stricter, such as banning polygamy whereas it is allowed under Torah Law, but they cannot allow the forbidden.

    the rabbanim of the BDA, the largest B"D for gittin in the US supports takanot like the halachik pre-nup.

    The prenup is not a takana and even according to the RCA it is not mandatory. That being said, the RCA prenup itself is fraught with halahcic problems. Rav Eliashev paskened a Get given by a husband who is a signatory to the RCA-type prenup is doing so under duress of the penalties (and yes he rules they are penalties despite the prenup authors PR otherwise) and as such a subsequent Get may constitute being a Get Me'usa - and invalid Get.

    While many may critizize R'Stern or R' Shachter, l'maaseh the gittin are kosher and the women are able to go on with their lives and their future kids are able to marry.

    Actually many if not most of the Gets that result from their type of activities result in Get Me'usa's and the wife remains married despite purporting otherwise due to her receiving a Get Me'usa. If she subsequently remarries she and her new paramour are committing adultery and any future children maintain the status of mamzeirim.

    When is a marriage over?

    When Halacha says it is over as ruled upon by Beis Din. ONLY Beis Din has the right to demand a marriage end over the objections of one of the spouses. This is a black-and-white fact of halacha.

    The fact of Jewish Law is that if one of the spouses wishes to continue the marriage over the objections of the other spouse, and the other spouse who is demanding a divorce does not have valid cause to demand as such, then Jewish Law will often support the spouse who wishes to continue the marriage over the objections of the spouse demanding a divorce. Not always does Torah Law support divorce on demand.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I have a friend who is a Rav of a Kehila, a Rosh Kollel Dayanim and a Dayan in Bnei Brak. I have mentioned this in the past. I wanted to know from him the basic halachos governing divorces and he said to me that divorce is not about ' halacha' , it about either try to save the marriage and if not help people to change their ' thinking'. People get caught up in trying to prove they are in the right, instead of being wise and focusing on getting on with their lives and being happy. Not knowing the specifics of the W-D case , he said that AMW could be happily married by now with someone who wants to be his wife , also have a baby and also a normal home into which he can bring his son he is co-parenting with Gital.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @AllanKatz - It seems you've made two quite possibly contradictory statements here.

      1. "Not knowing the specifics of the W-D case" - If the W-D case resembles many other "Orthodox" divorce cases, its entirely possible that Gital is using or has used the NJ courts to prevent AMW from having parenting time with his child.

      2. "a normal home into which he can bring his son he is co-parenting with Gital" - On what basis do you conclude that Gital will allow this?

      If you had more knowledge of typical "Orthodox" divorce cases, you would never assume that AMW is trying to prove he's in the right. Rather its quite possible, based on the information we have, that he's trying to preserve any semblance of a relationship with his son.

      Delete
  10. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I agree that in the event of halocho being fulfilled it is far better to get rid of such a wife and to move on and give a get although this cannot be forced. However if the halocho is being broken by the woman through excess demands in arko"oys no moral obligation exists and let her sit until she has white hair. The hypocrisy of the MO ignoring how women use arko"oys to desroy men while they shout FAKE AGUNAH reminds me of Sdom vAmorah.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I would like to add the fact that many a purported woman simply uses the exremely biased US court system to literally torture her ex. No halachik or moral requirement to give a get in these all too frequent cases.

    ReplyDelete
  13. @ Stan- You may personally have problems with the BDA, but where is there demonstrated cases of their gittin not being accepted.? @Ben Torah also asserts a position by R' Elyashiv. Is this a theoretical p'sak or is there documentation that this was used to deny a couple wedding after a BDA p'tur was issued. I can understand arguing from an apriori approach that it might be a "forced" get but again l'maaseh if the woman and her new children can remarry then the discussion is pilpul b'alma.
    "Ben Torah" also asserts.that Jewish law requires the use of a B"D. The fact remains the BDA is the largest issuer of gittin. If as you say " many if not most of the Gets that result from their type of activities result in Get Me'usa's and the wife remains married despite purporting otherwise due to her receiving a Get Me'usa. If she subsequently remarries she and her new paramour are committing adultery and any future children maintain the status of mamzeirim." Please provide the actual evidence of this in normative B"D practices. (Transcripts, court documents, etc.)
    Therefore if parties use the BDA to adjudicate their gittin they are fully in compliance of Torah and halachah. As you say the "black and white fact of halacha..." We all know the halacha is grey. Machloket is essential to the ongoing transmission. So long as piskei din of the BDA is supported by the community both in Israel and in the States I think it is irresponsible to say that there is any question of the kashrut of their gittin. What goes along with that is the defacto acceptance of ORA and R'Shachter. I fail to see how one can accept one without the other.
    As I asked and am still waiting for ideas from the tzibur- is what is the roadmap for a contested divorce? Right now why would a woman not use the BDA? A court that is known for their professionalism, competency and transparency. Their Gittin are accepted and she has the best chance of having her case adjudicated fairly and speedily.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The "many if not most" comment of mine was regarding the ORA type pressure tactics to secure a Get. My point is those ORA Gets are Get Me'usas. I didn't say that most of the BDA uncontested Gittin are invalid,

      Again, I am speaking of the ORA-type tactics to force a Get. Those are invalid Gets not worth the parchment they are written on.

      Sometimes halacha is grey and sometimes halacha is black and white. If you want children that some poskim consider mamzeirim while other poskim consider them kosher, gezunte heit., But don't cry in 20 years when no one wants to marry these potential mamzeirim. And like the machlokesim between Beis Hillel and Beis Shammai regarding the status of mamzeirim, when someone from Beis Shammai was considering marrying someone from Beis Hillel, Beis Hillel would tell Beis Shammai that this person we do not consider a mamzer but according to your shitta he IS a mamzer, so don't marry him. Don't forget to inform those who consider him a mamzer.

      Perhaps we need to establish genealogical tables to keep track of who the potential mamzeirim are.

      ORA has little or no acceptance outside of the MO world. And even the BDA is no automatically accepted in much of the Chareidi world.

      I provided the roadmap for contested gittin above. The roadmap is called Beis Din. Per Halacha. It is required. A woman can ask to use BDA but her husband has the halachic right to not to accept BDA as the beis din. Then it will need to go to zabla, not BDA, per halacha.

      BDA has an extremely strong reputation of being very feministic and pro-women/pro-divorce in these type of cases.

      Delete
  14. Dan I dont personally have issues with the BDA. SHULCHAN ORUCH has issues with the BDA as should any Hashem fearing Jew. Your response is a non reponse. R Elya Svei also condemned them.

    Your attitude to seious vuolations of halicho must be condemned in the strongest terms. Address the halachik issues or dont quote the BDA as a halachik source please. Is this a joke? This is not a real bais din but a mamzer making machine

    ReplyDelete
  15. @ Stan- Obviously the dayanim know SH"A and poskim. You might disagree, that is fine. I don't understand why you feel the need to insult. Again, when has a p'tur not been honored? If right now ALL gitten from BDA are accepted that means the gitten are not considered forced. Also to call a reputable B"D a "mamzer making machine" is ridiculous. Do what you want with your daughters but to make such inflammatory statements serves no one any toelet. You quote R Svei- Which particular case did he refuse to marry as a result of a BDA p'tur?
    As far as addressing the halachik issues- What you call a forced get, they don't. It is a machloketYou might be somayach on a Riva"sh, they don't. Perhaps they have a diferent understanding of R' Tam than you do. Do you honestly believe they are ignorant? They are people who are oskei b'tzarchei tzibur b'emunah. There are halachik differences but nothing nefarious. To insult and call into a question the largest B"D in the US is preposterous. I can understand an approach to guide a couple to use a particular B"D, or even a particular "style" of B"D. However, bedieved to invalidate a reputable psak B"D and invalidate a p'tur is a whole diferent animal. It's just not happening. As a final comment to Ben, having a pre nuptual agreement to use BDA or any other B"D as a means for binding arbitration would solve a lot of your agunah problems, correct? So take out the financial clause and have bnot yisrael guaranteed a smooth get without the Zabala delays. If both stpulate to that from the outset what is the problem?
    "Having a sefer yochsin also is not a direction most rabbanim want to take the community now. Rabbanim have always worked to prevent mamzerim, I don't see a movement to make more mamzerim gaining traction.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually Rav Eliashev and other gedolim have said creating a sefer yochsin might be a good idea nowadays considering all the forced get me'usas being done by so-called beis din's that don't follow halacha properly.

      Delete
  16. Dan you can call them reputable all you like. They are an organization that violates halocho. I ask you to directly address the issues raised but you cant. Of course they know and still violate halocho. They dont care because they dont answer to anyone. But the gedolim have repeatedly condemned this type of behavior. Look at the real Kol Koreh of the 70 gedolim. If the BDA was in Israel rav shach and rav elyashiv would not have kept quiet. The member rabbis of the RCA threaten those who wont give gittin while the women are busy stopping access to the children and the poor guys just capitulate. I have heard about these cases. Bottom line Dan produce a few seruvim from the BDA on women in arko"oys for us please. I challenge you to do so.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Dan firstly I learned to insult botei din from the BDA who told me themselves Rav Gestetner does not follow normative halocho. So your claims that there is just a machlokes just dont fly. Why doesnt the same apply to rav gestetner? Why can rav gestner not hold mous olai is not grounds for forcing a get and that if forced will lead to an invalid get meuseh without being insulted by the BDA?

    The bottom line is that I can repeat until I am blue in the face. Please answer the violations i have alleged. There is no machlokes anywhere regarding someone in arko"oys obly the BDA sees no problem with this.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Stan- It is clear from your comments that you see Halacha as monolithic. You see it as your mission to insult anyone who you disagree with. You raise a challenge regarding BDA and permission to use secular courts. As much as you see it as a "black and white" issue it clearly is not. A bet din can allow secular court without being against halacha. You pasken differently. No problem go with bracha, but don't force the whole world to accept your p'sak. You pound your fists on the table and demand "seruvim for going to arkayos". Perhaps they don't hold like you regarding when one can avail themselves to US courts. Move on. Not everyone looks the same, dresses the same, or thinks the same. At the same time, until the p'tur is questioned, which right now it isn't, there exists, ipso facto, acceptance of the BDA and their halachik positions. Again don't let your children marry people who had their cases adjudicated by BDA, but do not declare your personal opinion for kllal yisrael.
    Also-@Ben- what do you think of the pre-nup to go to a particular B"D to avaiod Zabala?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Beis Din is not allowed to permit anyone to use secular court except in extenuating circumstances where one party is refusing to follow beis din's orders.

      If a prenup were only an agreement to use a specific beis din, and contained no financial clauses, I don't see any halachic problem with it then. I may still be concerned about even that from a social aspect, as in making divorce a normal run of the mill thing you discuss even prior to marriage and assume it is normal to happen. I would have to think about the social aspect. But I see no halachic objections.

      Delete
    2. @Dan - "A bet din can allow secular court without being against halacha" - You're simply spewing more and more hypocritical feminist YU-ORA nonsense.

      A Jewish wife has no right under halacha to adjudicate her divorce in the virulently anti-father family courts and then come to a feminist "Bais Din" such as BDA just to demand a Get. A civil court cannot, under the US constitution, entangle itself in a Jewish Get matter. So if the wife wants her case decided in a civil court, she has no right to demand a Get.

      Based on reports I've heard, if the BDA allows women to litigate in family courts while allegedly presenting their cases to the BDA, then the BDA is not a Bais Din. Or if the BDA decides divorce cases based on feminist civil law, then again it is not a Bais Din.

      We see a continual pattern here where the MO/YU/ORA activists invent anti-Torah feminist divorce practices such as the RCA prenup, and then try to foist them on the Jewish public as being Torah Judaism. They're promoting a new age feminist religion, not Torah Judaism.

      Delete
  19. Dan please provide us with a source in shulchan oruch to back your totally ridiculous claims up permitting arko"oys. Please also read the teshuva of none other Rabbi Norman Lamm on Yu Torah's web site where he says the same rhing that going to court for money is grounds for a siruv. Please explain the contradiction.

    We want sources not fake excuses. As I said the insults fly in both directions and Rabbi Dovid Eidensohn who was given semicha by none other rhan Rav Elyashiv has already stated rhat he is impressed with the knowledge of Rav Gestetner whom a member of the Bda told me personally that r gestetner does NOT follow normative halocho.

    Dan all I want from you are sources as to why going to arko"oys for money by a woman does not render her worthy of a cheirem. SOURCES, SOURCES SOURCES please.

    ReplyDelete
  20. The only ones pounding their fists are MO ORA chevra shouting FAKE AGUNA FAKE AGUNA.Please explain articles by the BDA eg Yaakov Feit discussing the aeverity of arko"oys with the nonsence you spouted.

    ReplyDelete
  21. The excuse given by the BDA writing Gittin while they are in court is is because the court cant write a get only a bais din can. This is utterly ridiculous. Tell the woman if you want the Get, then follow halocho and get out of court. Dan call them uo and ask them.

    ReplyDelete
  22. The unwillingness and frankly the inability of Dan who wanted his own post no less to be able to site a single posek in support of the BDA s bifurcation disaster shoqs just how illegitimate the approach is. Everything is based on their feelings - how can a woman be left chained. They just dont care that almost universally it is she who has chained herself by running to arko"oys and using the despicable court system to destroy her husband. As shaul was told those who are kind to rhose they should be cruel to end up being cruel to those they should be kind to. Classic.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Unlike others I am fully upfront about my ignorance of the nuances of the intricacies of CH"M. Therefore, I leave it to experts. I reread my posts to see if maybe I said something offensive that triggered such a harsh response from you and others. I think I wrote openly and respectfully, since that is "darcheah, darkei noam."
    As far as sources, the BDA is pretty clear that they do not recommend arkyo"s (same position, not surprising, as R' Simcha Krauss). What I said is " A bet din can allow secular court without being against halacha." They can give a heter arkayo"s. So can any B"D so long as it follows the parameters established in halacha. Typically they allow it when they publish a seruv. As far as seeking retribution when someone goes to court without a heter, I will contact them and ask if they published on the topic.
    As far as p'sak for bifucating the get procedure. Since I am not an expert in diney gitten, I rely on those that are, and there is no reason not to trust the BDA poskim. You can be "broiges" all you want, but until their p'tur is challenged they are considered accepted. The position I advocated was respecting the B"D. If you have personal problems with a particular B"D shop around and find one you like. I personally wish BDA would publicize their positions more so that we can learn from and challenge them. It would also provide a clearer path for those wishing to avail themselves to a B"D instead of secular court.
    Therefore it seems your problems are not with me, it is with the BDA. Yet what remains is that they process hundreds of cases. Their gitten are not challenged and the resulting children are able to marry freely.
    In conclusion- since the BDA is accepted and once they establish a marriage is over, the husband should give the get same as if any other reputable B"D. Also having a particular B"D designated "meirosh" solves many f the problems of current Zabala systems. @Ben agrees there is no halachaic issue, just a social issue. I argue that the social system we currently have is broken and this will strengthen the position of B"D who would be the arbiters of family law. Just like no one thinks "DIVORCE" when they sign the ketubah, (essentially a prenup) so to with a halachik prenup.
    After I get a response, I will email R' Eidensohn and it will be up to him to publish or not.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Dan you are correct I have no issues with you personally. I however do know way too many men who are victims of arko"oys and I place a significant amount of the blame on the BDA/ RCA YU camp for this. Since women know they can get away with anything short of murder and still obtain a get with the support and and encouragement of the MO ORA crowd including R Herschel Schachter and also the BDA / RCA separately or together these women have an incentive to break halocho and go to court and destroy many a man. For this many hold the BDA and of course the corrupt amongst the chareidi botei din responsible. Again I am not attacking you personally but only have utter contempt for the approach of the MO world to divorce.

    ReplyDelete

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