Thursday, March 27, 2014

Schlesinger Twins: Rabbi Biderman's testimony regarding the twins

Due to requests for the voluntary testimony that Rabbi Biderman - the head of the kindergarten that the twins attend - gave to the court, I am posting this translation from the German




---------------- Dated 15.5.2012

I, Rabbi Jacob Biderman, born on 28.11.1957 declare the following in testimony to the court:

In the last few days I was contacted by a Rabbinic colleague in England who informed me that an acquaintance of Beth Schlesinger has initiated a media campaign which is about to be publicised. The media campaign claims that this is a 'horror story,' that the twins Samuel and Benjamin Schlesinger are in a very bad state with their father and that their father is endangering them. They further claim that this is demonstrated by the fact that Samuel needed a number of teeth removed. I refuted these claims and told this Rabbi that the director of the Lauder Chabad Kindergarten, which is under my authority, has told me not only about how well the children have settled into kindergarten since Autumn but also how much they have developed psychologically. I also told my English colleague that these false and one-sided claims illustrate amateur journalism and above all, harm the children Furthermore, I am being harassed by different Rabbonim from England, Israel and Australia who have contacted me to ask me to help the mother because - according to her - the children are in a terrible state.

Rabbi Jacob Biderman ----------------

81 comments :

  1. Thank you for posting this. Sadly, it lays bare the culpability of Chabad in Vienna, which, apparently, is condoned by the Chabad movement worldwide.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. pray tell. what culpability?

      Delete
    2. I lived in Vienna for a few years and know R. Biederman personally. He is a good man who can be fully trusted.

      Delete
    3. @Aharon I am sure that you are correct that Rabbi Biderman is a good man. There is also no question however that the evidence supporting Beth's viewpoint is strong and consistent. If you have access to Rabbi Biderman perhaps you can persuade him to write a guest post why he is supporting Michael against Beth and why he thinks having the twins raised by two fillipinos is to their benefit?

      Delete
    4. James, what do you really know of Beth Alexander? Have you seen her since Yavneh days? Have you been to Austria to investigate her claims yourself? What are your sources of [unbiased] information?
      Forgive me, but your outspoken support, seems a bit foolish and naive.

      Delete
    5. Zvi. Rabbi James is probably asleep in Australia at the moment but I have no doubt that a highly respected Rabbi he will answer.

      Do you know Beth and are you a supporter, who wants to see her reunited with her children, or are
      you here as a trouble maker. I do hope it is the former.!

      Delete
    6. Sam, why on earth do you think I might be a trouble maker?! And why is 'a troublemaker' opposite to 'a supporter of Beth'?

      p.s. I'm sure Rabbi Kennard is awake by now - it must be 7pm in Melbourne.

      Delete
  2. Chabad Just Want CashMarch 27, 2014 at 8:48 PM

    I'm waiting for all the commentators on previous blog posts to claim we are being unfair on biderman, and that this is just more anti chabad propaganda!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thank You HaRav Yackov Biderman shlit"a for setting the record straight in sworn court testimony. You have finally put to lie the media spin and drivel spread by a disgruntled ex-wife who has waged a bitter warpath to overturn a lawful court verdict on all levels of trial and appeal.

    We now know that father is in fact loving and caring of his children.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "We now know that father is in fact loving and caring of his children."

      Nowhere does it say that in the affidavit. On the contrary, between the lines, you read that kindergarten is helping them to improve, but the situation outside kindergarten is not what could be expected from "normal" children... Why else would they need to "be more calm now"?
      It says "they made progress in their development", which would imply that their development was not adequate before. It does not say they are "developed like any children of their age", which, I suppose, means they are not...

      Delete
    2. A child could be underdeveloped or slow in developing for natural reasons. Some children develop slower than others. That is not an indictment of the parents but rather how Hashem gave each individual child different developmental progress milestones.

      Delete
  4. @ J.Kennard, Rav Biderman simply states a fact under oath, namely, that the boys are doing fine contrary to their mother's mobbying campaign. I don't know both, but having followed all the statements and court protocols published by her, I come to the conclusion, that she is not trustworthy. Why should this rabbi lie under oath - he has no reasaon and certainly not in his position. I really pity poor Sammy and Benji for being dragged into this evil campaign.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Chabad Just Want CashMarch 27, 2014 at 9:44 PM

      "fact", read my comment above. You timed yourself to perfection!

      Delete
    2. It doesn't say they are doing. It says they calmed down and are making progress in kindergarten...

      If they need to calm down, obviously they were not doing fine when they started kindergarten.

      It also does not say that father does care adequately for them... It merely says they made progress thanks to the efforts of the kindergarten... which is completely compatible with the mother's statement that they have no adequate care at home...

      Delete
  5. fact, how can you be so sure the children are "doing fine"? I can think of many reasons why "rabbi" Biderman would lie. Just ask anyone in Crown Heights about his previous track record.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The german text does not say they are doing fine, just better than before - they are making progress

      Delete
    2. On the wrong trackMarch 28, 2014 at 12:34 AM

      This track record would possibly be relevant here but I don't know anyone in Crown Heights to ask. Does anyone else? Rabbi Biderman, who is unlikely to be an expert on either child development or pediatric dentistry, relied on the director of the Lauder Chabad kindergarten to fill him in on these matters and then gave a voluntary testimony to the Vienna family court. Now there are two problems with this: 1) the case had already received considerable publicity, which, if negative as far as the kindergarten was concerned, could have been bad for Chabad. There must be good news emanating from there if the city council subsidy is to be continued (about €300/child/month), ie no scandals or even hints that there could be children there who are not doing well. The director would be afraid of losing her job and, presumably, good reputation, should anything negative be passed on to journalists or to the council, on whose approval and goodwill she depends. But the Schlesinger twins started kindergarten in a traumatized state, as a result of their having been seized from their mother under shocking circumstances (no warning, no good reason, no comforters, armed police, as is usual in Austria, etc) and it was reported at some point by the kindergarten that one of them had even been self-harming, a step on the way to possible suicide. When Rabbi Biderman wrote this statement, the boys were 3 years old and so traumatized that their speech, normally developing quite well by this age, was virtually non-existent. Had Rabbi Biderman even met the boys at that stage? Had he ever tried to talk to them? I doubt it very much, for if he had, he would have realized, even as a layman, that something was radically wrong, and suspected that the director had been leading him up the garden path. According to the rabbi, the boys started at Chabad in autumn 2011 and the statement was made in May 2012, ie only 8/12 after they arrived in a most appalling state. It would be highly unlikely that children who had lived very happily with their primary carer prior to this could have "developed psychologically" in such a short time, especially if "life events" such as self-harming had been occurring (and, BTW were not reported, as required by law, by the father to the mother). 2) How Rabbi Biderman can possibly have refuted the mother's claims that the children were "in a very bad state with the father" as a result of having front teeth removed at such a tender age, I do not know. Is he secretly qualified as a dentist? We are informed by pediatric dentists in Vienna that the most common reason for having to perform such a cruel act on a young child is some clown having left them regularly for hours with a bottle of sweetened liquid in their mouth. So it looks very likely that this might have been the situation with these kids, deprived of the mother they love so much and cared for by their father and by women who have not been observed by anyone so far to be loving, well-trained and talkative (in German). Rabbi Biderman - how could you possibly have made a statement re pediatric dentistry? If you are in fact qualified in this field, please let us know!

      Delete
  6. The german text does not say "harrassed" (3rd line from the bottom), but merely "contacted"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Translation is an art and the translator is given license to translate into the most appropriate language possible. The German word is more neutral but it's clear that "harrassed" is what was meant.

      Delete
    2. An article in the Guardian Weekly by a translator includes the following: "I think it's important to recognise that translation is about making creative decisions...". So there you have it Patience, from the horse's mouth!

      Delete
  7. Pro-Beth ppl - take it easy! All that we have here is a sworn court statement by a Rabbi in the community that he has heard from the boys teacher that they are developing very well. You don't have to get so defensive and bash his persona. Just HEAR IT, respect it, and try to uncover more testimonies that might give backing to your position.

    If the facts are different, then shift that position. If they support you, give thanks Above.

    Emes, emes tirdof !

    ReplyDelete
  8. What authority or qualifications does Rabbi Biderman to say that the children are doing well psychological ly well? One of them was self harming in his kindergarten and they ccould not speak coherently then and still can't even though they are a month off five.
    What does this say about Rabbi Biderman and his sworn oath?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can you not read? He says that they have DEVELOPED psychologically! What qualification does he need to ask the director how the children are doing? seriously? you're grasping at straws!
      he doesnt say the children are speaking coherently, just that they have improved.
      one was self harming? first, show proof. Not Beths word, thats hearsay.

      Delete
  9. Thank you, thank you, thank you for posting Rabbi Biderman's statement.

    As I predicted, every word he says is true.

    He does not say the children speak 3 languages.
    He does not say that they are on par with their age group.

    He says that the children have settled well into kindergarten (I can attest to this too. When I see them, they seem calm and playing with friends)
    and he says that they have developed psychologically. Which they have.

    Does this mean that they don't need extra speech therapy or whatever therapy they should get? No, what this means is that in kindergarten, they are happy, they are acclimated, they develop.

    What a whole load of rubbish you people project.

    thank you once again for posting.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sarah, you said you would speak to "rabbi" Biderman personally if the statement was posted up. Please can you now honor this and ask him why he made this VOLUNTARY statement.

      Delete
    2. Hey Sarah, you might as well say, "Thank you, thank you, thank you Rabbi Biderman for helping these children not to have a mother"

      Delete
    3. speak and speechless;
      I said I would speak to Rabbi Biderman about his supposed voluntary statement lying about the boys' condition and their fluency in language etc etc. Surprise, surprise! Rabbi Biderman's statement is factual and true. Why he made this statement is obvious- to show the courts that the boys are thriving in kindergarden. He makes no statment about the home situation. What, pray tell, do you know need to know from Rabbi Biderman?

      I thanked dt for putting up the statement so everyone, far and wide, could see how this whole mud slinging campaign against vienna, Rabbi Biderman, Chabad has no actual basis whatsoever and is simply sinat chinam.
      Speechless, Rabbi Biderman was reporting facts. If the fact that the boys are doing well in kindergarten is considered an impediment to the mother's custody, what would you prefer - that they do poorly in kindergarten?

      Delete
    4. On the wrong trackMarch 28, 2014 at 3:39 PM

      Sarah, it was definitely never Rabbi Biderman who claimed the children speak 3 languages. You come to some extraordinarily silly conclusions, which makes me wonder if anything you write is actually correct. That was claimed by someone who had no right to as he is not a speech pathologist but a pediatric neurologist in Vienna. Since when do such doctors assess children's language ability in languages they almost certainly neither speak or understand? I dare to assume that this dr, like most Austrians, does not know Hebrew.

      Delete
    5. On the wrong trackMarch 28, 2014 at 3:46 PM

      Sarah: how well educated are you? Apparently not at all in language or philosophical thought. To say that Rabbi Biderman's statement says the boys are "thriving in kindergarten" is a total misunderstanding of "how much they have developed psychologically". If they had perhaps stopped self-harming there, the director could honestly have told the rabbi that they had "developed psychologically". However, neither you nor the good (?) rabbi states a point which may be taken as a basis for the comparison using the word "developed". Thus the director's statement becomes meaningless. Any logically-thinking judge would not have been taken in by such uneducated statements.

      Delete
  10. real fact, I'd be worried about motzie shem rah if I were you.
    When the facts dont support you, resort to hearsay, motzi shem rah and personal assaults. lovely

    ReplyDelete
  11. Why is Beth only releasing this document from the court record? Why is Beth not releasing the entire judgement against her issued by the judges on both the trial and appeals level of the courts? Is the full court record too damning and incriminating against Beth that she refuses to release it publicly and instead chooses to publish piecemeal small documents from the court record such as this above?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why doesn't the fathers release it?

      Delete
    2. seems like the father does not want to engage in frivolous pr when he has full custody anyhow

      Delete
    3. On the wrong trackMarch 28, 2014 at 3:49 PM

      By not communicating, both the father and the rabbis closest to him - Biderman and Pardes - have brought great shame on the Jewish community in Austria. I even dare to claim that this kind of behaviour might be increasing the amount of anti-semitism in Austria. Is this desirable?

      Delete
  12. By Beth waging a public battle against Dr. Schlessinger, it will not make it any more likely that he will agree to accommodate her in her desire for additional visitation time. What she is doing is very counterproductive as it will in all certainty make him far less inclined to agree to any changes that are not mandatory.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. On the wrong trackMarch 28, 2014 at 3:57 PM

      There is nothing counter-productive about it, Visitor, if you acknowledge that the population of Austria (and indeed of the world) is learning that the Jewish community is composed of human beings with all the vices that non-Jews have: some of them are cruel, sadistic, misogynist and anti-foreigner, just like non-Jewish Austrians can be. While this is tragic on the one hand, it just goes to show everyone that Jews are not only a people who have suffered great wrongs over the centuries but that they are also capable of the same kinds of sins themselves.

      Delete
  13. Dr. Schlesinger doesn't comply with his mandatory obligations. Beth had no option than to turn to the media.
    She has been wrongly accused of being mental, , which has been disproven. The court has stripped her of her children without giving a good reason. The father is totally unreasonable! What else should she do?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. what options does she have? venting is fine, but will it get her anywhere?

      Delete
    2. On the wrong trackMarch 28, 2014 at 4:01 PM

      I absolutely agree with you, Leslie. When a father appears to be getting protected by some kind of "Mafia" (is there a Jewish one in Vienna?), then the mother of his children has no alternative but to go public. Her boys would hold it against her later if she hadn't. And Beth is far from being the only woman who is being forced to do this - there are thousands and thousands of mothers like her in the world whose children and she have been the objects of "court-licensed abuse". If such women don't fight publicly for their rights, their children will hate them when they are older.

      Delete
  14. What justification has the court given for giving custody to the father. Why is the father refusing to publish it?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Biderman criticises the media for saying its a horror story.
    It certainly was a horror story the way these little boys were torn from their mother by the father and how many policeman??!!!!!

    He refutes claims that Samuel needed a number of teeth removed.
    Ok so we must be imagining the missing teeth on all the photographs!!!!!

    Could anybody confirm if the Director of the kindergarten is a professional Psychologist, and where he/she graduated from?!!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. where does rabbi biderman refute the missing teeth?!

      Delete
    2. In his Court statement Sarah!!!!!!

      Delete
    3. On the wrong trackMarch 28, 2014 at 4:08 PM

      It's clear, SMUG, that the director of the Vienna Chabad kindergarten committed a sin of omission: she failed to mention the baseline she was comparing the kids' psychological development to, thus making her statement meaningless. Rabbi Biderman quoted her, which was equally meaningless. But the judge took it seriously, indicating a flaw in logical thinking. Both the director and the rabbi are guilty of using a meaningless statement to convince a judge. Then the rabbi says that it is not a "horror story" because those front teeth were removed. This is an extraordinary claim by either a kindergarten director or a rabbi! If children's front teeth are removed as they are learing to speak, THIS WILL LEAD TO SPEECH IMPEDIMENTS! And that is a horror story if it is unavoidable. Wrong again, Sarah!

      Delete
    4. The director's name according to the Vienna Chabad web page is Mrs. Chanie Eidelman. Perhaps someone here knows her personally and what her qualifications are....?

      Delete
  16. Beth should sue for defamation of character. A false medical was issued to the court and Rabbi Biderman has inflamed the situation!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. how has Rabbi Biderman inflamed the situation? by reporting the facts? that the children enjoy school? if these are the ways she hopes to win custody, seems rather weak argument

      Delete
    2. It is good to hear that the children enjoy school. However, we have established that they are underdeveloped particularly in
      their speech. What qualifications does R. Biderman have to psychologically assess children.
      Where are the assessments and
      proof of his qualifications?
      It is clear he is taking sides
      because he honours the father in
      his Shul and shuns the mother.
      Further he complained to the
      court that he was being bothered
      by Rabbis around the world. In
      effect asking for the courts
      sympathy. Why has R. Biderman
      shunned other Rabbis around the
      world in the secular court and
      used it as a defence to help the
      father obtain Custody? Why has
      he not worked with Rabbis to
      obtain Shalom for the sake of the
      children? Therapies have been
      mentioned, but the only therapy
      that has not been tried is mother therapy!

      R. Biderman states on his website that he "saves children". He takes
      them from their parents! In this
      case he has helped to take the
      children from one parent over another for no good reason!
      He obviously has motives for helping the father to get cusody and completely barring the mother from her children's lives.
      What are they? What gives
      him this right?

      Delete
    3. On the wrong trackMarch 28, 2014 at 4:12 PM

      Rabbi Biderman failed to inform himself about the boys' speech development and thus inflamed the situation. I'm certain he never met the boys and tried to talk to them. The judge automatically believed him, one would assume, as Rabbi B. is a well-known figure in Vienna due to his amazing achievements in Chabad education. Why would she have had any reason not to believe a man who hobnobs with the leaders of Austria and with wealthy men like Lev Leviev?

      Delete
  17. There is no reason givem by the Courts!
    This makes the Courts decision ILLEGAL!
    Michael its time time to give the boys
    to Beth!

    ReplyDelete
  18. R-Biederman, even if the kids were doing well with the father is it not important for the kids to have a relationship with a mother beyond the once a week visits, which have on several times being cancelled- especially at this tender age. Why does the father not remarry - being looked after by 2 fillipinos is not a home for them. Where is the ahavas yisroel for Beth - Is it because she is an outsider , there are no feelings for the plight of the mother. We are taught not to learn from the midos of the people of Canaan - apply this to Austria and Germany. The father is waging a war against his wife on the backs of his kids- he wants custody not because he can provide a better home and family life - 2 fillipinos - but to make Beth's life as miseable as possible.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. On the wrong trackMarch 28, 2014 at 4:18 PM

      Hear, hear, AllanKatz! He wants to make her life hell but... he's the one who started all this by getting a judge from the Jewish community to intervene originally. Surely as a doctor he is intelligent enough to understand what he's doing and surely as a doctor he should realize that by depriving his kids of their mother's language input, he is programming them to remain special needs kids for their whole school careers. Does the Chabad primary school in Vienna even have a special needs dept for them when they reach the age of 6 (or 7 if they are not mature enough to start school)?

      Delete
    2. I am from Vienna and I can tell you why a lot of us cannot support the mother: everyone made a huge effort to accommodate her and make her feel welcome. But, many of us had to witness her regular outbursts , and nasty behaviour towards us. Always moody and unpredictable. Moreover, when some of us noticed that she had trouble coping with the twins (they were showing visible signs of neglect) she refused any kind of aid and liked to scream at people. The consensus therefore is, that the kids are better off with the father. Beth is not living in reality. She might like to see herself as a goof mother, but she isn't. She certainly loves them very much, but she isn't capable of caring for them. It is also nonsense to write that people , who support Beth are being threatened. Everyone,who knows the Schlesinger family, knows what warm hearted and caring people they are. Beth was literally carried on their hands by them and they always tried to accommodate to her. Everyone could see that. No one wishes Beth anything bad, but most of us believe, that it is in her and the kids best interest, if it stays that way. Dr Katz certainly understands this, too.

      Delete
    3. @from Vienna I gather than your community - including yourself - view yourself as psychologists who are able to judge that a mother under stress from a bad marriage is not capable of taking care of her children but a husband who is allegedly abusive and tried to have his wife committed to a mental hospital by lying about being psychiatrist is the preferred choice?! That having the twins raised by fillipinos with little contact with their mother is in their best interest?!

      There realy is a simpler answer to dealing with stress than by cruely separating the twins from their mother at the age of two - Beth could have been given support under the guidance of professionals.

      None of the supporters of Dr. Schlesinger have cogently explained why taking custody from Beth and giving it to Michael was in the best interest of the twins - including your bizarre letter.

      Delete
    4. from Vienna: Once again, I get the feeling from your language that you may be the German-speaking Dr Schlesinger's sister posing as a group of "delightful" family members. Das Torah has described the situation Beth found herself in most eloquently and compassionately as usual but you have dared to describe the Schlesingers as "warm-hearted, caring people"! Now that can only be a joke and makes me doubt that much of what you have posted above is true. Please explain to us all how it can be that a family in which the grandfather of the twins was booted out and not permitted to see his own children and now his grandchildren ever again, the aunt failed to attend her brother's wedding in Manchester and booted out her own husband, both the aunt and the grandmother changed their married names back to Schlesinger, and finally the father tried to have his wife and mother of his children put into a mental hospital with a fake diagnosis .......can be described in this positive way! There are postings on numerous pages on this blog by extremely unpleasant people who do not have the welfare of the twins at heart but only revenge on the mother. Who are "Bubbe", "Naomi Rosenberg", now "from Vienna" and quite a few others? Pretty clearly you are all members of the father's family or he, himself. And you are doing the boys a great disservice by writing such twaddle.

      Delete
  19. Also questions have to be put to Biderman why he is obviously siding with the father, what are his reasons? There is no way he can pull the wool over everybodies eyes, by saying he has always been neutral, or he cannot get involved in a couples marriage problems. Those sort of excuses don't wash. There is a definite "air of arrogance" coming from this man, and this could causes him to think he is immune, and to carry on regardless in the face of world criticism. Biderman your critics want answers. Or do bullies generally run the other way. Watch this space. Also, I think it is extremely important what professional qualifications the Director of his kindergarten has. That is absolutely crucial to know, as that is where he has got his information about the children from.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Brian Ingram is quite right to ask what Biderman's MOTIVES are in this case. As I have said questions need to be answered.

    ReplyDelete
  21. FROM VIENNA how many of you are the mother of twins.? How many of you are foreigners? How many of you are married to an uncaring, selfish man
    who on the night of his sons brit went out to a jolly. He obviously didn't care much about his sons that night! He obviously didn't care weather his wife
    who had just given birth and had
    witnessed the boys trauma of their brit could cope. He wasn't interested, putting himself and others first before
    his wife and children. What sort of
    man does this? What sort of husband was he? What sort of doctor is he? Are you all such saints in Vienna? Do noneof you have any compassion? Who are any of you to judge Beth's capabilities?
    Perhaps it is now high time for Beth to
    be given the chance to care for HER
    CHILDREN! It is clear that they have not thrived and they need her. Instead of making critical statements on this
    blog you can talk some sense
    to Michael Schlesinger and tell him
    that the children need their mother and this continual denial of her is detrimental to them. Time has moved
    on and the boys are below par after three years in their father's care. Things must now change for the sake of the boys. They need their mummy!

    ReplyDelete
  22. No one in Vienna has replied to Dini's comment. It's funny how the court give no reasoning, the Jewish community in Vienna shun Beth for no reason.
    In the meantime Sammy and Benji are
    not thriving and they cannot speak
    coherently having been on their father
    s care with Fillipinos since they were
    two.

    This maked no sense, as their mother is a professional language teacher! She teaches other people's children language!

    What can be better than a mother
    learning with her children and giving
    them love at the same time. No
    teacher, no therapist, not even the
    father, who has proven that he can't,
    can do this!

    For ths sake of the children, it is time for Beth to play a major part in their lives!

    The courts and the father need to stop messing with these boys' lives. They have got it wrong. Now it is time to put things right. Let the world see that Vienna is just and care about young children!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Vienna: you may say the mother had difficulty coping after the twins were born and that you say 'she could not cope and screamed at people' but you must remember that she was having no emotional or physical help from her husband. In fact he was physically abusive and violent towards her. How would you feel in that horrific situation? Especially as everyone was on Michaels side or silent in her horrendous situation right from the beginning. Have you ever heard of post traumatic stress? Or post natal depression? Caused by trauma? Thousands of women go through this throughout the world. Do you think their children are taken away from them? No they have loving and supporting husbands, family and friends who support them. Believe me I was one of those women. My husband was very supportive throughout and friends in the UK community. Have you ever asked the boys if you they are happy with their daddy? If they are self-harming now I dread to think what they will do when they are older? Do you want to be held responsible for that? If you don't care about the boys then you are evil. And g-d will judge you in this world and the next.

      Delete
    2. I'm shocked to read that "everyone was on Michael's side or silent in her horrendous situation right from the beginning." I guess you mean the community, liyba, but what I cannot understand is why the members of a mixed secular and religious community would immediately take sides with a local. I seem to remember reading that a "friend" of Beth's spread a rumour which she later retracted about Beth being insane. Do I get this correctly: the community supported the father because they believed his wife to be sick? Is that a normal way for a community to react in the 2000s, when we know so much more about mental illness than ever in the past?

      Delete
    3. "but you must remember that she was having no emotional or physical help from her husband. In fact he was physically abusive and violent towards her."

      I don't think that's true, actually.

      Delete
    4. Avi, how do you know this is not true. Is there something you are not telling us?

      Delete
    5. yes! I know this is going to seem a bit of a cop-out but I can't reveal my knowledge for fear of embarassing my source. (This person has no current connection with the case)
      I'm quite prepared for the flak about to come my way.....

      Delete
    6. Well, this is most interesting! It certainly puts into context your previous comments.

      How does your source know Schlesinger wasn't violent towards the mother? Was he/she there living in the flat? Perhaps your source may not have the correct information....or worse...may be deliberately not telling you the correct information....

      Delete
    7. Avrohom, we meet again!
      I am 100% sure that my source is telling me the truth. 100%.

      Delete
    8. Why is your source and everyone else in Vienna so afraid to write a guest post with what they believe to be the truth. Why should we believe you if your source is not prepared to state this publicly. Would your source be able to write an anonymous statement instead?

      Delete
    9. Avi - you once claimed to be a GP, so I'm wondering if you happen to be........Dr Schlesinger! Or one of the various au-pairs from the time when the boys were tiny? Only Dr S himself could swear that he hadn't been abusive! An au-pair would be able to claim he WAS, but not that he WASN'T. However, having said all that, I doubt that Dr S as an Austrian would use a word like "cop-out" - or are you playing games with us?

      Delete
    10. Another thought, Avi: If the father was doing friendly things like pushing his wife when she was holding a baby, as we have been told by Beth, then you claim it's not true? Do you think she would have invented such stories? And were her father and Johnny Mandl both hallucinating when they saw him committing acts of violence?

      Delete
    11. Avrohom - why should you believe me? No reason at all.

      I can assure you "Noemi" that I am not Dr. Schlesinger and I most definitely am not an au pair!!! :-)
      Her father is hardly a disinterested observer and who is Johnny Mandl?

      By the way, I admire your tenacity and remembering all the details about the various contributors to this blog. Are you Beth?

      Delete
    12. Avi, would your source be interested in helping the twins rather than sitting on the sidelines and watching this injustice take place.

      I have little respect for you and "your source who doesn't want to be embarrassed" if all you can do is write comments on a blog. Has your source spoken to Mr Schlesinger about this case to try and get him to see sense?

      Delete
    13. Actually Avrohom, I don't seek your respect. All I am trying to do is to put a different perspective on the matter from that presented by Beth's (and this) blog. I also distance myself from the hysterical comments posted on here from both sides of this dispute.

      Delete
    14. @avi noffer - you are claiming to be neutral with some inside source of information. Could you please write a guest post explaining the evidence I have presented and that you know - what you think a neutral i.e. rational approach to this mess is?

      Delete
  23. Perhaps we could name and shame thisvso called friend! We are not here to name and shame good caring people who speak out for the sake of two little children, only those who are evil and spiteful!
    We here in England will not give up until we see justice is done!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But.....you do not know where justice lies! (Nor do I) Are you asking for the mother to be given custody? Are you simply asking for her to have better access?

      Delete
    2. where justice liesApril 1, 2014 at 1:41 PM

      I don't know where justice lies, but I am 100% convinced justice does not lie with the situation we have today. A proven capable mother with proven no mental health issues being awarded such limited visiting rights, and a father who has escaped all psychological assessment who has tried to get his wife committed to a mental hospital by lying about his credentials? A father who cancels visits without explanation or replacement.

      Avi, even you must agree this is not where justice lies.

      Delete
  24. Avi, Definitely more contact. This wrangling is not good for anyone, especially the children.

    The court, nor the father has not put forward any good reason why Beth
    should not have good contact with her
    children, despite repeated requests!

    What is anyone therefore meant to make of it. We are all thinking people
    and need clear explanations.

    Rabbi Biderman made a statement to the court. Based on what? The Court
    decisions are based on what


    Why shouldn't Beth and the children have more contact?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Rachel - I agree with you! She should have regular and contact with the children for which she does not have to pay.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Thank yo Avi. If only the father had your sense.
    What is he gaining by his unreasonable behaviour. What are the children gaining?

    ReplyDelete

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