Monday, September 28, 2015

Rebbitzen granted right of privileged communication by Oregon court

Yated   Is a rebbetzin a religious leader? Or is the term an honorary title denoting nothing more than “wife of a rabbi?” 

The question lay at the heart of an unprecedented court case in Portland, Oregon, in which Mrs. Esther Fischer and Mrs. Sarah Goldblatt, two kollel wives employed with their husbands by the Portland Community Kollel, were subpoenaed in a divorce trial. The women were asked to disclose personal and confidential information they had received from the wife in the divorce case, which might have bearing on child custody issues coming before the court. 

The women responded that such information, including confidences shared in person, by letter, over the phone and through emails and texts, was protected by the statute governing clergy privilege, similar to the law granting attorney-client privilege. 

As rebbetzins in the Portland community, they said, their conversations with community members fell under the rubric of a state law protecting the confidentiality of information entrusted to clergymen. As advised by rabbonim, the women said they were not permitted to share personal information they had received from a woman they had taught or counseled.[...]

As the testimony and deposition continued, the atmosphere in the room seemed to change. The questioning came to an end and Judge Beth Allen, in an unusual departure from protocol, issued her ruling on the spot. 

“It seems pretty clear,” she said, “that the issue here is not about official ordainment as a means of identifying Orthodox Jewish clergy. The state is not in a position to dictate to religious organizations how to define their clergy. The key seems to be how the movement itself identifies its religious leaders.” 

“In Orthodox Judaism, where only men can be rabbis, men can have their confidences protected by the law when they talk to the rabbi. But what about the women who prefer not to talk to male clergymen about deeply personal matters and turn to women religious leaders for guidance? Is it reasonable that women who prefer to open their hearts to other women should be deprived of the law’s protection? 

“I don’t believe that is what the statute governing clergy privilege intended,” the judge concluded, granting the kollel wives in this precedent-setting case their motion to void the subpoena.[...]

5 comments:

  1. Wasn't there a case many years with a 'frum' guy who told Rabbi Tendler that he murdered his business partner and pregnant wife?
    The defense was that this was privileged information. I remember one of the Gdolim in America testifying that there is no such confessional confidentiality in Judaism. The guy was convicted and went to jail.
    So what changed?

    ReplyDelete
  2. http://www.jlaw.com/Articles/RabbinicCounseling1.html

    ReplyDelete
  3. Clergy confidentiality is unique, at least in NY, in that the clergy can waive the confidentiality (as opposed to attorney confidentiality, where only the client can waive the confidentiality).

    In the r tendler (sr) (the s-i-l) case, r tendler waived the confidentiality, and testified (that the accused admitted the crime. And that there is no confession concept in judaism.)

    ReplyDelete
  4. No chol hamoed shiur this year?

    ReplyDelete
  5. It is still possible but doesn't seem likely this year

    ReplyDelete

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