Who should be mandated to report child abuse?

silive  If enacted, the bill would make every adult resident of South Carolina the equivalent of New York’s mandated reporters, minus, of course, their professional expertise. Granted, some instances of child abuse are so blatant that they’d be apparent to the most benighted layperson. Conceptually, however, child abuse and neglect are imprecise terms, their incidences often susceptible to lively debate among professionals in the field. 

To expect the average person to analyze every potential situation and make a reasonable judgment as to whether child abuse or neglect likely exists is unrealistic; to punish him for wrongly concluding that it doesn’t when, in fact, it actually does is unconscionable.

Making everybody a mandated reporter also invites abuse by those inclined to use the requirement as a pretext to maliciously defame others. 

False accusations of child abuse, particularly child sexual abuse, have already become the nuclear option for desperate combatants in custody and visitation cases. They and similarly unscrupulous types would be further emboldened under a broad reporting mandate.

Unity Government Disbanding Over Dispute on Draft

NYTimes  The national unity government formed in Israel two months ago unraveled Tuesday when the head of the centrist Kadima Party, Shaul Mofaz, announced he was withdrawing because of intractable differences with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his Likud Party over a proposed universal draft law. 

The broad coalition, which had given Mr. Netanyahu a supermajority of 94 of the Parliament’s 120 members and led Time Magazine to dub him “King of Israel,” has been in turmoil for weeks over the issue of how to draft more ultra-Orthodox Jews as well as Arab citizens into either the military or civilian service. 

Mr. Netanyahu remains extremely popular in Israel, and most here see his re-election as all but assured. The key question is what will become of Kadima, a centrist party that broke away from the Likud in 2005 and has recently lost traction in public polls.

Can We Trust Psychological Research?

Time Magazine  Psychologist Dirk Smeesters does fascinating work, the kind that lends itself to practical, and particularly business, applications. Earlier this year, the Dutch researcher published a study that showed that varying the perspective of advertisements from the third person to the first person, such as making it seem as if we were looking out through the TV through our own eyes, makes people weigh certain information more heavily in their consumer choices. The results appeared in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, a top American Psychological Association (APA) journal. Last year, Smeesters published a different study in the Journal of Experimental Psychology suggesting that even manipulating colors such as blue and red can make us bend one way or another.

 Except that apparently none of it is true. Last month, after being exposed by Uri Simonsohn at the University of Pennsylvania, Dr. Smeesters acknowledged manipulating his data, an admission that been the subject of fervent discussions in the scientific community. Dr. Smeesters has resigned from his position and his university has asked that the respective papers be retracted from the journals. The whole affair might be written off as one unfortunate case, except that, as Smeesters himself pointed out in his defense in Discover Magazine, the academic atmosphere in the social sciences, and particularly in psychology, effectively encourages such data manipulation to produce “statistically significant” outcomes.[...]\\

Many psychologists are aware of these issues and very concerned about them—in fact, most of the concern about this problem has been raised from within the scholarly community itself. This is how science works, by identifying problems and trying to correct them. Our field needs to change the culture wherein null results are undervalued and scholars should submit their data along with their manuscripts for statistical peer review when trying to get published. And we need to continue to look for ways of moving past “statistical significance” into more sophisticated discussions of how our results may or may not have real world impact. These are problems that can be fixed with greater rigor and open discussion. Without any attempt to do so, however, our field risks becoming little more than opinions with numbers.

Fiduciary relationship - free-will or rape?

I recently received the following letter

I am writing to you about finding sources in halacha regarding sexual abuse. I have an adult client who was molested by an adult from the age of 12-18. This adult man was responsible for her housing and care. She was told by her rabbi that she bears no responsibility even though she sometimes took the initiative. She clearly has emotional and psychological problems and a low I.Q. However she understands right from wrong and knows that after 12 she is an adult. She doesn't understand why she is responsible if she transgresses Shabbos or doesn't say a beracha before she eats but she is not responsible in this area. She definitely is very upset by what she did as well as being told she didn't sin.

 Any suggestions of where I might look to find this information?

 In secular law there is a concept called a fiduciary relationship where one person is dependent on another because of trust or expertise or authority. It accepts that because the relationship is not equal one party will submit to doing things against their free-will and is therefore not held accountable. Thus in the realm of sexual abuse a commanding officer having a sexual relationship with a subordinate would be considered rape rather than an act of free-will.  It sometimes also applies teachers and students, employers and employees as well as rabbi's and congregants. Is there a comparable view in halacha?

All I could find is that the seduction of a child is considered rape by all authorities - except for the Rambam. For an adult the only exemption is if she is a shoteh. Any suggestions?

Recent lawsuit concerning whether in NY State - rabbi-congregant is considered fiduciary relationship
 ===============================

Update - these are the halachic issues that need clarification:

Questions 1) Tinok shenishba (Shabbos 68a) : If she lives a life sheltered from knowledge of sexuality – has she sinned by participating in sexual activity? In other words is she a tinok shenishba in regards to sexuality? In fact this is even more of an excuse than tinok shenishba in that she has been taught by authority figures that the sexual activity is permitted.

Question 2) yetzer elabasha  (Kesubos 51b) - Even if she knows it is wrong do we say that if she were abused as a child but she enjoys and participates as as 12 year – do we say “at first it was rape but then it becomes willing and therefore she is patur? Would we also say this if she was first abused as a 12 year old? Or is this leniency only for a single act of intercourse but it doesn’t carry over to the future? The Hafla’ah (Panim Yofos Vayikra 20:17) says that she is guilty only if she was warned in between sexual acts - while Kerisos (15a) indicates that each maaseh bi’ah is viewed separately.

Question 3) Does halacha acknowledge that there are authority figures such as a father or rav whose authority or trust overcomes free-will and therefore seduction by an authority figure is considered rape – even for an adult?

Question 4) Does halacha acknowledge that sexual abuse – where there is psychological trauma and strong conflicting feelings that involve guilt and shame – that the victim isn’t viewed as sinning even if at some point he/she initiates the activity?

Pilegesh permitted by rav if wife is sterile

bhol   אב בית הדין הרבני בירושלים, הרב אליהו אברג'יל, בפסק הלכה חדשני: במקרים שבהם אין לגבר ילדים, אם אשתו אינה יכולה   ללדת ילדים, הוא רשאי לקחת פילגש.

בעיתון "ישראל היום" פורסמה הוראה שנכתבה בספרו החדש "דברות אליהו", שם כתב הרב: "הקמת משפחה זו מצווה חשובה.

"אישה שמסרבת או שאינה יכולה להביא ילדים לעולם, ולא מוכנה לתת גט לבעלה, מעכבת אותו מלבנות משפחה ולהמשיך את זרעו. במקרה שכזה הבעל רשאי לקחת לו פילגש ואין עם זה שום בעיה הלכתית. הדבר יסייע לאותם בעלים לקיים את מצוות פרו ורבו גם במחיר של לקיחת פילגש על בסיס קבוע. אותה פילגש יכולה גם לגור יחד עם בני הזוג", כך בספר.

Myerson Get: Rav Sternbuch & Rav Karelitz

Rav Sternbuch and Rav Karelitz - Mayerson Get

Eida Chareidis handcuffs kids to protest Draft

On Vigilantism & AMI's embarrassing Editorial

Vos Iz Neias by Rabbi Yair Hoffman   With due respect, I would like to take issue with Rabbi Yitzchok Frankfurter’s recent editorial (Ami Magazine p. 8 July 11, 2012) regarding religious vigilantism, Jewish history, and bloggers.  Rabbi Frankfurter has distinguished himself as a highly intelligent thinker on the Jewish scene, with a sensitivity to the Torah’s values on some very important issues that have arisen in our community. 

Nonetheless, it is my feeling that he has taken an incorrect position in this editorial on the issue of recent acts of religiously motivated vigilantism that have been highlighted in the media, primarily in Israel, but even here in New York

Rabbi Frankfurter writes, “contrary to what some bloggers might think, religious vigilantism over Jewish history was not an altogether negative phenomenon.”

It must be clearly understood that “vigilantism” was never a protective shield.  It has always undermined the notion of law and order and is antithetical to one of the principal notions of the seven Noachide laws – the establishment of a legal system.  Indeed, even the killing of Zimri by Pinchas, as Rabbi Frankfurter paradoxically points out, was not an act of vigilantism – the Halacha itself clearly dictates that Kanaim Pogim Bo is part of the Torah’s system of jurisprudence.

30% of sex crimes target minors

YNET  The Knesset's Committee on the Status of Women is set to debate a new report on how the school system deals with sexual violence, Ynet learned Monday.

The report states that 30% out of the crisis centers' 40,000 reports of sexual assaults in 2011 involved children under the age of 12. Almost half of the reports were of rape or attempted rape, some 25% were reports of incest and 20% were of sexual harassment.

The report also includes police statistics about sexual violence: In 2011, 4,563 sexual assault complaints were filed, 47% of them by minors.

In 20% of the cases, the suspect was a minor. In 18% of the cases, the assaults allegedly took place on school grounds. 

HaPeles challenges Yated's leadership

JPost  A new chapter has been opened in the struggle for public opinion among the haredi community, with the publication of Israel’s newest daily newspaper, HaPeles, on Friday.

Following the recent power struggle over the influential Yated Ne’eman haredi daily, HaPeles was published on Friday to compete for the ear of the target audience, members of the non-hassidic “Lithuanian” haredi community.

HaPeles, whose editor-inchief is Grossman, means straight or level, which Labin says reflects the desire to present straight and direct opinions and perspectives on the haredi world.

The upheaval at Yated Ne’eman, the most important paper in the haredi world, occurred as a result of a broader struggle for the leadership of the community – in light of the continued hospitalization and incapacitation of Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, 102, the undisputed leader of non-hassidic haredim until now.

Rav Bulman's 10thYahrtzeit - R Malinowitz & R' Leff

Tonight in Jerusalem Rav Chaim Malinowitz and Rav Zeff Leff discussed the legacy of Rav Bulman in the connection with the issue of 

"The Role of English Speaking Kehillos in Eretz Yisrael"

The were introducted by Rav Bulman's son. Rav Berkowitz was unable to attend because he is an avel.

This is the recording of the event - there are a few minutes missing from the Introduction

Click following link to play or to download

Mp3 audio file 44 meg

Who will comfort us now? by Toby Katz

Economic & family deficits from being unmarried

NYTimes  Jessica Schairer has so much in common with her boss, Chris Faulkner, that a visitor to the day care center they run might get them confused.

 They are both friendly white women from modest Midwestern backgrounds who left for college with conventional hopes of marriage, motherhood and career. They both have children in elementary school. They pass their days in similar ways: juggling toddlers, coaching teachers and swapping small secrets that mark them as friends. They even got tattoos together. Though Ms. Faulkner, as the boss, earns more money, the difference is a gap, not a chasm. 

But a friendship that evokes parity by day becomes a study of inequality at night and a testament to the way family structure deepens class divides. Ms. Faulkner is married and living on two paychecks, while Ms. Schairer is raising her children by herself. That gives the Faulkner family a profound advantage in income and nurturing time, and makes their children statistically more likely to finish college, find good jobs and form stable marriages. 

Estimates vary widely, but scholars have said that changes in marriage patterns — as opposed to changes in individual earnings — may account for as much as 40 percent of the growth in certain measures of inequality. Long a nation of economic extremes, the United States is also becoming a society of family haves and family have-nots, with marriage and its rewards evermore confined to the fortunate classes.