Thursday, January 13, 2011
Brain Death - Rav Shabtsai Rappaport reports his discussion with his grandfather Rav Moshe Feinstein
אסיא מז-מח, עמ' 5-13 (1989
"חמי הרב משה פיינשטיין זצ"ל היה מודע היטב להתקדמות הזאת והתיר ניתוחי השתלות לב בשנים האחרונות. אכן, שכן שלי שהושתלו אצלו לב ושתי ריאות לפני שנתיים בפיטסבורג (קבוצת ד"ר סטרזל) עשה כן לאחר יעוץ עם הרב פיינשטיין ועם, ייבדל לחיים, הרבי מלובביץ שליט"א."
לעומתו כתב הרב דוד שור:12
"וכעת דברתי עם הרב דוד פיינשטיין שליט"א, בן הרב משה פיינשטיין זצ"ל, והוא העיד לי שאביו לא התחרט בכלל לפני מותו ממה שכתב בשו"ת אגרות משה בסימני מיתה והשתלת הלב."
בירור ישיר עם הרב דוד פיינשטיין13 העלה שבניגוד למצוטט בשמו, אין בידו מידע הסותר את עדות הרב טנדלר, אף כי אין בידו מידע המאשר עדות זאת.
לסיכום, אין עדות הסותרת את עדות משפחת טנדלר על השינוי בדעתו של הגרמ"פ להתיר השתלות לב עקב ההתקדמות הרפואית אך קיים ויכוח חריף על הדרך להבנת הכתוב בתשובותיו "איגרות משה".
לאור ויכוח זה פניתי אל הרב שבתאי רפפורט שליט"א (אשר היה בקשר ישיר עם הגרמ"פ זצ"ל בעת הכנת התשובה הנדונה, לדפוס) על מנת לקבל בכתב את התיחסותו לויכוח הנדון. תשובתו היתה חד משמעית:
What follows is a clear illustration of the unquestioned fact that the view of Rav Moshe Feinstein regarding brain death is inexplicably given to major dispute - and that his son Rav Dovid Feinstein did not discuss the issue with his father. In fact this article appeared in 1989 when I left America to settle in Jerusalem. Rav Halperin M.D. - the editor of Assia and the author of this article sent me a copy in the hopes of convincing me to allow him to publish the medical citations from my Yad Moshe index in his publication. When I left America brain death was a very hot topic and it was clear that no one had the definitive answer as to what Rav Moshe held on the subject and in fact it seemed no one had asked him for a clear and authoritative psak. The debate revolved around how to read the teshuvos printed in the Igros Moshe. When I read in this artcile that Rabbi Rappaport had in fact reported asking his grandfather - I was simply floored. Because this information that he reports in the article was apparently not known to anyone else. When I mentioned this to Rav Halperin he told me that even if my assertion was true but he said now the issue has been answered so don't be concerned about the past.
בשאלה האם חזר בו הגרמ"פ מהאיסור לבצע השתלות לב נחלקו הכותבים : הרב משה דוד טנדלר, חתנו של הגרמ"פ, כתב11 :
"חמי הרב משה פיינשטיין זצ"ל היה מודע היטב להתקדמות הזאת והתיר ניתוחי השתלות לב בשנים האחרונות. אכן, שכן שלי שהושתלו אצלו לב ושתי ריאות לפני שנתיים בפיטסבורג (קבוצת ד"ר סטרזל) עשה כן לאחר יעוץ עם הרב פיינשטיין ועם, ייבדל לחיים, הרבי מלובביץ שליט"א."
לעומתו כתב הרב דוד שור:12
"וכעת דברתי עם הרב דוד פיינשטיין שליט"א, בן הרב משה פיינשטיין זצ"ל, והוא העיד לי שאביו לא התחרט בכלל לפני מותו ממה שכתב בשו"ת אגרות משה בסימני מיתה והשתלת הלב."
בירור ישיר עם הרב דוד פיינשטיין13 העלה שבניגוד למצוטט בשמו, אין בידו מידע הסותר את עדות הרב טנדלר, אף כי אין בידו מידע המאשר עדות זאת.
לסיכום, אין עדות הסותרת את עדות משפחת טנדלר על השינוי בדעתו של הגרמ"פ להתיר השתלות לב עקב ההתקדמות הרפואית אך קיים ויכוח חריף על הדרך להבנת הכתוב בתשובותיו "איגרות משה".
לאור ויכוח זה פניתי אל הרב שבתאי רפפורט שליט"א (אשר היה בקשר ישיר עם הגרמ"פ זצ"ל בעת הכנת התשובה הנדונה, לדפוס) על מנת לקבל בכתב את התיחסותו לויכוח הנדון. תשובתו היתה חד משמעית:
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Customized Kids: Parents Abort Twin Boys in Quest for Daughter
Time Magazine
Of course, every parent-in-waiting hopes for a healthy baby, but most — whether they admit it or not — have a preference for one sex over the other. But to what extremes would you go to make it happen?
A couple in Australia — already parents of three sons —have announced they have aborted twin boys in their quest to replace their baby daughter, who died soon after birth. Although sex selection via IVF is illegal in Australia, they petitioned a patient review panel for permission, which was denied. They've now appealed to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal, which is slated to hear their case in March [...]
Of course, every parent-in-waiting hopes for a healthy baby, but most — whether they admit it or not — have a preference for one sex over the other. But to what extremes would you go to make it happen?
A couple in Australia — already parents of three sons —have announced they have aborted twin boys in their quest to replace their baby daughter, who died soon after birth. Although sex selection via IVF is illegal in Australia, they petitioned a patient review panel for permission, which was denied. They've now appealed to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal, which is slated to hear their case in March [...]
Brain Death: View of Rav Moshe Feinstein is not clear & Rav Herschel Schacter says BD is a sofek
There are a number of issues being obscured in the current debate about Brain Death is 1) The position of Rav Moshe Feinstein is a matter of serious debate and disagreement. Furthermore Rav Herschel Schacter takes a much more conservative position than Rav Moshe Tendler Rav Dovid Feinstein did not have firsthand knowledge of his father's viewpoint.
JLaw by Rav Yitzchok Breitowitz
The position of R. Moshe Feinstein, whose psak could well have been definitive at least in the United States, is unfortunately a matter of some controversy. His son-in-law, Rabbi Dr. Moshe Tendler, a Rosh Yeshiva in RIETS and Professor of Biology, Yeshiva College, has vigorously argued the concept of decapitation in Mishnah Oholot.15 His position finds strong support in Iggrot Moshe, Yoreh Deah III no. 132 which seems to validate nuclide scanning as a valid determinant of death. This is also the understanding of the Israeli Chief Rabbinate, R. David Feinstein (who admits, however, to having no inside information on the topic), and R. Shabtai Rappaport, the editor of R. Moshe responsa.16
Others, however, have interpreted his teshuvot very differently, pointing out that R. Moshe reiterated twice (indeed, in one instance two years after the "nuclide scanning" reference) that removal of an organ for a transplantation was murder of the donor.17 (R. Tendler's response: Both of those teshuvot refer to comatose patients in a persistent vegetative state who are capable of spontaneous respiration and are very much alive and not to those who are respiratordependent.) They also cite R. Moshe's express opposition to proposed "brain death" legislation in New York unless it contained a "religious exemption."18 [...]
1. As noted, Rabbi Dr. Moshe Tendler has been the most vigorous advocate for the halachic acceptability of brain death criteria. In his capacity as chairman of the RCA's Biomedical Ethics Committee, Rabbi Tendler spearheaded the preparation of a health-care proxy form that, among other innovations, would authorize the removal of vital organs from a respirator dependent, brain death patient for transplantation purposes. Although the form was approved by the RCA's central administration, its provisions on brain death were opposed by a majority of the RCA's own Vaad Halacha (Rabbis Rivkin, Schachter, Wagner and Willig).20 [...]
5. Rabbi Hershel Schachter, Rosh Yeshiva and Rosh Kollel of RIETS, has taken a more cautious view. Conceding that the concept of "brain death" may find support in the decisions of R. Moshe, he concludes that such a patient should be in the category of safeik chai, safeik met (doubtful life). While removal of organs would be prohibited as possible murder, one would also have to be stringent in treating the patients as met, e.g., a Cohen would not be allowed to enter the patient's room.24
JLaw by Rav Yitzchok Breitowitz
The position of R. Moshe Feinstein, whose psak could well have been definitive at least in the United States, is unfortunately a matter of some controversy. His son-in-law, Rabbi Dr. Moshe Tendler, a Rosh Yeshiva in RIETS and Professor of Biology, Yeshiva College, has vigorously argued the concept of decapitation in Mishnah Oholot.15 His position finds strong support in Iggrot Moshe, Yoreh Deah III no. 132 which seems to validate nuclide scanning as a valid determinant of death. This is also the understanding of the Israeli Chief Rabbinate, R. David Feinstein (who admits, however, to having no inside information on the topic), and R. Shabtai Rappaport, the editor of R. Moshe responsa.16
Others, however, have interpreted his teshuvot very differently, pointing out that R. Moshe reiterated twice (indeed, in one instance two years after the "nuclide scanning" reference) that removal of an organ for a transplantation was murder of the donor.17 (R. Tendler's response: Both of those teshuvot refer to comatose patients in a persistent vegetative state who are capable of spontaneous respiration and are very much alive and not to those who are respiratordependent.) They also cite R. Moshe's express opposition to proposed "brain death" legislation in New York unless it contained a "religious exemption."18 [...]
1. As noted, Rabbi Dr. Moshe Tendler has been the most vigorous advocate for the halachic acceptability of brain death criteria. In his capacity as chairman of the RCA's Biomedical Ethics Committee, Rabbi Tendler spearheaded the preparation of a health-care proxy form that, among other innovations, would authorize the removal of vital organs from a respirator dependent, brain death patient for transplantation purposes. Although the form was approved by the RCA's central administration, its provisions on brain death were opposed by a majority of the RCA's own Vaad Halacha (Rabbis Rivkin, Schachter, Wagner and Willig).20 [...]
5. Rabbi Hershel Schachter, Rosh Yeshiva and Rosh Kollel of RIETS, has taken a more cautious view. Conceding that the concept of "brain death" may find support in the decisions of R. Moshe, he concludes that such a patient should be in the category of safeik chai, safeik met (doubtful life). While removal of organs would be prohibited as possible murder, one would also have to be stringent in treating the patients as met, e.g., a Cohen would not be allowed to enter the patient's room.24
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Tzitz Eliezar - Incest: Obligation to call the police to stop physical & psychological harm
Tzitz Eliezar (Nishmas Avraham 4:208-211): … 2) Concerning the second case where the father is repeatedly raping his little daughter and there is no concern that he will kill her – what is the halacha regarding the previous questions? In my opinion the halacha is the same as it was in the first case where there was a concern for pikuach nefesh (life threatening). That is because the father has the status of rodef (pursuer) after prohibited sexual relations, which are, treated the same as one who is a rodef to kill someone. That is true only since the incestuous rape of his daughter entails the punishment of kares – even though she is just a child but that is the father’s punishment and therefore there is a clear obligation to stop him… All this is in addition to the halachic fact that there is an obligation to save the girl from physical and psychological damage. Thus taking this all together the answer concerning calling the police is the same as in the case of physical abuse. Concerning the cases mentioned there were an additional two questions that were mentioned concerning the law of moser. In regards to the first case concerning physical danger, the parents have the status of rodef and therefore it is permitted to inform the police about them. … just as in the first case of physical abuse if it is clear to him that there is a danger it is permitted to inform on him since the parents have the status of rodef. Similarly it is also permitted in the case of incestuous rape because the father is also a rodef – though after prohibited sexual relations rather than danger to life as I mentioned before. Secondly even if the sexual relationship with the child is not one that incurs the punishment of kares [and thus the rapist would not be considered a rodef] it is still permitted to inform the police. This is so both in order to save her from being raped and also in order to save the rapist from this wickedness. … in our case the motivation is to stop him from committing a sin by informing on him. With such a motivation it is permitted to inform on him. Furthermore it is permitted to inform on him to stop him from harming the young child. … Look at the Shulchan Aruch (C.M. 388:7 where the Rema says that there is a view that if a person is beaten by another person he is able to go and complain to the non-Jewish authorities – even if it causes his assailant great harm. Furthermore the Shach (C.M. 388:45) makes a similar distinction. He says that it is permitted to inform on the assailant in order to prevent the assailant from continuing his beatings. Therefore concerning the present case – it is obviously much more severe than a mere beating. Consequently it is permitted to inform on the rapist – both because it is like the case of an assailant who hits and even more important – so that he is prevented from raping her anymore. It is important to remember that the beis din is considered the protecting father of little children.
Rav Moshe Halberstam:- In case of incestual rape - mitzva to call police & send him to prison
Taken from volume II of Child & Domestic Abuse page 138
Rav Moshe Halberstam (Yeschurun 15 page 646): Let’s return to the original question concerning a wicked molester whose evil inclination forces him to sin and be wicked and it is possible to turn him over to the government in order that he be incarcerated in prison for a number of years until he calms done and returns to Gd wholeheartedly. According to the sources we discussed before it is clear that there is no sin or transgression in handing him over to the authorities. In fact the opposite is true – it is a mitzva because by doing so he is caused to stop from doing the disgusting deeds. In addition we know that the government will not execute him. Therefore the essence of his punishment is that he will be forced to dwell for a number of years in prison. This will be beneficial to him in that they will assign him a psychologist or psychiatrist who will supervise him and his activities with a watchful eye. Perhaps he will be able to find a resolution of his torment by means of this treatment. So in such a case it is obvious that it is a good thing to save him and to save his family from his incestual attacks on them.
Alone together: Is Technology Making Us Lonelier?
Time Magazine
Digital communication is so pervasive that most of us don't even bother to question its role in society. That's not the case with Sherry Turkle, who has tracked the way we interact with computers and artificial intelligence since the 1970s. Founder and director of the MIT Initiative on Technology and Self, Turkle's new book, Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less From Each Other, asks a simple question: do digital methods of communication connect us the way interaction in the 'real world' does? In late December, Turkle sat with TIME to discuss robot puppies, teen texting and what "full attention" means in an age of smart phones.
Alone Together concludes a trilogy of books that started with your exploration of the very first computer programs. Now, 26 years later, we have this giant soup of communication methods. How has that changed our relationship to technology?
It took a while for things to evolve to show [just] where we were vulnerable. This changed dramatically with mobile communication. Who would have known that a little red light on the Blackberry — that doesn't even say who a message is from, but simply that you have a message — would drive people crazy? So [crazy] that if their baby is in the car next to them and they know they can't text and drive, they will [still fiddle] with the steering wheel at 65 miles an hour in order to know who sent that message.[...]
Digital communication is so pervasive that most of us don't even bother to question its role in society. That's not the case with Sherry Turkle, who has tracked the way we interact with computers and artificial intelligence since the 1970s. Founder and director of the MIT Initiative on Technology and Self, Turkle's new book, Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less From Each Other, asks a simple question: do digital methods of communication connect us the way interaction in the 'real world' does? In late December, Turkle sat with TIME to discuss robot puppies, teen texting and what "full attention" means in an age of smart phones.
Alone Together concludes a trilogy of books that started with your exploration of the very first computer programs. Now, 26 years later, we have this giant soup of communication methods. How has that changed our relationship to technology?
It took a while for things to evolve to show [just] where we were vulnerable. This changed dramatically with mobile communication. Who would have known that a little red light on the Blackberry — that doesn't even say who a message is from, but simply that you have a message — would drive people crazy? So [crazy] that if their baby is in the car next to them and they know they can't text and drive, they will [still fiddle] with the steering wheel at 65 miles an hour in order to know who sent that message.[...]
Yisroel Weingarten: Translation of the Zeitung article regarding the visit of major rabbonim
I want to thank the translator who sent me this for completion. This is an unfortunate illustration of great men refusing to acknowledge the horrible and bitter reality of abuse - especially by someone who is a respected member of the community. Abusers typically are not repulsive monsters who hide in the shadows - they are typically friends and family brothers and husbands - teachers and community leaders.
=============================
Historic trip to the "valley of the shadow of death" to visit the great rabbi and scholar Yisroel Moshe Weingarten in prison in Virginia. The most prominent of them was the great scholar Rav Moshe Green - who despite being in very poor health - traveled with great rabbis and activists to bring a letter of encouragement from Rav Tuvia Weiss the leader of the Eida Chardis in Jerusalem.
An extraordinary, historic trip occurred this week onTuesday, when great rabbis and activists led by the great scholar Rabbi Moshe Green went down to Virgina in order to visit the famous member of the yeshiva world and prominent Torah educator - the great scholar and tzadik Rabbi Israel Moshe Weingarten . He was rosh yeshiva of Netivot Hatalmud and produced many distinguished students who are now Torah scholars and G-d fearing men. He is unfortunately now languishing in prison
This distinguished rosh yeshiva the great scholar Rabbi Yisrael Weingarten is greatly treasured and cherished by all the gedolim that he has become acquaintanced with - such as the Satmer Rebbe zt"l, the Minchas Yitzchok and others. He is responsible for raising up a new righteous generation of. distinguished students who are a glory to the Jewish people. Unfortunately as is well known he was incarcerated in prison by his wife and one daughter who went astray. They invented terrible lies about him. They decided that at all costs to have this distinguished man thrown in a dark prison for many long years. They thought that in this way they will succeed in leading his other children away from the true religious path because they do not want any more to be under the pious influence of the father, - as they in fact declared publicly in court. With the help of some government officials, they thought of a way that he should not be able to defend himself, and sent him to prison for 30 years..
The terrible slanderous stories which circulated for a long time were heard by the distinguished rabbis including Rav Chaim Kreiswirth of Antwerp, and Rav Tuvia Weis of Jerusalem. After a very thorough investigation they reached the clear and certain conclusion according to Daas Torah that these stories were no more than slanderous lies. Furthermore they ruled that it was a terrible sin to make these accusations against such a distinguished person and awesome Torah scholar..
When these slanderers saw that the Jewish courts were not taken in by their lies and sinister plans they did not hesitate to leave the path of Torah and go to a non-Jewish court. As is well known these courts are a place which clearly manifest the inherent hatred that non-Jews have for Jews. The judge did not allow him to defend himself and consequently he sentenced him to the horrible punishment of 30 years imprisonment..
In attendance at this trial were many loyal Jews who were supervised by Rav Tuvia Weiss - who had been informed of this horrible situation from the beginning. He wanted to speak in tribute and honor of this great Torah scholar, Rav Yisroel Moshe. However the judge refused this request when he arrogantly made this cruel ruling - even though Rav Weiss is one of the greatest Torah authorities of the Jewish people..
Monday, January 10, 2011
Yisroel Weingarten - a secular legal analysis of his trial
Law.com
Israel Weingarten, the yeshiva teacher charged in Brooklyn, N.Y., federal court with sexually abusing his daughter for seven years, since she was 9years old, was found guilty Wednesday on all five counts.
With 14 federal marshals lining the courtroom, Eastern District of New York Judge John Gleeson warned the audience against emotional outbursts, but the verdict was met with near silence. With its pro se defendant, sensational charges and furtive peeks behind the closed doors of the secretive Satmar society, United States v. Weingarten has transfixed the Brooklyn legal community.
Following the announcement of the verdict, Weingarten, who appeared pro se, told the court, "As I said to the judge in the beginning, I need adjournment because I was unprepared and I was denied that." Gleeson responded, "You have your objection, you have my ruling. I'll see you [for sentencing] on April 3." [....]
Israel Weingarten, the yeshiva teacher charged in Brooklyn, N.Y., federal court with sexually abusing his daughter for seven years, since she was 9years old, was found guilty Wednesday on all five counts.
With 14 federal marshals lining the courtroom, Eastern District of New York Judge John Gleeson warned the audience against emotional outbursts, but the verdict was met with near silence. With its pro se defendant, sensational charges and furtive peeks behind the closed doors of the secretive Satmar society, United States v. Weingarten has transfixed the Brooklyn legal community.
Following the announcement of the verdict, Weingarten, who appeared pro se, told the court, "As I said to the judge in the beginning, I need adjournment because I was unprepared and I was denied that." Gleeson responded, "You have your objection, you have my ruling. I'll see you [for sentencing] on April 3." [....]
Historic visit of Rabbinic Delegation to HaRav HaGaon Yisroel Moshe Weingarten shlita in prison in Virginia
Zalmen Leib wrote, "a. There is nothing wrong with Rabbis visiting even the worst of the worst in prison b. Aside from that, how do you even know it is Weingarten they visited?"
A reasonable question if all you saw was the Matzav article. However Matzav was based on an article which appeared in Zeitung - I have attached the beginning of the article. Even if you don't understand Yiddish you will notice that the headline is what I placed as the subject of this post. It is clear they view him as a great man! Matzav at least had the sense of shame to delete his name - though I am not sure why they publicized this event. I am publicizing the fact that he is being glorified and that is a terrible problem. We see that people who do terrible things are still respected in some circles and thus we have a long way to go.
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Rabbinic delegation visit prisoner serving 25 years for incestual rape
Matzav
This past Tuesday, January 4, Rabbi Moshe Green, rosh yeshiva of the Yeshivah D’Monsey, in Monsey, NY, visiting Richmond, Virginia, to be mechazeik Jewish inmates there.
Rav Green rarely leaves Monsey, or NY at all, particularly since he has suffered two strokes and uses a wheelchair.Rav Green was accompanied by his son, Rav Avrohom Green, and his grandson, R’ Yaakov Flohr. They were driven by car from Monsey to Baltimore, MD, where they slept for a few hours, and continued in the pre-dawn hours to Virginia, where they participated in the daily 7:15 am Shacharis minyan at the Yeshiva of Virginia in the Near West End of Richmond. [...]
They then continued together to Hopewell, VA, for the main purpose of their visit, which was to give spiritual encouragement to the Jewish inmate community at the Petersburg Federal Prison in Hopewell, VA. Among the inmates is a prominent member of the Monsey community. [...]
The conviction of Yisroel Weingarten NYDaily News
The world as a game:Magid of Mezeritch
this is a continuation of the post regarding the dichotomy as viewing life as a game versus as reality. Below is a statement which says that G-d knows that this world is trivial - both its joys and hardships i.e., it is a game to get rewarded and to be taken seriously.
Magid of Mezeritch (Likutei Yekarim page 12b): The tzadik doesn’t get satisfaction in this world. Even though he prays occasionally concerning worldly matters—he is not answered and his prayers are ignored. In truth it is because of Gd’s great love and fondness for the tzadik that He doesn’t answer him concerning worldly matters. This can be explain by the following parable. A king’s small son made a tiny house out of twigs—as children typically do—and someone came and broke it. The child ran crying to his father the king. He screamed and wailed to his father about the great tragedy that had befallen him. The king upon hearing about this “great tragedy” laughed—even though he loved his son very much. Because in the father’s eyes this loss was totally insignificant in comparison to the fabulous good that the king was prepared to give his son. The king also had in mind to build his son a glorious palace of unparalleled grandeur. Consequently the little house of twigs was so inconsequential in the eyes of the king that he saw no reason to take revenge on the person that had broken it. Therefore even though his son suffered greatly by his loss, his father ignored it. It was only a tragedy in the eyes of the child but not to the father who knew that his son was receiving infinitely more significant things. The meaning of the parable is obvious. Because Gd’s great love for the tzadik He will give him many great and wonderful things in the World to Come. Therefore he doesn’t pay attention to the suffering that the tzadik has in this world. He knows that the good things in the World to Come are infinitely greater than that which a person has in this world. He also knows that the good in this world is as nothing compared to the great and strong love that causes Him to give the tzadik the good reward in the World to Come.
Newer Antipsychotic Drugs Are Overused
WebMD
Many people taking powerful psychiatric medications that increase their risk of weight gain and diabetes are prescribed those drugs when there’s little evidence that they will get any benefit from them, a new study shows.
What’s more, experts say that even when these drugs, which are known as atypical antipsychotics, are prescribed as recommended, they may not be safer or more effective than the less expensive, older medications that they’ve apparently replaced.
“Atypical agents were once thought to be safer and possibly more effective,” says study researcher G. Caleb Alexander, MD, an assistant professor in the department of medicine at the University of Chicago Hospitals. “And what we’ve learned over time is that they are not safer, and in the settings where there’s the best scientific evidence, they are no more effective.” [...]
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)