[I need to clarify the original post - which has been understood by some to mean that one should simply call the police in all cases. That is not what I said or meant. My purpose of writing this post is to point out that the process of deciding what to do is not a judicial process - but one of defense against harm. The rules of evidence are much more lenient in an extra judiciary process, there is no inherent need for a beis din or even a rav. However unless there is concern for immediate danger - then one should consult with experienced experts - which includes psychologists, social workers, as well as rabbis who are experienced and are well aware of the surrounding issues. Furthermore regarding a case of a perpetrator who abused long ago and has not repeated his crime and there is no danger to others - than a judicial procedure is required. There needs to be adequate considerations of proportionality - one does not need to call the police if a neighbor allowed your son to watch a t.v. show or his rebbe gave him a hug. Nor should one use a shotgun against someone who might have molested your child. The halacha in the case of rodef requires a focus on doing that which is necessary to stop the harm. If you feel that protection can only be accomplished by the police - then call the police. You do not need to accept the promises that the person did teshuva or assurances that the perpetrator will now have adequate rabbinical supervision. Also in a case of government mandated reporting which is enforced - it is different than where there is no mandated reporting or it is not enforced. In sum - I am saying that focus on protection from danger is the prime concern and the halacha clearly allows a person to do that which is necessary to protect children from being molested. You do not need to get caught up in a complicated halachic piplul - but need to act to protect the children. However it is not a blanket allowance to use any and all means to accomplish it and a person should act responsibly and consult those who are experienced and wiser in these matters - which is not necessarily a rabbi. In fact an inexperienced rabbi or one not knowledgeable in these matters might prescribe a course of action which is naive and harmful to both the perpetrator and the victim. On the other hand, calling the police or social services might also not protect the child and might cause harm. Protecting the children must be the prime focus. ]
One of the major problems in dealing with child abuse is the insistence that it is a very complex and difficult halachic issue that must be judged by a beis din or at least an experienced and competent rabbi. Going to the secular system is considered mesira or as a minimum a violation of the prohibition of going to a secular court. It is also claimed that we need two adult male Jewish witnesses as well a warning and careful investigation and cross examination. Because often these can not be done - it is considered beyond out capability to do anything -if we want to remain loyal to the Torah.
In fact - according to the halacha the above is not so. Reporting child abuse to the police is not in fact a judicial issue. It is a question of self-defense, protecting others or stopping others from sin. These do not require judicial procedures. This is the view of Rav Yehuda Silman that was published in the current issue of Yeschurun. While a beis din or a rav can be consulted - there seems to be no inherent requirement for such. In other words it is no different than the question of whether a judge needs to be consulted as to whether you can deal with an assailant who is beating you or your children or your neighbor. Similarly a judge is not needed to give permission to react to someone who is involved in sin and it is in our power to stop him. Clear circumstantial evidence is enough to act defensively. Reporting a suspected perpetrator to the authorities is not a judgment or punishment - it is done to defend our children from possible harm. Of course it is best if those experienced in these matters - whether rabbis or social workers or psychiatrists - be consulted. But not if the delay would result in harm. Thus the case of prevention of harm is different than punishment for sin - which in fact requires a beis din. This distinction between prevention of harm and punishment of past sin is very important and in fact is often blurred and confused.
Rabbi Yehuda Silman wrote:
One of the major problems in dealing with child abuse is the insistence that it is a very complex and difficult halachic issue that must be judged by a beis din or at least an experienced and competent rabbi. Going to the secular system is considered mesira or as a minimum a violation of the prohibition of going to a secular court. It is also claimed that we need two adult male Jewish witnesses as well a warning and careful investigation and cross examination. Because often these can not be done - it is considered beyond out capability to do anything -if we want to remain loyal to the Torah.
In fact - according to the halacha the above is not so. Reporting child abuse to the police is not in fact a judicial issue. It is a question of self-defense, protecting others or stopping others from sin. These do not require judicial procedures. This is the view of Rav Yehuda Silman that was published in the current issue of Yeschurun. While a beis din or a rav can be consulted - there seems to be no inherent requirement for such. In other words it is no different than the question of whether a judge needs to be consulted as to whether you can deal with an assailant who is beating you or your children or your neighbor. Similarly a judge is not needed to give permission to react to someone who is involved in sin and it is in our power to stop him. Clear circumstantial evidence is enough to act defensively. Reporting a suspected perpetrator to the authorities is not a judgment or punishment - it is done to defend our children from possible harm. Of course it is best if those experienced in these matters - whether rabbis or social workers or psychiatrists - be consulted. But not if the delay would result in harm. Thus the case of prevention of harm is different than punishment for sin - which in fact requires a beis din. This distinction between prevention of harm and punishment of past sin is very important and in fact is often blurred and confused.
Rabbi Yehuda Silman wrote:
Furthermore in the original article [Yeschurun 15] it was concluded that that it is obvious that there is no need to have witnesses that meet the standards required by the Torah but even less than that is sufficient and I cited a number of rishonim. The reason is reporting the teacher to the secular authorities is not punishment requiring a beis din but is an action mandated by secular law (in the Diaspora) or in order to separate the abuser from committing sin. In addition according to the reason that even in the case of a possible rodef it is permitted to inform the authorities – it is obvious that is permitted without proper witnesses since all that is required is that there be the possibility that he is an abuser.
