avf previously commented "Young Children After a Divorce Have Nothing More To Do With Their Fathers"
Why Tamar Does Not Have a Get a guest post by Larry Silverstein
Why Tamar Does Not Have a Get a guest post by Larry Silverstein
Commentator “avf” cuts to the heart of the entire matter - explaining, inadvertently, why Tamar does not have a get.
From the very beginning, Tamar has consistently done what she can, with the encouragement and active assistance of her supporters, to severely limit the child's parenting time with Aharon, seeming to take the position that the child should essentially have little or no day-to-day relationship with Aharon. [Even the court Order that the child remain in Pennsylvania because Tamar had kept the child there for so long before trial (as a result of Aharon agreeing to jointly cancel an earlier trial to bring the case to Beis Din) concluded that Tamar’s attitude towards the child’s relationship with Aharon was “spiteful.”] At a a minimum, Tamar devalues that relationship based on the twin, and not coincidentally, convenient for Tamar, beliefs that children are always better off with divorce [if that is what the mother, at any given time, thinks will result in an increase in the mother's happiness], and should subsequently only have one true parent, the mother. (These beliefs are contrary to halacha or any notion of traditional family values and more accurately described as quasi-theological ideology invented by the 1960’s free love / no-fault divorce movement.)
Tamar has been indoctrinated into this position – by those in Merion/Bala Cynwyd who advised her to leave the marriage with a four-month child and unilaterally relocate the child to Pennsylvania – that, as avf aptly summarized, “with young children after a divorce, they have nothing more to do with their fathers.”
When the mother believes the child should have nothing (or relatively little) more to do with the father, it is hard enough for child and father to have a meaningful relationship. But it is nearly impossible if the child has been taken hours away (particularly if the parents are Shomer Shabbos), and the child’s spending time with the father involves, as a practical matter, trade-offs that the mother will (placing relatively minimal value on the child spending time with the father) necessarily believe are against the child’s interests, such as traveling and missing school and other activities. Thus, Tamar told the court that Aharon’s request that the child be allowed to spend allotted time with Aharon in their home would place “an undue burden” on the child and shows that he does not recognize the child’s “need for normalcy and consistency in her routine.” And this is especially so when the child has been taken to a community that seems to be inculcating Tamar with avf’s attitude, while also poisoning the child against Aharon.
Another anonymous guest post by someone who does not know Tamar or Aharon yet somehow has knowledge of their thoughts and motives.
ReplyDeletewhy is James less anonymous then Larry Silverstein? Why should your claims of insider knowledge be accepted and that of other rejected?
DeleteI never claim to have inside information. If I did, I would state clearly what my views were based on.
DeleteI am willing to take him at his word provided he tell us how he knows what he knows. For example, if he had began his post with "Having spoken to both Tamar and Aharon on numerous occasions...." perhaps we could better ascertain whether his opinions have any merit.
As the moderator, you are responsible for the posts but not the comments. If you have verified that the poster has inside information, let us know. If not, the column should not be posted.
Wow WOW you sure know how to take my words out of context and twist them.
ReplyDeleteI was trying to make an observation about the custom and daas Torah , and referencing how this custom is still practiced in lakewood .
Here were my words , "What a load of rubbish !! The Jewish custom has always been that the children go to live with the mother , especially daughters. That is what's still done in lakewood with young children after a divorce , they have nothing more to do with their father's".
Now what was the " rubbish" that I was referring too? It was the posters complaint that if its hard for R Stein and the protesters to travel to the demonstration , then its not fare that aharon needs to make that trip to visit his daughter . Now besides that the comparison was silly, I was trying to point out that according to Jewish custom the husband would not have any contact at all.
Nowhere did I say that this should be the case here. I was just trying to point out the ridiculousness of the complaint.
Now if aharon was interested, and capable of having a relationship with his daughter then kol hakovod within a normal framework , but unfortunately that is not the case here , which is the cause of why their marriage fell apart in the first place.
avf, again you apparently didn't even read the post
Deleteavf: "It was the posters complaint that if its hard for R Stein and the protesters to travel to the demonstration , then its not fare that aharon needs to make that trip to visit his daughter"
The poster spoke about it being unfair for the child to travel, not Aharon.
Bob I already responded to that " but let's be real here aharons complaint has always been his traveling to pick her up or to spend time with her . For rivka to be DRIVEN is not a big deal for a young child with no demands on her time. "
DeleteYou mean to say 4+ hour journey every week that is normal for a child? I feel bad if you think that is acceptable for a childs well being.
DeleteYou really are an idiot , its a 4 hours round trip broken up over the weekend.
DeleteIt is Tamar that has repeatedly claimed that it is against the child's interests to travel back and forth between Pennsylvania and SIlver Spring. And regardless of whether Tamar actually believes that, she successfully convinced the court to impose a vicinity restriction on the child's time with Aharon, knowing that as a practical matter this vicinity restriction would result in significantly reducing the amount of time the child could spend with Aharon because he is Shomer Shabbos. This restriction was in place for more than two years, and was removed only over Tamar's vehement objections.
DeleteSo it too burdensome for the demonstrators to travel from Philadelphia - but perfectly OK for the child to travel back and forth?
DeleteThe July 2009 Order said the trip is three hours each way, and it could be more in heavy traffic.
DeleteWhy Tamar Does Not Have a Get
ReplyDeleteThe real reason is because the Rabbis are feckless and don't have the guts to change the rules slightly such that a get can either be assigned by the besdin or though some sort of other legal fiction.
the answer to u is either u beleive TORAH MI'SINAI or u don't - and apparantly you don't
DeleteCome on! For 2000 years every Jew got rid of every speck of chametz from his abode (a clear d'oraisa). Then suddenly they started selling it to non-Jews and buying it back a week later.
DeleteWith avf's continued false, despicable, and completely unsubstantiated accusations as to Aharon's relationship with the child, avf continues to provide further explanation as to why Tamar does not have a get. How is it possible that the child can have a meaningful relationship with Aharon if the child is raised in the atmosphere of vitriolic hatred against Aharon reflected by avf's fulminations?
ReplyDeleteThe Court ruled in July 2009 that the child stay in Pennsylvania with Tamar because the child had been there for so long before the trial, not because of the parties' relative parenting skills. avf's wild accusations as to Aharon's relationship with the child are contradicted even by the judge who ruled in Tamar's favor as to custody.
The Court found that Aharon “is a caring father and actively participated in meeting the child’s daily needs prior to the parties’ separation” and that after the parties' separation and Aharon's moving out of the apartment at Tamar's demand, Aharon "spent time with [the child] on a daily basis until" Tamar unilaterally relocated the child to Pennsylvania.
“The court finds that both parties are fit and proper to have physical custody of the child and are genuinely concerned about the child’s health, safety, and well-being.”
“The court finds that both parties participated in caring for [the child] during the marriage. As a result of her unilateral decision to relocate to Pennsylvania with the child, [Tamar] has been the child’s primary caregiver since the parties separated in April, 2008. The court heard evidence that both parties are of solid moral character and have a reputation with their friends and neighbors for being loving and attentive parents.”
While I didn't see the incidents that I have referred too. I have heard some from eyewitness that i believe like 2 witnesses. The rest I have heard from friends of tamars which were said over at the time of their separation, and are believed as they were said Lifei Tumah. You don't have to believe me but to me they are all EMES , to you the could be wild accusations , or you could open your mind to a different side of the picture .
DeleteIn addition I have had prior contact with them including being at shabbos meal with them, and everything that was said after fits like a glove to my impressions of them. You don't have to believe me or trust me but you can't discount as FALSE what I've said.
Do you mean the same witnesses that the court threw out because they were caught lying. If you are going to claim things about aharon why dont you name those witnesses?
DeletePlease stop subjecting us to your ora style propaganda. Terms as "other side of the picture". The problem is the readers have seen the other side and they have seen how ora has and continues to spread misinformation the same way that you are doing now.
You claim that you spent a shabbos with them why don't you share your real name so we could verify who and what you are claiming.
How exactly has the readers SEEN the other side ? And exactly who are you and what is your propaganda from ? And when exactly are you going to verify who you are ?
DeleteBasically everything you have said is inane and stupid.
As I said you don't have to believe me , I'm just offering the other side if the story for those who realize that their must be one .
All of the things I mentioned are public knowledge and anyone can look it up.
DeleteLike I said on a different post, tamar vouched for aharons character and it is in the court documents. Either she lied which makes her a perjurer or you are liar with your baseless accusations!!
avf, everyone has seen the other side because Tamar and her associates have been making your outrageous and false accusations against Aharon for four years.
Deleteaveroh gorreres averoh. you start off rejecting the halochos of gittin, you continue by preventing the child from kibbud av voeim, you justify it by sheker claiming father is inadequate. cherry on top you are oyver hamalbin pnei chaveori be'rabim.
ReplyDeleterak ain yiras shomaiyim ba'mokom hazeh veharaguni al dvar ishti - by being mabin pnei chavero.
avf
ReplyDeleteYou are providing further explanations as to why it is harmful for the child to grow up in the current environment of hate and vitriol in the Epstein's community.
"the rest I have heard from friends of tamars which were said over at the time of their separation, and are believed as they were said Lifei Tumah."
Why ? How do you KNOW that these are lies? I've given two reasons to directly believe these reports. One that these reports were said during the time and preceding her leaving their home , that was over 2 years ago before anyone thought their was going to be this whole agunah circus. Second I heard it from a friend of hers which was said over Lifei tumah.
ReplyDeleteNow how do you know that they are false? Also do you know the people involved ? Did you ever in your life even speak to aharon? If you have not, which I would think 90% of the people on this blog have than how can you say its false ???
I have brought you proof by citing where it is has been verified and all for the public to see. all you have claimed is that you have eaten by his shabbos table. and heard from friends of tamar.
DeleteSo either tamar has lied to the court or you and her friends have spread vicious rumors. More reasons why tamar is unfit to care for their child.
You are missing the point. Why were they gossiping about this?
ReplyDeletebottom line is according to rav ovadiah let this woman sit until her hair becomes grey because she refuses to follow halochoh, this fake agunah.
ReplyDeletewhy is it okay for avf to denigrate left and right the husband calling him a rosho but if i refer to her as a female canine which is exactly what she is this is objectionable? that is the problem with cesnorship. it is inconsistent at best.
because the court records show that tamar said that aharon is a good father. So either she is a perjurer or you are a liar!!!!!
ReplyDeleteavf's defamatory conclusions as to Aharon's parenting are coming from an anonymous source, quoting an anonymous source, who are, admittedly, close to the Epsteins, based on two vague incidents. This is supposedly confirmed by avf's un-described observations of Aharon at a Shabbos meal. And, all of these incidents apparently occurred well over four years ago when the child was several months old. Is that supposed to be considered impartial and unbiased?
ReplyDeleteBoth the Baltimore Beis Din and the civil court heard extensive testimony as to Aharon's parenting of the child. The witnesses on Aharon's behalf testified that Aharon is an excellent parent and that this conclusion was based on their having seen him interact with the child (and in most cases their own children) multiple times in various circumstances. Most of the witnesses on Aharon's behalf actually have known the Epsteins longer than they have known Aharon. On the other hand, Tamar and her family viciously attacked Aharon's parenting skills.
After hearing both sets of testimony, the Baltimore Beis Din's interim parenting schedule (expanded weekends and 4 out of the 6 weekends covered by the schedule) increased the child's time with Aharon - which the Beis Dn would not have done if they believed Aharon is the monster your are describing.
It is true that the Court ruled in July 2009 that the child stay in Pennsylvania with Tamar - but that was, the court said, because the child had been there for so long before the trial. The court directly contradicted avf's wild accusations as to Aharon's relationship with the child.
The Court, after hearing two days of testimony, found that Aharon “is a caring father and actively participated in meeting the child’s daily needs prior to the parties’ separation” and that after the parties' separation and Aharon's moving out of the apartment at Tamar's demand, Aharon "spent time with [the child] on a daily basis until" Tamar unilaterally relocated the child to Pennsylvania.
“The court finds that both parties are fit and proper to have physical custody of the child and are genuinely concerned about the child’s health, safety, and well-being.”
“The court finds that both parties participated in caring for [the child] during the marriage. As a result of her unilateral decision to relocate to Pennsylvania with the child, [Tamar] has been the child’s primary caregiver since the parties separated in April, 2008. The court heard evidence that both parties are of solid moral character and have a reputation with their friends and neighbors for being loving and attentive parents.”
Fighting over a child is typical post-divorce behavior among ex-spouses. Regardless of the nature of their personal disagreements, and I am fairly certain that it's been proven psychologically that raising a child in a single-parent home viewing the ex-spouse as a villain (regardless if it's the mother or father) isn't healthy - and the spouse with custody should seek professional help to avoid harming their child. I don't know if either Tamar or Aharon have this attitude, and perhaps both might harbor some level of resentment for one another, which led to the dissolution of their marriage.
ReplyDeleteBut that's besides the point with regard to the get. The get should be given and not used as a weapon against an ex-wife. That is the biggest problem, and Aharon's use of the get for leverage is simply disgusting and unjust.
You have obviously not gone through the large volume of both halachic and other arguments involving this case from both sides - which has been published on this blog. There are clearly major poskim who hold that Aharon has no obligation to give a get in this case and that there are major halachic problems caused by ORA's demonstrations against him which can cause a get me'usa. Therefore as long as ORA and Tamar's friends insist on being abusive to Aharon and his family - there is simply no way she will receive a Get.
DeleteI have a simple rule as a psychotherapist - if a person tries particular technique or approach to life - and it simply doesn't work no matter it is tweaked - then I tell my client - TRY SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
Tamar has wasted 4 years of her life by trying to bully Aharon into giving a Get. Her rabbinic advisors including Rav Kaminetsky have refused to discuss compromise with Aharon because, "She is winning."
So to simply declare "the get should be given and not used as a weapon against and ex-wife...." is true - only if there weren't considerably more to this saga - and there is.