Friday, November 15, 2013

Weiss-Dodelson: A pragmatic resolution to their conflict

Update See Solution below

Everyone acknowledges that the battle between Gital and Avraham Meir has gone on far too long and is now seriously harming the Jewish community.

Two young people – amongst our best and brightest - are losing the best years of their  lives in a war of attrition that neither is winning and can continue for many years. The wake up call came with three recent developments. 1) The chilul haShem that has been generated by Gital's article in the New York Post that she says was written out of desperation for her freedom and 2) His father and uncle lost their jobs to prevent Artscroll from being destroyed by a consumer boycott. 3) The threat to destroy Rav Reuven Feinstein's yeshiva for his support of his grandson.

Various people have suggested that it is time for everyone to stop fighting over who is right and focus on providing a realistic proposal that will be acceptable to both sides and bring an end to this ma'aseh Satan. I have a  friend whose son was deceived into marrying a mentally ill woman by important rabbis. When the son asked for a divorce, the schizophrenic woman demanded full custody and financial compensation. Our friend told his son not to fight, but to sacrifice their child and get on with his life. Even though he lost his son, he now has a new family and is doing well.

In a similar vein, one gadol has stated that even though it is clear to him that Avraham Meir is right in every detail - he won't fight for him. "If I succeed in defending Avraham Meir I will have to destroy the reputation of many important rabbis and institutions that are critical for our community. I would rather sacrifice Avraham Meir than destroy the Jewish community."

This post then will be devoted to understanding the critical issues from both sides and suggesting a solution satisfactory to both sides - based on pragmatism and not principle. First let me present what I think their pragmatic and psychological concerns are and then offer a solution that addresses them.

Gital's view: 

1)  She doesn't want to be married to Avraham Meir and wants a Get to be able to marry a "stepfather for her son."

2) She wants more control over their son and in fact she and her family want to reduce Avraham Meir's right to access and involvement with her son that had been mandated by the court custody agreement. She and her family don't think that Avraham Meir is a good parent and want to minimize their child's attachment and love for him. Ideally they would like Gital's next husband to be recognized by the  child as Tatty.

3) She refuses to pay any compensation for the severe financial loss of the Weiss Family resulting from the legal fees in this battle. In fact she feels they owe her for causing her to legally defend to that which is rightfully hers. She feels that Avraham Meir is only the sperm donor and her son is totally hers. She feels she should not have to pay for the Weiss'  being obstinate and fighting her for custody of her child but rather they should have simply given up when she moved out and took him away. She was willing to be fair and generous in allowing him to see her son. She saw no need to go to court for custody rights. Consequently she doesn't feel so generous after the court battles.

4) She wants to be acknowledged as rightfully fighting not only for own freedom but that of other Orthodox women who are being held captive by laws that are out of step with modern values of individual freedom. She readily points to the many great rabbis who have supported her and have called for her husband to be ostracized until he gives into her demands. She also feels that her experience indicates a significant change needs to be brought about dating and marriage in the Orthodox community. She thinks women - especially those who are the breadwinners should have greater financial control in the marriage.  She also feels that women should able to obtain a Get on demand for those who are unhappy with their marriage, and have final say over child custody. 

5) Gital is used to getting her way and this fight with Avraham Meir has been traumatic. It is important that she regain control over her life and well as to recover psychologically from what she  views as a demeaning relationship with Avraham Meir. Even though he tried improving their relationship - it was too late because she could never trust him again. Her need for a get is much more than freedom to find a "stepfather for her son." The get also means retrieveing her life from being controlled by Avraham Meir.

6) This fear of being controlled and thus the compensatory need to be in control extends to other aspect of Gital's life - especially in relationship to other people. It played a role in a previous relationship that didn't work out. Thus these last four years have been  torture for her, while the sense of power from intimidating the Weiss' and Feinstein's has been exilarating.

Thus whatever settlement Gital obtains has to not only include receiving the Get - but also clearly establishing that Avraham Meir and his family did not win and that they don't dictate the terms. This view is also shared by her mother and therefore is non negotiable.

Avraham Meir view: 

1). He entered marriage viewing it with the normative view presented in the gemora and poskim that the husband is the boss - but found out the hard way that his wife (like many frum women today) wasn't interested in that approach. His eventual willingness to change his view to his wife's view of equality  was rejected as coming too late. Thus he now has a much more realistic and flexible understanding of women then when he got married.

2) When his wife simply left him with their child it was a major shock. He wasn't used to this helpless state - especially in regards to his own child - whom he loves dearly. Initially he tried simply accepting it as a test and relied on her sense of fairness. However he realized that the good faith relationship was not working out and that in reality she was in total control of his ability to see their child and she was using that power to keep his son from him. Thefore he decided that he needed to formalize in enforceable secular law his access to their son - something that went very much against his training as a frum Jew. Again he learned to act pragmatically rather than what was maximally ideal.

3) His initial belief in rationality - if you are logical - than the other side will eventually agree has been shattered. When his wife agreed to go to therapy, he thought they could work things out and he would give up what ever needed to hold the marriage and family together. When she quit therapy with the therapist she chose - after four session - despite the therapist saying that the marriage was fixable, he realized that rationality in these matters is not much use.

4) His education in pragmatism - and the emotional rather than intellectual approach of women - was only the start of his education in real life. He discovered that going to court cost money - lots of money and that the Dodelson's could play the court system better than his family. As his family was driven into bankruptcy and the stress was severely impacting all members of his family - he became focused on regaining this money that he had been forced to spend to retain access to his son.  He views it as an non-negotiable point to regain if not all - at least a significant amount of money that his wife forced him to spend. It is not just a question of pride. He doesn't want to live the rest of his life paying off the hundreds of thousands of dollars spent - nor does he want his family to have to deal with it.

Bottom line. Avraham Meir is much more mature and realistic about life. His minimum requirements for a get are 1) guaranteed custody rights from a consent agreement ratified by the judge which will ensure that the Dodelson's don't try to take his son away from him. 2) Financial compensation for the lawyers fees that he had to shell out in order to obtain the elementary human right to be with his son. He doesn't have the psycholgical need to win - but he and his family have suffered major public shaming. He doesn't want revenge but he does want the settlement to convey a public message that he and family are not the evil psychopathic creatures that the Dodelson's have successfully conveyed to the public.

Suggested settlement: 

After listening and engaging in discussion on this topic for countless hours I think the outline of a resolution to this disaster has become obvious. The halachic issues have been fully discussed regarding his right to give a get and the requirement to avoid a get me'usa. Her excrutiating pain from being kept in a marriage for 4 years has also been fully and clearly described. I have allowed posts from both sides that I normally would not because of the to'eles that both sides need to know that their pain and indignation  and rage has been heard by the whole world – especially the other side.

There are actually two viable solutions - not one.

1) Reconciliation: I know most people will respond that this proves that psychologists are all crazy – but this is really the best solution. I am not saying this merely as an armchair observer. Gital had agreed to go to marriage therapy contingent on a number of conditions 1) The choice would be hers 2) He had to be a non-Jew 3) He had to live outside their community 4) She would only go for 4 sessions. The therapist told them that the marriage could be saved. Gital wasn't interested and never went back.

 It is clear that returning to a marriage that can be repaired with the person with whom she had a child – is infinitely better than hoping to find someone new. She has already struck out twice – there is no reason to believe that marriage to a 3rd person would not end the same way. Her legitimate objections to Avraham Meir can readily be dealt with by an agreed upon rav that will guide them through future conflicts. Likewise the rav can help Avraham Meir to be more sensitive and accommodating to her psychological and religious needs. It really isn't rocket science.

Rabbi Avraham Blumencrantz once mentioned that he advised all couples to move far away and minimize contact with their families at least during the first year of marriage. He observed that many if not most disputes came about through "good advice" from concerned mothers and fathers. Chazal tell us that when a woman marries it equivalent to be captured by a foreign nation. She needs to understand that marriage doesn't make the husband an extension of her family – but that she and her husband are forming a new family with alliances to relatives. This advice applies equally to Avraham Meir. 

Avraham Meir needs to be fully aware that the ideal of marriage described in the rabbinic literature – needs to be modified according to the nature of the wife. He needs a wise rav who they both respect to guide him in making appropriate accommodation. I have seen too many avreichim who cite Shulchan Aruch and stories of tzadikim when they come for shalom bayis session. As the Steipler put it – he has to understand his wife is not a shtender.

They both have to know the welfare of their son is best served if he has the two parents living as husband and wife in harmony rather than living in two alienated families. Even with the best psychologist and the best intentions their son will be harmed by divorce. In reality divorced couples are not known for their rational loving attitude towards each other – and they convey that clearly to the detriment of their child.

2) Divorce: If the thought of reconciliation makes them want to vomit then here are the outlines of a fair divorce settlement. It is clear that despite all the yelling and screaming about extortion – money is not the main issue for either of them. Baruch haShem, Gital's parents are very wealthy and will not suffer in any way from a financial settlement. They do not however want to give it on principle. However since this is a pragmatic solution which has a single goal – that Gital should obtain her Get – we must ignore who is right or wrong. 

First step: $350,000 should be put in escrow according to both their lawyers advice. Giving of the money to Avraham Meir is to be contingent on his giving a get of his own free will. This step is really the simple one

Second step: This is really the issue that divides them. They are both concerned that the other side will harm the child and therefore satisfactory guarantees need to be provided. The Dodelson's have consulted with a psychologist who has emphasized the need for the child to have one home where he can feel secure. He noted that by having divided custody, the child really does not have a home or identity. Therefore the Dodelson's want a reduction from the court ordered custody arrangement. They also don't want their grandson to be too attached to his father and are hoping that when Gital remarries the child will accept his stepfather as his Tatty.

Awareness of the Dodelson's goal is the reason that Avraham Meir is fighting so hard for a consent agreement which will guarantee that he doesn't have to constantly worry that he will be summoned back to court to fight for his relationship to his son. In addition to the stress, he does not have the money or the time for this fight and he feels this tension is bad for his son – as well as his whole family. He doesn't want his son to be poisoned against him – which is a realistic worry.

I would suggest the formation of a committee of several rabbis respected by both side working in consultation with psychologists who are respected by both sides. I would suggest that Rav Matisyahu Solomon, Rabbi Yakov Horowitz, Rabbi Aaron Kotler and Rabbi Ronnie Greenwald form this group with psychologists of their choosing. I would suggest that both Avraham Meir and Gital agree in advance to whatever decision the committee unanimously agrees to. The issue of custody should not be left to a secular court, nor it should be decided on the basis of advice by a psychologist hired by one side nor should it be the source of ongoing tension. It needs to be decided now. (However if in the future one side feels a need for modification, the committee should meet again and decide the issue.)

If these two issues are dealt with as described, there is absolutely no reason why a get will not be given promptly. Gital and Avraham Meir with then be able to live again – and peace will be restored in Clall Yisroel.


  1. Did you speak to Gital on her view, or are you picking it up from the ny post?
    If its the latter, then again it shows a total lack of integrity.
    If you want to help, stick with the facts, not your twisted view. It's enough you became the Jewish national inquirer blog. You should know, that people like are part of the problem.

    1. I am sorry you are wasting your time reading this blog - please do everyone a favor and go elsewhere.

    2. "You should know, that people like are part of the problem."

      Well said. I wholeheartedly agree.

    3. the NY Post ws written by Gital's side as her pov. why can't it be used to show what she thinks and wants?

    4. Because the NY Post is 1) a shmutz tabloid 2) a secular non-Jewish publication. Take a look at the comments posted on the NY Post website on her "story". It generated vile anti-semitism. Against ALL Orthodox Jews.

    5. It's time for Avrohom Meir to move on with his life and get remarried. He'll make a beis din for the purposes of a heter meah, deposit a Get than Gital can pickup once she meets his demands, but he can remarry right away.

    6. I have to agree with the original poster. You are showing extreme prejudice against Gital and are putting words in her mouth and present positions she supposedly holds based on your prejudice, not on what was said. And even though I enjoyed your other posts that balanced different views beatifully, I am very disappointed that your position here is so biased and you don't even see it. Should I also go get my information elsewhere?

  2. "When the son asked for a divorce, the schizophrenic woman demanded full custody and financial compensation. Our friend told his son not to fight, but to sacrifice their child and get on with his life." - This is an extremely big ask of people. I would think that most people wouldnt be prepared to just 'sacrifice' a child.

    All this is rubbish anyway. All that Dodelson wants, it seems, is to receive a get and thats it. And Weiss is extorting her for it.
    I'm sure she would be perfectly happy to receive the get and then be taken to beis din to sort out the other issues.
    Fact is: The get should not be used as a means of negotiating, as it is a trump card and if once side does not get what they want (in beis din) they can always turn to the get to extort what they want, forcing the other side into misery as no one, not even a beis din can really force anyone to give it. Thats why it should never be used and should just be given.

    1. You keep repeating yourself - based on zero knowledge

    2. @Daniel - "All that Dodelson wants, it seems, is to receive a get and thats it" - Your bogus claims are just more ORA flim flam. Dodelson filed a full divorce lawsuit (as Plaintiff) in the NJ courts. Claiming that Dodelson just asked for a GET in a full divorce lawsuit is utter nonsense.

      The anti-male family courts generally give the women just about anything they demand. When a father then exercises his halachic right to decline to give a GET, then the ORA gangster machine is brought to bear on the father, his family, his employer, his landlord, etc.

      If we strip away the phony facade of ORA and its fellow travelers - then this case has nothing to do with "rescuing an oppressed agunah". What this whole Dodelson case is really about is the same thing most of ORA's cases are about - steamrollering Jewish fathers into giving up their children and giving up all their halachic rights while forcing a PASUL GET out of them at the same time.

    3. Sheker,

      Can you answer if Dodelson filed for divorce before Weiss filed for custody, alimony, & the like, or after?
      Can you answer if the divorce filing was before Mechon Lehoraah held Weiss in Siruv, or after?
      Can you answer if you have any evidence that other than your misguided rantings that the mother is trying to withhold the child in any way from the father? Before you make an abject fool of yourself, remember that Weiss stated in his deposition that THE CHILD WAS NEVER HELD BACK FROM HIM, not even for one minute.

    4. @EmesLeYaacov - you misunderstood not only what I have said but also the facts. Dodelson does not say that IN PRINCIPLE (which is what Eidensohn is saying is her position) the woman should have final over custody, what she does dipute is that what it should be in her particular case. And that should be decided by court/beis din.
      With regard to her filing. She filed for just legal divorce, the court merged it with the previous custody case which weiss began, and called her the plaintiff even though it was weiss who began the proceedings. So get your facts straight please.
      I am going to repeat myself again. Weiss is holding Dodelson to ransom with the get, because there is no recourse to law/halacha to force it. This is midas sdom.

    5. @Foncused - "Weiss stated in his deposition that THE CHILD WAS NEVER HELD BACK FROM HIM" -

      Weiss never said this, you are simply a bald faced liar utilizing ORA's obfuscation tactics. On page 5 of the court_documents_visitation document on Dodelson's website, Weiss clearly states "her attempt to prevent Aryeh being with me on weekends...she continues to fight me spending time with Aryeh". Later in the deposition Weiss seems to say that Aryeh is not being withheld CURRENTLY, but Weiss was being questioned by her lawyer, and most of the deposition has been concealed.

      Weiss's child was abducted and he was originally denied parenting time so he obtained a valid HETER to file a court action so he could see his child.

      Bogus SERUVIM are being constantly issued by corrupt rabbis, usually on behalf of women using non-Jewish courts against their husbands, these "seruvim" simply political weapons being used to justify ruthless persecution of Jewish men fighting for their halachic rights.

      If you claim the current court order is fair and everything is settled, then Weiss has no obligation to give a GET - the court did not order it. Stop trying to overturn the court order, you and your ORA thugs should stop your insane warfare against Weiss because everything is settled.

    6. Sheker,

      Try being honest for a second, it prevents you from looking like the fool you are in front of others. Weiss said that Dodelson is trying to prevent him from being with his child on weekends- and he's clear that the only way she tried to do that was not by physically withholding the child (ever) but by fighting his attempt for expansion of custody in court. Anyone can see that context for themselves.

  3. "and have final say over child custody" - Where on earth do you get this from? Obviously where there is dispute over child custody it should be resolved by artibration, beis din, or a court. I dont think she is saying that its up to only the woman to determine. Each case should be decided on its merits.

    1. Thats a great response. I have a great rejoinder: No, you are wrong. LOL.

    2. Doniel, as you are so unbiased, let us hear your professional opinion as to what is better for the child, from a psychologists point of view. To have done sort of stability living full time with his mother, & the father having court mandated visitation rights that nobody can take away from him so that he can spend meaningful positive time with his son, or making the child sleep in one house 4-5 nights & another 2-3 nights? I'm not saying this is the facts in this case, it's a purely academic question.

    3. why doesnt your sister gital send hazmana? oh right she will be a moredes in the eyes of bes din........ aryeh you and all the kotlers are corrupt and it is sick how a famil like yours can act like this may you burn

    4. Wow- behold the vitriol. Again, I repeat I am of no relation to the Dodelson family but Yossi keeps insisting I am & curses me as well. I for one, when seeing the amount of hate he is leveling against someone he sees as being from the Dodelson family, would not be surprised if he is a member of the Weiss family. Who are you? Is YOSSI short for Yosaif Asher?

      & concerning your Taanah, here's the Siruv, which states explicitly that she sent him hazmanas to Beis din.

  4. Dear Rabbi Dr Eidensohn,
    How is your constant writing about this helping either of the parties involved? You write that the Article in the NY Post was a chillul hashem but yet you posted it on your blog I may have never knowed about it otherwise.
    I once heard Rabbi Ahron Soloveichik quote a famous dictum of the Bais Halevi that is relevant to what is happening now. “Not all that is thought should be said, and not all that is said should be written, and not all that is written should be published, and not all that is published should be read.” Hatzlacha in all your endeavors and we should hear good news.

  5. Reb Doniel,

    Your wife is a wise woman. And you are to be commended for this post.

    I am looking forward to Part Two. Many are already looking to quibble over the details, but let's hear the whole package out first.

    PS : That Daniel that posted above is a different individual.

  6. you quote " I will have to destroy the reputation of many important rabbis and institutions that are critical for our community. I would rather sacrifice Avraham Meir than destroy the Jewish community."
    maybe we have been duped to thinking that these are important rabbis . maybe they should be destroyed and like always the kllal will rebuild without the sheker that these rabbis have been pushing.
    Which one of your children are you willing to give up - Weiss only has one son and you are asking him to give him up.
    torah is torah... sheker is sheker --- don't ever try to combine them. what you are saying that we should look away from abuse to protect rabbis and yeshivas --- look away at the beatings and kidnappings to protect rabbis and important people..
    that's sheker not torah
    stand up for pure torah and strict halacha and hashem will do his part and protect torah and emes

  7. If I am right that the arbitration or mediation efforts have failed and there is no arbitration or mediation taking place, the parties have to go back to the Beis Din – this I checked with a dayan - if they refuse I assume a ' siruv ' would be in order ?

    by the way - the only winners here are the lawyers -

    1. Allan, there is an outstanding Hazmana & Siruv from the most widely accepted & respected Beit Din in America, Mechon LeHoraah. For years Weiss has refused to appear.

    2. As of when has Mechon LeHoraah become the "widely accepted & respected Beit Din in America" and by whose declaration?

    3. Please tell me what Beis Din in America is more respected & widely accepted. If you can't name one, my point stands. If your point is that every Beis Din (besides Gestetner) is corrupt, I think you've made my point for me.

    4. Agudas HaRabbonim is the most respected beis din. Not Mechon L'horya.

  8. The way you respond to Pro-Dodelson commenters almost makes people think you have some sort of negius

    1. Focused, is it you are pro the dodelsons or are a dodelson? I don't have a side here but most of these writers seem to be weiss sympathizers. Why do you waste your time here?

    2. Maybe I'm just a Masochist. Since this Parsha seems to be winding down with one side totally beclowning themselves (& it isn't the side from lakewood) the esteemed Dr Eidenson can spend time analyzing me from a psychologists point of view. And I repeat again, I am not a Dodelson, nor am I related to them in any way.

    3. Foncused my analysis is that you are an honest and perceptive person - who has accepted fully the Dodelson's version of events. At the same time you have the integrity and concern to try and convince the other side that they are mistaken.

  9. "When the son asked for a divorce, the schizophrenic woman demanded full custody and financial compensation" That is AWEFUL! How can someone just be expected to give up their child?

    I do not know the facts, only what the gossipmongerers spread. However, why can a get not be given and a legal battle for custody be pursued? It seems like the only reason to hold off on a get is to use it as leverage if the court (secular or beis din) does not give the opinion that the man's family wants. Otherwise, give the get and let whatever the court decides be the final say.

    Also, I do not understand why the Dodelson family should pay the legal fees of the Weiss'. When you go to court to fight for custody that is what happens, you need to pay a lawyer. It is unfotunate that this happened, but if they can't agree then lawyers need to get involved.

    1. Wrong. Custody halachicly needs to be decided by a beis din; it is forbidden to use a non-Jewish court to decide custody.

    2. Exactly, we have some agreement here. That's why we can all agree that it was wrong for Weiss to go to court to decide custody, & not Beis Din, like Dodelson did.

    3. False, if both sides agree they can go to a secular court.

    4. False, if both sides agree they can go to a secular court.

    5. TP (interesting roshei teivos BTW) - assuming yiou are correct halachically (and I question that you are,) why did Weiss INITIATE these proceedings with a petition for custody in the NJ courts - in other words - you can't have it both ways
      shmuel simenowitz

    6. Even if both sides agree to use arkoyos it is still assur. That being said, both sides did not agree to use secular court.

      Foncused, Weiss went to secular court after getting a heter arkoyos only as an EMERGENCY matter since his wife ran off with his kid. It is similar to calling the authorities if someone takes your kid.

    7. why did Weiss INITIATE these proceedings with a petition for custody in the NJ courts - in other words - you can't have it both ways
      shmuel simenowitz
      please read the Weiss family documents

    8. Has Weiss published the heter arkaos?

  10. אשר פיהם דבר שואNovember 13, 2013 at 3:01 PM

    I don't have a way to resolve this conflict peacefully at this time. It seems like the Dodelsohn's don't want to pay a dime, and want to minimize the visitation of AMW, and are willing to go public and even spend money to achieve what they feel is right,
    The Weiss/Feinstien side is holding on to their halachic right to withhold a get, want a lot of money for their court fees, which may be halachically justified, and are basically telling the world יקוב הדין את ההר. They hold the trump card which is the get, so if they hold out they will win, or they all lose.
    The המון עם is split. The modern orthodox crowd, and the secular world are about 99% with the Dodelsohns, as the secular world, especially liberals, view the Torah world as backwards, even before they speak, or they learn what the Torah says. Just one look at how we dress, and they assume that we are backwards, and afford women no rights. Therefore, for a man to not allow a divorce by a woman is always wrong.

    The modern orthodox try to push the Torah to co-exist with the secular world. That is why they are trying to push for גט prenups, evolution with Torah, technology with Torah, etc.
    The ultra orthodox communities are split as well. Most sympathize with the Dodelsohns. The powerful Dodelsohns have gotten Rabbis behind them, and are pushing strong to win, and to get a divorce for their daughters. There is also an element of extortion, that most women and men, don't want in future divorces. We have all seen this in the past. This is not our first frum rodeo.

    There are some people, who know the Weisses and the Feinstein's as wonderful good people. They trust that their intentions are to get what they deserve halachically, and no more. They realize that they are dealing with people who are desperate, and are doing things that they probably shouldn't do in order to get the get (PR Firms, ORA, NYPost, boycotting artscroll). They see this as a sign that the Weisses are in the right, and are just standing firm and demanding their halachic rights.

    Practically speaking, the only way this gets resolved is with some type of arbitrator and some type of payment to the Weisses. Especially with the loss of job, the PR campaign, the legal fees. RG was he right way to resolve the dispute, but obviously it didn't work. They need to find another arbitrator, when cooler heads prevail, and work out something. It should have some face saving for both sides, and perhaps a joint plan to help the child financially when he is older. There has to be some trust built, or this will never get solved.

    As a suggestion to the modern orthodox world, you should stop with ORA, as they are only trying to get publicity for ORA, and are furthering the stereotype of orthodoxy as being anti-woman and backwards. Their idea is also ineffective, as the beatings, pressure, embarrasment, does not work halachically. The current RCA prenup, doesn't work either as it only causes a financial pressure to give a גט. There is a much better and effective halachic solution. A post nuptial גט על תנאי, if they dont live together for 6 months. You should look into the גט על תנאי as that should solve all problems. It would be much better halachically, in the eyes of the world, and many ultra orthodox would demand it as well for their daughters. It is also possible that if the man after the marriage refuses to write one, and the wife leaves, that the whole marriage will be considered a מקח טעות, and may be able to be annulled halachically. Those who don't sign the גט על תנאי, will have to deal with these types of situations. It is a good idea, and I haven't heard as to why it becoming standard should be any problem. Also, a woman opting out of having her מעשה ידיה to the בעל should be standard as well in this day where most women work. A woman has a right to say איני נזונת ואיני עושה. It is a תקנה for her. It is a cause worth pursuing. This ORA makes a lot of noise, as does Rabbi Avi Weiss, however, is does nothing to help ordinary people.

    1. Superintendant ChalmersNovember 13, 2013 at 3:41 PM

      The idea of a get al tnai was floated about 75 years ago by the Conservative movement and resoundingly rejected by the Gedolim and Poskim. All the letters are collected in the kuntres "ledor acharon" (which is sometimes appended to the second printing of the sefer "ain tnai benisuin.")

      Good try though.

      See here

    2. אשר פיהם דבר שואNovember 13, 2013 at 4:05 PM

      I still have not heard why it would not work as a post nuptial. It makes no difference who suggested it. If halachically it will avoid ממזרים, and מחלוקת, and there is no halachic problem with it, I am for it.

      I believe the idea in years past was a bit different too. It was to never require a גט, and have every קידושין be על תנאי. What I am suggesting is a post נשואין, and halachically should not be different that גט אם לא באתי.

    3. Most sympathize with the Dodelsohns. ..............Forgot the SILENT MAJORITY who sympathize with the Feinsteins and see thru this campaign of harassment.

    4. "The idea of a get al tnai was floated about 75 years ago by the Conservative movement and resoundingly rejected by the Gedolim and Poskim."

      Oh, I thought Uriel gave Bathseva a get Al Tenai, which allowed her to be [adulterous] with David hamelech.

    5. Superintendant ChalmersNovember 13, 2013 at 4:55 PM

      Asher Pihem
      Look at the link i posted.

      Your proposal was rejected resoundingly by all the Gedolei Hador.
      Sefer Ledor acharon is in response to exactly your proposal of get al tnai. (Which was a different proposal than nisuin al tnai, which is the subject of the sefer "ain tnai benisuin.")

    6. אשר פיהם דבר שוא: Read the Sefer mentioned by Superintendant Chalmers for the answer to your question. He provided a Hebrewbooks link to the Sefer why it is no good.

    7. Asher pihem diber shavNovember 13, 2013 at 9:57 PM

      Hey guys,
      Scratch that idea. At least I can say Baruch shekivanti to the idea of well... Scratch that as well. Back to the drawing board !!!

  11. what we really need is a writtn psak from the right person that any get after a demonstration is a get meusa. that would put an end to all these tragic cases and return them to the proper place - a legitamite bais din that will pasken lhalacha - not based on what people want to hear. if i understand it correctly - halacha says that mais alai - the din is she is a moredes and tashaiv ad shetabin
    so where has Rab Dovid been all these years

  12. I am so sorry that Gital and Avrom Meir could not work out their differences. What puzzles me is that Gital's view on marriage is much like my own--modern orthodox view. Why would she ever want to go out with a learning boy? Did her parents force her? Did her school, like mine did, brain-wash her? Learning is hard work and his pay is your pay? Yissaschar Zevulon kind of thing. How could this marriage work out? Perhaps she does not want to have her son emulate his father. Foncused--What does her father do? Is he in learning? Investments? Working stiff? Part of his wife's business?

    If I were to arbitrate or mediate this nasty situation I would suggest to the families that the years of the child fly by all too quickly and they should what....imagine respect each others lifestyle that are opposed hashkafically????

    1. Nice try "observer" obviously sockpuppeting to try & make Dodelson look bad. There's nothing about her view on marriage that can be found in the Post article that isn't indicative of a normal Hareidi world view. Much as you guys may try, and flail about helplessly, you are now fighting a list battle. Lol indeed.

    2. Also, everyone familiar with this situation knows that the Dodelson family finances are earned through the hard work of the mother, while the husband......

      Sits and learns all day.

    3. Actually Gital, in her shmutz NY Post article, attacked Orthodox Jewish practices on dating too quickly, marrying too young, as well as against Torah Laws that only let the husband issue a divorce and prevent women from remarrying with a civil divorce.

    4. Amazingly, people who have had their mods warped with hate will see whatever they want to in any context.

  13. Superintendant ChalmersNovember 13, 2013 at 3:27 PM

    Daas Torah,
    What is your source that
    "2) She wants more control over their son and in fact wants to reduce Avraham Meir's right to access and involvement with her son that had been mandated by the court custody agreement." ?

  14. One short question I'm sure everyone would love if Rabbi Eidenson can answer;

    Is your statement of what Gital Dodelson wants based on any conversation with the Dodelson camp, is it speculation, or is it what the Weiss family has told you.

    I eagerly await your response, it should be very enlightening.

    1. I agree with funcused. She doesnt care about her kid she only wants to have coffee with another man. Her words not mine.

    2. Observer, what happened? I thought you were modern orthodox, like you said earlier? Why would you be so scandalized if the words you quote mean what you imply that they do?

    3. good morning aryeh dodelson (foncused) why dont you go to kollel and learn something instead of browsing the web so when you come home your wife will still be there and than we wont have to talk about you like this in 4 years
      when you dated you said you were gonna learn long term seems like your dropping out already?

    4. Is your statement of what Gital Dodelson wants based on any conversation with the Dodelson camp, is it speculation, or is it what the Weiss family has told you.
      It was based on the NY Post article, Jewish Week article and the Dodelson's web page. As I noted before if Gital or one of her close supporters feels that they are innaccurate I will modify them accordingly.

    5. Superintendant ChalmersNovember 14, 2013 at 1:47 AM

      I don't recall anything in any of those sources regarding increasing control over their son or limiting Avrohom Meir's right to access their son. Please provide a specific source for this assertion. Otherwise, I would suggest that you amend the post,

  15. It Is a Womens World Out ThereNovember 13, 2013 at 4:19 PM

    You Can Speak To Askonim and Dayanim In Lakewood. They Will Tell You There Have Been Many cases In Lakewood where as soon as The Husband Gave a Get He Lost all His Rights. The women went To Family Court Got Restraining Orders against Him, Had Him Arrested on Violations , Took away Custudy and Visitation Rights From The Husband and His Family all While Causing The Husband To Spend Hundreds Of Thousands Of Dollars In Lawyers and Legal Fees , While The women Sat at Home Suntanning With Her Feet Up in The air without Having To spend a Penny Because The Prosecuter and The Family Courtsby Default Work On Her Behalf For Free.

    1. You are correct and I agree with you 100% - but why the initial caps? Seems like a lot of wasted effort just to type incorrectly.

  16. In a similar vein, one gadol has stated that even though it is clear to him that Avraham Meir is right in every detail - he won't fight for him. "If I succeed in defending Avraham Meir I will have to destroy the reputation of many important rabbis and institutions that are critical for our community. I would rather sacrifice Avraham Meir than destroy the Jewish community."

    So sad...

    I guess we have to remember that In the yud gimmel middos, Emes in not listed first. It comes after Rachamim and Chesed.

    1. Perhaps some of that Rachamim and Chesed should be reserved for Gital. It seems to me that this statement can be unpacked as follows: While Gital's position is halachically unsupported, she is NOT going against our tradition, in fact, she is doing what we are supposed to do: relying on "rabbis and institutions." And not just any rabbis and institutions, either. As one would expect from her family background, the rabbis she is relying on are "critical to our community."

      If my understanding of this gadol's statement is correct, (a) Gital does not deserve the vilification she is getting and (b) we are in a very, very perilous situation: in our community, we cannot count on justice from Beit Din or halachic fidelity from the leadership and that our only help is achdut, for which, as Lazer said, Rachamim and RAV Chesed come before Emet.

      Our leaders are failing us. We have nobody to rely on except our Father in Heaven.

    2. so what is torah worth according to this 'gadol' or in my opinion katan. these important rabbis and institutions should be destroyed and hashem will protect torah. that is the basis of all our emunah

    3. dor tahapichos ikesh ufsaltolNovember 13, 2013 at 8:20 PM

      Are you referring to gedolim to the likes of Epsteins and their goon squad, or the kind that hit the fan. In any which case, this is not a jewish community, it is a Sodomite community, Erdo na ve'ereh and even for the haktzakaasa Riva ACHAS habaah elay osu kolo Breishis 18: 21: Rashi. Sounds like the chanifas Hordus aval achinu oto. is it a wonder why we have a such a Dor? Didn't they just recently destroy the life let alone the reputation of Rabbi S in fakewood? And who decides which Ra bonim are expendable, Huh? Kulom menoafim verodfei shalmoynim.

    4. what about rachamim and chesed for the child to have a healthy, viable, and vibrant relationship with his father in the face of a vindictive mother?

    5. ADF- My wife has a sicko mother that won custody of the kids in her divorce. A year later they moved back with their father. We have to remember that our Father in Heaven has the last word.

    6. Toras Emes, I think it was Nathan Hale that said, "Give me liberty or give me death!" Last time I checked, he wasn't Jewish. Sometimes we have to push Emes aside for some other considerations.

  17. How can she reduce Avraham Meir's visitation rights which has been mandated by the court custody agreement? If she can break the law somehow, and is only complying for the get, what can change, so she would keep to the court's ruling after receiving the get?

    1. Vindictive mothers with full custody, which Doddleson possibly is from what I have read so far on this blog, often pose a grave danger to their chidren's well-being by constantly attacking their relationship with their father through psychological manipulation and unrelenting legal assaults .

      See Gital's comment in the Post article where she bizarrely professes that she all wants for Aryeh is to have a stepfather. Her phrasing indicates she places little to no value on Aryeh's relationship with his true father. Given her toxic attitude demonstrated here and in other places, combined with:

      a) her family's (the Kotlers) ENOURMOUS political power in Ocean County


      b) their tremendous wealth,

      there is EXTREME danger that she can continue to wreak havoc on the child and fathers well being by threatening to damage or destroy even their court mandated their time together. She can do this, as has been done before by many vindictive and jealous mothers, by constantly returning to court to reduce visitation with the pretense that it is in "the best interest of the child" -- which of course it is not!

    2. Custody arrangement can be change - if it can be shown that it is in the best interest of the child

    3. What about the second part of my question about what can change regarding this. In the artscroll letter, the Weisses wrote: "Avrohom Meir has been - and is - ready to give a get as soon as the Dodelsons accept the arbitrator's decision as well. The Dodelsons, not we, are preventing the get from being given." What "arbitrator's decision" can be accepted so the Dodelsons cannot change the arrangement improperly?

    4. My apologies for my earlier post accusing you of deleting your own comment. I lost track of where you made that post.

      But the question still remains. If custody arrangements can be changed if it is proven to be in the best interest of the child, what do the Weiss's gain by demanding an agreement that she will never contest the current custody arrangements? She can still always contest them if she can prove her case and the court (and maybe even a Beth Din) will invalidate the current agreement.

      Assuming I am correct (it is possible that I am wrong) doesn't this prove that the Weiss's are after money and nothing less?

    5. Superintendant ChalmersNovember 14, 2013 at 1:49 AM

      If that is the case, what then does Weiss have to gain from any arbitration agreement?

    6. Superintendant ChalmersNovember 14, 2013 at 1:51 AM

      I see my question was addressed below.

    7. Josh I answered your question already. See the issue of consent agreement

  18. Why must you consistently explain Gital’s position in the least defensible manner? Anyone who is incapable of the explaining her position in a manner she herself would agree with is not untitled to express a position. Surely you know the basics of Lomdus! Yet in this particular case you seem to be incapable of even pretending to be unbiased. Why? I don’t mean to attack you, I’m totally bewildered. It doesn’t make sense to me.

    I have a much better explanation of Gital's position.

    Gital was willing to go to any reputable and widely accepted Beis Din. Avrom insisted on a Beis Din whose Gittin are not widely accepted and so he took her to secular court, where he received a verdict he is unhappy with. He is now trying to use to Get to “Get” the terms he feels he deserves.

    Gital feels that since Avrom picked the venue and is not contesting the divorce, the marriage is now over and he must give the Get unconditionally. If he wants to appeal the secular court’s decision by taking her to Beis Din he may do so, but only a Beis Din whose Gittin are universally accepted.

    1. Hopeful why are you engaging in the negative practices you accuse me of? You have not spoken to Gital and verified that my understanding is wrong. Your conjecture is interesting - it just isn't consistent with the facts.

      If Gital wants to modify my summary I would be happy to do so. That is my reading of the NY Post article - which I admit could be mistaken.

    2. You misunderstood my point. Anyone can invent an interpretation of what Gital holds, and in a certain sense only a Navi can truly know if one interpretation is better than another. But here is a question for you. Ask Gital supporters which interpretation of her position is better, mine or yours. Can you imagine that any of them would say yours? Can you say with all honesty that you think there’s a good chance that if Gital herself would choose your interpretation over mine?

      When trying to define a Machlokes, you start by trying to find the strongest explanation for each side. Otherwise someone could explain every Machlokes between Rashi and the Ramban by saying that the Ramban properly understood the Sugya and Rashi made a foolish error. Much simpler than the usual Lomdus approach!

      I could explain your position on Weiss-Dodelson with an uncharitable explanation. You hate the Kiruv movement and want a major Chillul Hashem in order to turn people away from Torah. You therefore want everyone to know that it isn’t AMW who is being cruel, but that Torah itself is cruel (Chas V’Shalom) and hates women. In addition to being rude, such an interpretation would be stupid. Even if you are wrong, I should try to discover the error you are making by explaining your position in a manner you would agree with.

      I’m more sympathetic to Dodelson, but I’m willing to change my mind and have even given you ways to convince me. And I’m telling you that I found your “interpretation” to be offensive. When you can’t find any Gital supporters you agree with your interpretation, it’s time to retract, apologize and start again. I look forward to seeing you give an explanation of Gital's position that you truly believe she would agree with.

    3. "You hate the Kiruv movement and want a major Chillul Hashem in order to turn people away from Torah. You therefore want everyone to know that it isn’t AMW who is being cruel, but that Torah itself is cruel (Chas V’Shalom) and hates women."

      That really is the honest conclusion I came to after reading this blog for a while.

  19. She can claim the child is not feeling well or that he doesn't want to. I know someone that this happened to.

  20. Since everybody is so interested in this case, since RDE wants to help solve the conflict, since this blog went up to over 60'000 visits a week, I propose the following solution:

    RDE: collect the 350'000 $, pay them to Weiss, ask him to give the get.

    1. Avraham Meir probably would give the Get if the Dodelson's would do that - with the additional signed consent agreement not to try and change the custody agreement. these two things and she has her Get! Of course the down side is that I would have a severe reduction in hits - but I can live with that if Gital receives her Get.

    2. RDE,

      1) Why did you erase your comment below to "A duped father November 13, 2013 at 10:47 PM" that custody arrangements can always be changed if it is shown that it is in the best interests of the child?

      2) Doesn't your deleted comment show that the Weiss's are really after money and nothing less? Since even if Gitel agrees in writing not to contest the current custody arrangements, she will always be able to contest them if she feels it is in the best interest of the child to make a change and the court will invalidate the agreement if she can prove her case. So if you are correct that custody arrangements can always be challenged, why are the Weiss's making this demand?

    3. I didn't realize i deleted them - thanks for catching that. Yes custody rulings can be changed if one side petitions the court and charges that the child's best interests are being harmed. I believe the sole exception is if a consent agreement is signed not to try and change the custody arrangment and that is approved by the judge. If the Dodelson's signed a consent agreement not to attempt to change the custody arrangement then the Weiss' would be secure unless they were grossly negligent.

    4. 60'000 visits

      such yachenes men are.( I assume 90% are men)

    5. calling a spade a spadeNovember 14, 2013 at 2:50 AM

      Your assumption is wrong. Tisha kavin sicha yordo leolam says jut the opposite, even the name yachne attests to it. The men are in it for sympathy, despising ORA. I'll spare the rest as in the spirit of al tarbeh sicha im...ved"l

    6. RDE,

      Even if there was a consent agreement, the Court would ignore it and make changes to the custody arrangements if they thought a change was in the best interests of the child. The Court views itself as protector of what is in the best interests of the child and would not care about any consent agreement. I also believe that any 3rd party (would not even have to be a family member) could petition the Court for a change to the custody arrangements if they had information that proves that a change would be in the best interests of the child.

      If the Court will ignore any consent agreement, and if any 3rd party can petition the Court for a change, what do the Weiss's gain by demanding a consent agreement from Gital? Is it possible that this demand is nothing but smoke and mirrors to obfuscate the true Weiss position and this is nothing but a case of trying to destroy Gital's life and maybe to get money from her?

      I have yet to understand how withholding the Get accomplishes anything for the Weiss's and would hope you can shed light on this.

    7. Regarding the consent agreement - I am not a lawyer and simply don't know the answers to your question. I was just offering it as a suggestion.

      No evidence that I have seen would justify saying that the Weiss' are simply trying to destroy Gital - realistically his life is also on hold. Divorce cases tend to elicit this type of rigidity.

      Realistically - I don't think there is any reason that Gital and Avraham Meir can't come to an agreement now and get on with their lives. It seems that there is too much focus on who was right. The present situation is bad for both of them.

    8. RDE,
      You wrote: "with the additional signed consent agreement not to try and change the custody agreement." Are you saying that Weiss is content with the current custody order by the court? Is this only about money?

    9. Point of InformationNovember 14, 2013 at 6:42 PM

      DT - You are getting closer to reality. You are now more honestly identifying the real issues in the Weiss/Dodelson dispute.

      When it was suggested in a comment that you yourself "collect the $350,000 and pay it to Weiss" you responded:

      "Avraham Meir probably would give the Get if the Dodelson's would do that (pay the money) and give an additional signed consent agreement not to try and change the custody arrangement"

      Rabbi, I beg you please stay on this truth - don't wrap yourself in the Torah, halacha, arbitration, siruv,magen, meah d' million rabbonim.

      If you wish to reserve any integrity to the Torah, - LEAVE THE TORAH OUT OF THIS MONEY DISPUTE.

      You said the truth: "Avraham Meir probably would give the Get if the Dodelson's would do that (pay the money) and give an additional signed consent agreement not to try and change the custody arrangement"

      Finally, you admit: He is doing it for the money, not for any Torah purpose.

      Forget about who is the worse spouse; forget about "compensation" and stepfathers, yes, even forget about ORA, feminism or the NY Post aritcle - those are irrelevant subterfuges in this particular case.

      Is it RIGHT for any man, whether a schmoe or a man with big yichus, to make an ex-wife pay cash money and/or trade custody for a get? (you previously wrote that the halacha permits a man to either give the get or not give - so the Weiss makes his own choice).

      Is it good for Torah when men refuse to grant a get unless paid cash money?

      Is it good for today's Jews when men refused to grant a get unless paid cash money?

      Let's talk about those real issues rather rant back and forth spewing off-topic accusations of shortcomings on the various sides.

    10. Is there an actual financial demand from the Weiss side? This claim itself seems to be a matter of dispute, i.e. if such a demand even exists -- as opposed to a demand for arbitration of all marital issues according to Torah law. But even if there is a bottom line financial claim on the Weiss's part, this claim could easily be understood as not only an appropriate repayment of devastating and possibly unjustified financial losses, but also as a level of protection NECESSARY to have the financial resources available in the future to legally protect the father's relationship with his son in the face of the very real threat that Gital will CONTINUE to try to marginalize, possibly even exclude the father from having a meaningful role in his son's life.

      Gital's family already possess "a nuclear arsenal" and has unfortunately demonstrated a determined willingness to unleash a scorched earth policy to belittle or destroy ANYTHING in their path. (yes the Iran references are intentional and compelling when we consider how our actions affect the fate of the Jewish people, even the world.)

      In a quest to damage or destroy the father-son bond, the Doddlelson's, with their enormous wealth and political power in Ocean County, would have both the means and the motivation to marginalizing Rabbi Weiss from his son's life by replacing him with a future and unknown stepfather who will, in their minds, be Aryeh's real "Tatty".

      I speak from experience. I have personally lived through the horror of the above scenario. Nevertheless, "Rabot machshavot b'lev adam, v'atzat Hashem, he takum!", Through G-d's tremendous grace and goodness and my and my family's life-draining sacrifice to stand in the face of a relentless assault on my relationship with my child, a sinister plan failed. My now adult son and I have enjoyed and continue to enjoy a very close relationship. It came, however, at an unrecoverable cost of insurmountable debt, years filled with terrible stress and anxiety, and ultimately significant long-term damage to my and my family's physical health.


      But why should Rabbi Weiss leave himself defenseless to further assaults on his cherished connection to his son? I left myself defenseless by giving my get "on demand" to be kind and generous, after having been brainwashed by ORA type thinking. My get was given without proper legal protection for the promised equal parenting rights I was promised to have with my young son. The get was given just a few days after we had separated, and I paid a devastating price for the next 12-15 years.

      Any father who values a close relationship with their children needs to know that they must make reasonable effort to prepare themselves for such a scenario, rachmana letzlan.

      This is not to say that vindictively withholding a get is EVER justifiable. Of course it is not! It is clearly an evil thing to do.

      But at the same time, the get needs to be given with substantive but reasonable defensive efforts made to withstand a possible assault on the father/child relationship -- just in case a vindictive ex-spouse decides to pursue such a wicked plan. It would seem, based on Gital's own words in the NY Post article, that she is deservingly suspect in this regard.

  21. Your presentation of "Gital's view" is slanted and one-sided. Take for instance this:
    "She refuses to pay any compensation for the severe financial loss of the Weiss Family resulting from the legal fees in this battle." The Weiss family initiated court proceedings. The Dodelsons wanted to remove the case to BD. Weiss LOST the court proceeding that he initiated. No court has ever granted legal fees to the losing party - especially if that party initiated the proceedings! She isnt refusing to pay his fees any more than you are refusing to pay the fees.
    You also claim as a fact that the NY Post article was a chilul hashem. Why? Was the Kolko article a chillul hashem? No. Kolko was the chillul hashem. In this case, Weiss is the chillul hashem. The takeaway from that article for the vast majority of readers was that Weiss was manipulating Torah law to torture Dodelson.

    1. James am I correct in assuming you are basing your opinion entirely on what Gital wrote in the Jewish Week and NY Post articles.

      Regarding the Chilul hashem - even some of Gital's major rabbinic supporters were horrified by the NY Post article and viewed it as a chilul hashem.

      I do agree with you most non-Jews, secular Jews and Modern Orthodox Jews viewed the article as "proof" that Avraham Meir was abusing Gital. However from the feedback I have gotten - Chareidi readers were horrified at Gital's obvious ignorance of halacha and magnifying difficulties into insurmountable problems.

    2. That is not correct. I am basing my opinion on the evidence provided. The Weisses seem to make assertions that are not supported by evidence. When the Dodelson's make an assertion, they back it up. The Weisses said that dodelson agreed to arbitrate. The Ddoelsons provided emails proving otherwise. Even the eventual Greenwald letters state that the dodelsons never agreed to arbitrate.

    3. Which obvious ignorance of halacha?

      Are you saying that according to halacha, a husband is not obliged for his family?

      Are you saying, that according to halacha, a husband gets to chose his wife's gynecologist?

      Are you saying that according to halacha, a husband can tell his wife how to spend her own hard-earned money, even if he does not contribute one penny to the household?

      Are you saying that according to halacha, it is right to give the young bride the silent treatment on the first shabbes together?

      Are you saying that according to halacha, a man should man-handle his mother-in-law?

      Are you saying that according to halacha, a man is entitled to alimony from his wife or ex-wife?

      Are you saying that according to halacha, a man is entitled to child support if he gets custody of the child?

    4. Re: the wife as the working spouse so therefore she obviously controls all financial decisions -NOT!

      Gital married someone in learning, as that is the "highest" dream of almost every Lakewood girl. She chose to be in a marital partnership with a learner so she could get the Kavod of having a socially prestigious shidduch, but takes NO RESPONSIBILITY for her decision.

      If she is working and her husband is learning by their MUTUAL CHOICE, then it is clearly a partnership where her earning power certainly does NOT entitle her control of all family finances!

  22. I don't feel confidant that I know the true story well enough so I will not take any position in terms of taking sides. I would like to make 2 points.

    1. You write what she wants in her personal situation. This is important in order to know how to negotiate. But in your point 4 you write how she wants to be acknowledged etc. To that I say that since you mention a quote about "making a sacrifice in order not to destroy the Jewish community", I would sooner sacrifice everything, before I would allow a young lady with a marriage gone sour to be the Moreh Derech of Klal Yisroel.

    2. If a bull barges into the room, you can't reason with it. You do what ever it takes to save as much as you can, starting with your life. The bull will trample and destroy and there is nothing to say that will convince it to stop. That is, until it is satisfied that it got what it wants and is lured out of the room. Unless, of course, you feel that you can overpower the bull, and you are willing to chance it and give it a try. However, if the Midah of Nitzachon will lead him here to fight the bull against what the better judgment would suggest, then the best he can hope for is that on his tomb stone it will say that he was right and innocent. When a person is faced with an opponent who, as it seems to the person, doesn't respond to reason or Yoisher, the person is faced with 2 choices. Fight or concede. The better judgment says weigh carefully what you might lose, assess the probability and act accordingly. In this case the better judgment says save yourself from the bull. I don't know who the bull is. Maybe both are, in the sense that the other person sees them as not responding to reason or Yoisher. So the Rabbanim should suggest to which ever party will listen and choose to take the reasonable step, to stop fighting a losing battle. I wouldn't even consider this the lofty attribute of Maavir Al Midoisov, because there really is no choice when attacked by a bull. If neither party assesses the situation this way, then the fight will go on. So they should be explained this.

  23. Following the logic of my first comment, the man who sacrificed his son and moved on with his life, really didn't sacrifice anything, because for the sake of any valuable relationship, he lost his son anyway, so now the question is just how much good money would be thrown after bad, so he decided to make no additional sacrifices and end it early when his son was his only sacrifice, and before his list of sacrifices grew exponentially to include, as one of the many items, his son.

  24. RDE,

    I wonder where your analysis of Gital's position comes from. It does not strike me as a fair portrayal. Anyone reading what you wrote is inclined to look unfavorably upon her position. She may very well be wrong in all this, but I don't think she would agree with your writeup of her position (for example, that "women should able to obtain a get on . . . and have final say over child custody"). If you have a source that shows otherwise, please share it. Otherwise you are unfairly painting her as a real agitator against Torah.

  25. Frankly, I am sick of this whole business. She comes off as a piggish self-riteous machshefa. The Kotlers and Lakewood will have a hard time the next time they come to me for a donation. I think Artscroll is usid litain es hadin for allowing these idiots to bring about the loss of livelihood for people who are not involved. I think this Weiss guy should give the get and thank Hashem that he is done with these people. I wouldnt be mischaten with either family based on this episode.

  26. " She refuses to pay any compensation for the severe financial loss of the Weiss Family resulting from the legal fees in this battle. "

    Why would she pay his legal fees? Is he paying her legal fees? On what halacha do you base the claim that he is entitled to get his legal fees back from her, and not she from him?

    1. Why do you think she didn't ask him to pay her legal fees?

    2. Well, as far as I understand the story, this guy never earned a penny in his life. So I suppose that she knew she would never see the money, even if he was condemned to pay her legal fees.

      You did not answer the question about the halachic basis for his claim.

    3. "Blatant" : Your blatanlty disparaging attitude that "this guy never earned a penny in his life" expresses the typical hypocrisy of many families with money in the learning world. They often respect learning for reasons of social prestige, but when a conflict arises, money rules the day! The value of learning full time is thrown out the window! Those who were once considered the pride of the Jewish people as our future leaders and talmedie chachamaim are now framed as "shleppers or freeloaders".

      Basically Gital seems to have married a full time learner for kavod, but after she was married and even more so now, money and earning power is all she and her family evidently respect! How disgustingly hypocritical!

  27. Rav Doniel,

    I commend you for this post. Although, I would ask you respectfully to please be mindful of and lessen the seemingly cynical tone you use when trying to describe the situation and specifically Gital and the Dodelson's. I know you are close with the Weiss side and believe them, but when writing a post that is supposed to "help," based on the appropriate comment from your wife, please try and stay unbiased and not cynical towards one side. Meant with much respect.

  28. yossiNovember 13, 2013 at 5:50 PM asked
    “why doesnt your sister gital send hazmana?”
    Um. She did. Which Wiess ignored, hence the Siruv
    Daniel SNovember 13, 2013 at 1:30 PM
    Reb Doniel,

    “Your wife is a wise woman. And you are to be commended for this post. “
    Your wife is wise. You less so. A very one sided attempt at being even handed.
    E-ManNovember 13, 2013 at 5:51 PM
    “False, if both sides agree they can go to a secular court.”
    Well the Sa (CM:26) disagrees with e-Man!!!
    HopefulNovember 13, 2013 at 5:23 PM
    “Why must you consistently explain Gital’s position in the least defensible manner? Anyone who is incapable of the explaining her position in a manner she herself would agree with is not untitled to express a position. Surely you know the basics of Lomdus! Yet in this particular case you seem to be incapable of even pretending to be unbiased.”
    I have to second this. I lost a lot of respect for the blog owner over this incident

    1. Joe,
      Look, in any negotiation, it's just not going to be perfect. I accept your diyyuk, but everyone here is jumping all around before we even heard Part II.
      DT's behavior was, as of last night, becoming totally indefensible. I choose to believe he's starting to see the light. Hence, this post, and the eerie silence from him on the comment boards. When the truth stares you in the face, big people are able to own up to it accordingly.
      Bottom line, let's give him a chance. This post was at least a move off his irrational defense of a m'agen, which was rock solid until today.
      Everybody needs to take a deep breath and see where he's going with this.

    2. I gather you are trying to be insulting - haven't figured out what your problem is yet.

    3. I assume that last comment was sent my way, not Joe's.

      I must be frank. Your writing on this issue -- but definitely over the last 48 hours -- has left me with the strong impression that you haven't been upfront with your readership regarding your involvement with this case.

      I've been a quiet follower of your blog for a long, long time. I'm hoping I'm wrong. I know how much work you put into dissecting this whole sugya, and you've reviewed countless sources, Rishonim, Acharonim, Poskim. Between you and your brother, how many gig have been expended reviewing the inyan?

      And yet, with all that scholarship, a lot of us still feel -- from a very deep place -- "you don't pasken this way". It's not תורה, and it certainly isn't דרכיה דרכי נועם.

      You've been deaf to any other way of thinking but your own. And if it's because you've studied the sugya forward and backward, and your convinced....well and good.

      If it's something else, then we've got a Hershel Goldwasser kind of problem. I'm hoping I'm wrong, I really am.

      Since you asked, that's what's bothering me.

      "Sunlight is the best disinfectant."

  29. For the record, I don't think YOSSI is YAW, I just think it's fun to tweak him that way.

  30. I am not going to bother reading all these comments, so I may be repeating something here.
    1. Someone in a civil marriage who wants out MUST file for divorce ... she wanted out and she filed for divorce. However, custody could have been "arbitrated" from the get go. HE - WEISS to HER to court for custody and at the time also asked for alimony and legal fees paid. The official court document shows him as plaintiff and she as defendant and the court gave HIM legal joint custody with reasonable split and denied him the alimony and legal fees. HE DID NOT LIKE THAT and wants more.
    2. I can assure you - that NO court would give a mother diagnosed with schizophrenia sole custody or even residential custody of her child. Your story is hogwash. He could have easily gone to court and asked for an evaluation of the mother and if she had an actual diagnosis of schizophrenia he would have gotten his custody.
    3. According to what your wife asked of you, you have yet to respect her wishes as you have presented everything here that you can possibly think of in biased favor of Weiss. You present no reasonable solution. You want Weiss to get paid for taking HER to court for custody? Seriously, you call that reasonable? I and many others refer to that as "extortion" He needs to hand over a Get - period!

    1. Lament I admire your confidence - but you are wrong. In general you are simply repeating what has been repeated before.

    2. You can not argue with a legal court document - and YOU are. He is plaintiff, she is defendant. He should have accepted the civil divorce stipulations and given her a Get 4 years ago. You want to keep arguing everything that followed ... it is MOOT!

  31. I am such just a husband who was brainwashed by the ORA liberal type thinking. I gave my "get on demand" to be nice and kind, without realizing the vindictive nature of my ex and the danger I was putting myself and my young son into by doing so without proper legal protection.

    My family and I spent the next 15 years and went into insurmountable debt fighting to legally protect my relationship and visitation time with my son.

    Thank G-d we succeeded but at a devastating cost in terms of emotion financial and physical health from which I have never really recovered. All my ex ultimately succeeded in doing is in probably shortening the lifespan of her son's beloved father - myself - a father he was always very attached to and which he continues to be very close to as a young adult, baruch Hashem!

    1. @A duped father - Your comments are very insightful and shine a great light on Ohr-rah's darkness.

      ORA's sickening public propaganda onslaught against R. Weiss has repeated itself over and over in prior divorce cases, only on a smaller scale. Now the ORA goons are dragging the Jewish husbands and the Torah through the feminist sewer in front of millions of non-Jews.

      The methodology of the ORA BIRYONIM is to force a GET using ruthless pressure against the husband, which then allows the ex-wife a free hand to engage in unrelenting legal assaults on her ex-husband. As you mentioned, Dodelson's callous stepfather comments should be a sharp warning to R. Weiss about Dodelson's true intentions.

      Please continue to warn naive Jewish men that if they succumb to the ORA propaganda machine, and rush to provide GITTIN to vindictive women, they could lose all connection with their beloved children.

    2. I am sorry to read about your story, but I don't believe giving a Get upfront minimized your negotiating position. Even if you would not of given a Get until after you were satisfied with a custody arrangement that you obtained via the so called "leverage" of withholding the Get, your ex could of still fought you and petitioned the Court or Beth Din to make changes. If it was in her nature to fight and be vindictive, you would of had the same legal battles regardless. Withholding the Get, would probably of made her even more vindictive and would of cost you (emotionally, financially and in health) even more.

      I am still waiting for someone to show me how withholding a Get accomplishes anything except cause pain and prevents either party from moving on with their lives.

    3. Just the Facts -" Withholding the Get, would probably of made her even more vindictive and would of cost you (emotionally, financially and in health) even more"

      You are making a wise and considered observation. I honestly do see the valuable point you are making about withholding a get as a risk to further inflaming a hostile spouse to be even more vindictive.

      But, at the same time, I think there is a middle ground of not "withholding a get" unreasonably, but of waiting until a fair and equitable custody/visitation arrangement is decided -- first by a mutually agreed on Torah-based arbitrator/bais din, then to be finalized in court with as strong a consent agreement as is legally viable (as per Rav Eidesohn's previous suggestions).

      I would like to highlight 3 points in this proposed middle ground, which I am suggesting.

      1) An ORA type "get on demand" places the father/child relationship at great risk. An equitable visitation/custody decision needs to first be made by a bais din and then signed into law with as strong legal safeguards as is possible.

      2) There should NEVER be extortion with a get , but if both parties agree to abide by a mutually chosen and respected bais din, then waiting to give the get until after that decision is rendered is not only not extortion, but paves the way for a peaceful conclusion.

      3) The siruv on Rav Weiss from the Monsey bais din is not meaningful, as both parties must MUTALLY agree to the composition of the Bais Din. Nor is it reasonable for Rav Weiss insist that his wife must go to Rav Gestetner's Bais Din to receive her get. With zabla, even if husband and wife have very different ideas of how the bais din should look, it is possible to find a mutually agreed upon composition for three dayanim.

      Even more simply and less prone to conflict would be if a single Torah-based arbitrator could be agreed upon before the marriage. Ideally, a prenup should specify who the arbitrator/bais din would be in case of divorce. Thsi would greatly reduce the chance of explosive conflict, should there, G-d forbid, be a divorce.

  32. Here are my 2 sense. I and most of us truly have no idea who is right and wrong without first listening to both sides. Whether Dodelson created a chilul hashem by going to the secular media really depends on whether she is right or wrong. If she is wrong, tremendous chilul hashem. If she is right and Weiss is a bum, who can blame her for going to the press and try to put pressure on him. the chilul hashem is on him. But hardly anyone knows the truth so most of the comments are silly.

    There are 2 things I read that she wrote in her own words which to me indicates that she is not a simple person to deal with. First is that she complained that her husband did not want her parents in the waiting room when she was giving birth and then pushed them out. If he did that, it was wrong, but what on earth were they doing there in the first place? why would she allow them to be there? the parents werer clearly making their presence felt where it did not belong. In fact, her allowing them there indicates that she was unable to recognize that as a married woman her husband comes before her parents. I invite anyone to argue with me and tell me that it is pefectly normal to have the girls parents in waiting room and entering the birthing room shortly after birth. This is indicative of an issue on her side which might shed some light into what went on when they aregued about whose minhag to follow at candle lighting.

    Secondly, no matter what the issues are, when the mother picks up her baby and runs back to Mommy and Daddy, she has just unilaterally declared that the marriage is dead. SHe pulled a move that was unconsionable, though unfortunately I have heard it being done more often in our community. If her parents had any decency, they would have sent her right back home. Stealing the child is just a horrible thing to do. Is he not a 50% partner. What kind of nonsense is this? Based on this act alone, I find it hard to believe anything she says.

    1. "that she was unable to recognize that as a married woman her husband comes before her parents."

      That's a strange take on things, as if, during a birth, the most important thing was to make the husband feeling important...

      To me that signifies that probably she did not really feel loved and cared for by her husband, so she prefered her parents to be there. And his behavior, as described, was definitely completely wrong.

      I suppose she was ready to take his abuse to a certain degree, even when she was pregnant, but she did not want her child raised by a fahter who seems not quite able to see any needs but his own and is ready to compromise his child's health and wellbeing for the sake of his egoistic wishes.

      I think it would have been abusive to send her back to her husband, and I wonder how a person purporting to fight against domestic abuse can publish such a comment without at least calling such a position into question.

    2. your 2 sense? is that like your 6th sense?

    3. You are crazy if you think you can tell a birthing women who she should want around her. Whatever makes her feel comfortable is the right answer. Including turning on a light for a blind midwife if the birthing woman so desires. For some people, even in perfectly wonderful marriages, it's not the husband. But then, you are probably one of the posters here who thought it was perfectly normal for a husband to have to approve his wife's obgyn. Here's a hint: IT"S NOT NORMAL.

  33. Court documents state that Weiss tried to sue Dodelson for child support.

    Where does halacha allow a man to sue his wife for child support? Does the husband not take upon himself to provide for his children?

    Weiss sues Dodelson for Life insurance and health insurance. Where does the halacha permit him to extort health insurance from his wife or ex-wife?

    This alone proves that Weiss does not care one bit for torah or halacha.

    Who could take a person like this seriously.

    RDE, you are misguided by your brother, and your position in this case really makes you look bad.
    I think this

    1. This is a crucial point, because poster Emes L'yakov, as well as R' DE, constantly harp on the point that all money, including those she personally earns, belong to the husband, because al pi the kesubah, he takes it upon himself to support her. Hmmmm..... so how does his demand for child support, health and life insurance jive with this? Weiss seems to want both ends of the stick here. To those posters here who claim he is only demanding what is rightfully his according to halacha, please do tell us how her paying for his health and life insurance and CHILD SUPPORT or alimony is his due right according to halacha?

    2. @tootired - "Emes L'yakov, as well as R' DE, constantly harp on the point that all money, including those she personally earns, belong to the husband" -

      You're just babbling nonsense here, I never said any such thing as you claim. The primary issue I'm protesting against here is the vicious, unjustified, anti-Torah jihad being waged against the Weiss's and the Feinsteins by the Dodelsons and their feminist attack dogs like the YU O-RAH and Shira Dicker.

    3. Actually, you've said that dozens, if not hundreds, of times on these pages. That all marital assets, including money she personally earns, belong to him. Just because you're rude enough to call tootired babbling nonsense does not make you right. It makes you look even more wrong. Back to the substantive point, how is demanding child support and other income from her a matter or claiming what is his, halchicly? (Here's a tip: when you don't answer questions, you look wrong)

    4. @(Not so) Frum One - "you've said that dozens, if not hundreds, of times on these pages" -

      Just show me one posting I made where I claimed all marital assets, including money earned by the wife, belong to the husband. You can't, because you're a lying OH-RAH troll.

      Evidently OH-RAH feminism needs to be classified as some type of mental disorder. What is it about OH-RAH feminism that causes severe delusions and lack of integrity in those suffering from it?

    5. Once they were in the court system, which Rav Weiss had a heter to go to in order to preserve his time and relationship with his son, you can't expect he and his lawyer to file court papers all inaccordance with halacha! Especially when the other side is not committed to the same and the courts are deciding based on American legal rules and not halacha!

      Ideally, all claims should have gone to a bais din/arbitrator in the first place where halacha should rule. The problem seems to be that she insisted on her bais din and he insisted on his and they could not come to an agreement.

      Nonetheless, he did not have proper time with his son as she seems to have been withholding their time together. You can see this in her OWN words in the NY Post article, where she says she"packed up Aryeh and left" to her parents house - a unilateral move that made NO accommodation for his needs and his child's needs to be together.

      With the conflict over how the bais din would be composed not coming to a conclusion, it is VERY understandable why Rav Weiss, had no choice but to go to court, with a heter no less, too preserve his time with his son - at least until a bais din could be agreed upon.

      Evidently the snowballing animosity and pressure of court proceedings swamped any movement towards a mutually agreed upon bais din, The end result was that they never made it to the point of agreeing to this critical step. and now, as a result, there is this ongoing disaster.

      Lesson for all present and future couples: make an agreement in advance, before there are insurmountable problems, that in the case of divorce, G-d forbid, both parties have committed in writing as to who will decide the resolution of all marital issues. Of course, such an agreement is not fully enforceable, but it certainly lessens the chance of all-out war.

  34. Concerned about LakewoodNovember 14, 2013 at 3:47 AM

    this is mind boggling there is over 100 active divorces going on now in Lakewood alone forget about new York why is everybody busy with this one only??
    why are certain rabbonim taking side on this and not dealing with all the other cases something very wrong here?

    1. They dont care or have the guts to get involved and help these couples. Its a wild west kol dealim guvar.

  35. Even if the PR consultant advised hit piece in the New York Post is to be taken as the whole and complete truth and there is no other side to this story (which if anybody believes is the case, I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn), the behavior Dodelson describes does not amount to abuse. If Dodelson has indeed decided, based on the behavior she describes in the NY Post, as @blatant claims that Weiss should not have any real role in raising the child, that would go along way towards explaining why Dodelson does not have, and indeed should not have, a get.

    1. On the contrary. The court documents show that the dodelsons were forthcoming with visitations rights, 2 days a week plus every other weekend plus a holyday schedule.

      Nothing in the documents shows (nor does AMW claim) that the child was withheld from the father.

      But the court documents show that AMW sued for child support and alimony! (and sole custody). Just, tough luck, it did not go as he thought.

      The court documents also show that several mediation attempts were made. Furthermore, documents show that Dodelson wanted to mediate in a rabbinic context before AMW went to court to claim sole custody for his child.

    2. A mother in court nowdays absolutely MUST offer generous visitation unless she has VERY strong and solid evidence by secular standards that the father is unfit. If the mother does not offer generrous visitation, she risks being seen as obstructive of the relationship with the other parent and could lose custody. This does not prevent her from later on, once she has been given custody from undermining the father's relationship with his child through psycholigical manipulation and further legal assaults.

      The court documents also do NOT in any way address what was going on in terms of Gital allowing generous visitation BEFORE court papers where filed. It seems to me, from my reading of the situation, granted without first hand-knowledge, that Gital was withholding Aryeh from his father, whic foced Rav Weiss had to go to court, witha heter, to secure time with this child

  36. 100 active divorces??? What are you smoking?

  37. The ignorance on this web site is breathtaking. Eman it is mfurash that even if both sides agree it is completely issur to go to arko"oys.

    If a toveah takes a nitvah to arkooys there are viable opinuons rhat nirvah can claim money he would not get in bais din as a knas. Since weiss claims doselson is the plaintiff he is fully allowed to ask for alimony inaurance etc

    However a toveah who has a hetter arko'oys cant take more ac5cordinf ti most opinions.

  38. Daas Torah,

    It is possible that I am wrong and it is possible that you are wrong.

    We are all human, and we must have the humility to recognize that no matter how much evidence we have and how smart we are the very nature of being human means that we are fallible. After all there are plenty of smart people – and even Talmidei Chachomim – on both sides of the aisle. By definition, in this case and in millions of other disagreements very bright people are wrong all the time.

    Therefore, I call on you to be pragmatic. If you are wrong in your halachic positions on divorce, then you are guilty (by promoting these wrong views) of causing enormous suffering to hundreds of women whose husbands are not giving them a Get.

    The path is open to you to follow R’ Shmuel Kamentzky and others whose opinions whether in this case or in many other cases are much more favorable to the woman and would make it easier to obtain a Get.

    The spiritual danger of your opinion is clear. By going “all in” – by adopting opinions which make it more difficult for a woman to receive a Get - you risk destroying your humanity, decency, and compassion in the event that you are wrong about the Halacha, and you are acting with great cruelty by causing hundreds of women to be stuck without a Get.

    The Neturei Karta also think they are right – and we recognize that the Neturai Karta are wrong – and look how they destroyed themselves spiritually by hugging Arafat and the President of Iran. Look how religious Muslim fanatics have destroyed themselves spiritually (by murdering men women, and children) – and they are convinced they are doing a good deed – instead they could have adopted the path of a peaceful brand of Islam.

    As you have repeatedly said when responding to me and others, that we are only saying these opinions because we don’t know the halacha and we are influenced by Western values. In other words, you agree that if not for your sources, the natural ethics and morals would lead us to believe that the husband should just give the Get (as the rest of the world believes).

    My advice is, don’t adopt opinions which do terrible harm to people when there is another halachic path available (R’ Shmuel Kamentetzky and others) whose ways are peaceful. Remember, I want a win-win situation where both sides can be happy – and I believe the Weiss’s have received a very fair custody deal from the courts (2 nights a week plus every other weekend), and the couple has no money or house to fight over. If Weiss gives the Get today, I think that he received a good deal – a fair deal. Weiss's situation would be no different than the hundreds of other frum husbands who give a Get each year.

    Any chance of this being a guest post?

    1. Daas Torah,

      Any chance of responding - I spent a lot of time writing this lengthy comment - for your benefit!

  39. I agree with the above, but what about all the people stuck in unsuccessful marriages. Divorce at least is a successful end to an unsuccessful marriage. Instead of dealing with problems thru legislation – prenups etc couples should be given real life skills to enrich their marriages
    These words from Daas Torah resonate with me
    'Realistically - I don't think there is any reason that Gital and Avraham Meir can't come to an agreement now and get on with their lives. It seems that there is too much focus on who was right. The present situation is bad for both of them.'
    As the saying goes – instead of being right be clever or even better instead of choosing to be right , choose to be happy

  40. RDE/DT:

    You should do a new article for an expose on this Shira Dicker who is the Dodleson's PR firm they hired and got the NY Post to publish Gital's attack piece. She is also responsible for setting up the Dodleson's social media and web campaign. She is not a frum person. Google her.

    You should also google Saki Dodelson, Gital's wealthy mother and instigator of this campaign. Her photos are plastered all over the internet. And she is the CEO of her well off firm.

  41. It is now a full 24 hours since you published a half finished article that was totally biased to the Weiss's and whose tone is totally one of knocking Gital. The way you slanted and worded Gital's view, reads like a NY Times article on Israel.

    When are we going to get the Weiss's view and your pragmatic solution?

    1. And now he completed it to show even more clearly how biased he is, since he made no mention of the monetary demands on the Weiss side.

      It is one thing to state that halacha does not allow for coercion, so the only realistic way to obtain a get is "appeasement" through money. It is another thing to claim that AMW is entitled to money as RDE does. And yet another thing to leave the money demans out of an analysis of the claims on each side.

  42. Instead of finishing this article, you wrote two new articles that knock Gital and her supporters. Are you truly listening to your wife or just paying her lip service?

  43. Az you are missing the point. Over 70 gedolim ruled less than 20 years ago to continue what the halocho has always been - no get on demand, punishing women who go to arko'oys and following the halocho.

    I hardly call siding with epstein who withdrew from bais din the peaceful approach. The claims that holding on to a get don't work are naive and misguided. Furthermore if there is no chiyuv to give it to someone who refuses to give you your kid then tell the woman to back down. This argument against withholding get would only make sense if the women would stop using the children as pawns.In Ny the court forces a get at the end and thats why so many men get creamed

    However of all the twrrible things that dodelson said to newspaper the worst was about the stepfather. I have no sympathy for her. Neither does the halocho according to the feinsteins.

    The dodelsons tried to use a technicality that father only had a hetter from a single rov to litigate for only right to see his child and went and started a whole war in arko'oys. Perhaps Feinstein s hold a single rov is enough although I admit it sets a bad example

    The bais din of mechon lhoyro sucks. Yechiel Tauber was motzi sheym ra on Dayan Abraham so please I doubt his erlichkeit

    1. Point of InformationNovember 14, 2013 at 7:35 PM

      Weiss will never publicise his true goals in the get hold-up, despite DT's promises. You needn't bother watching the blog every minute so as not to miss that!

      Oh, Weiss' father might write a few words like "Gital is a liar", etc. He will 100% certainly beat the drum that "Gital wants to shut Weiss completely out of custody - all we want to negotiate is fair custody" or "we want to be compensated" or "all we want is our halachic rights", etc.

      They are not gonna spell out numbers, they'll be no dollar figures. Weiss is not going to be specific about anything. "We want the boy three shabbos a week and there times during the week?" Fuhgettaboudit.

      No way. The Weisses cannot afford to publicly state what the are trying to get from Gital, for two reasons.

      First, if the tell the truth about what they want, they will be perceived as greedy, totally unreasonable and deceitful.

      Second, If Weiss were to present reasonable claims, THERE IS A DANGER GITAL MIGHT ACCEPT!

      So, if Weiss does set forth chapter and verse as DT has promised he would, after everyone reads the baloney he writes, the debate will remain exactly the same:

      Is Gital a bad person? Is Weiss over-controlling? Mearrev mesarem meagen rogaine, blah blah blah.


      As everyone knows, the Weiss' want to extort from Gital two promises (a) her agreement to a child custody agreement very favorable to Avrami; and (b) her promise never to go to court get that agreement thrown out.

      But by now, even the meshugenas on this blog know full well that whatever Weiss could extort from Gital in "arbitration", means nothing to the civil court. Gital can go directly from the "arbitration" to the courthouse and get the harsh custody agreement vacated and a reasonable, fair one put back in.

      Here's the Weiss tricky plan: Gital has to give them $350,000 in cash and sign a harsh custody agreement.


      Pretty smart these Weisses, no? Real Yiddishe kopfs, No?

      So now can everyone stop wasting time with totally irrelevant chatter about halacha-shmalacha, Chilul HaShem, NY post, he hit me first, she hit me first, she's a bad person, he's a bad person, heter-shmeter.

      You want to know Weiss' claims? Write this down:

      He claims is that hee will refuse to give Gital a get until she gives him a custody agreement that will be good for him but harsh for her and to deposit $350,000 with him, which he gets to keep if she tries to break that agreement.

      So now you understand why Weiss has been preparing you for this scheme by salting this Blog with comments from sundry sources that "Gital has been threatening to not comply with the existing custody order" and "Gital has been threatening to go to court to diminish Weiss visiting rights".

      So now you've heard the real story. Do you still want to debate about who should have followed who's minhag in lighting shabbos candles?

    2. POI,

      No one reading this blog should accept a single word of what you've written as true. For all we know, it is more misinformation.

      But, I too am growing impatient. We were treated to Part I of "The Road Out of this Morass" over a day ago....and Part II has now been preempted with a bunch more yellow journalism articles.

      RDE's actions -- as I said in a prior thread -- are treading ever closer to a Hershel Goldwasser moment. WHAT ARE HIS INTERESTS IN THIS CASE?

    3. Point of Information ,
      Sorry this is not the real story

  44. Recipients and PublicityNovember 14, 2013 at 5:54 PM

    Stop the madness and stop fighting with each other ALL of you !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The Second Bais HaMikdosh was destroyed because of Sinas Chinam ("causeless hatred), and the third Bais HaMikdosh will only be rebuilt by Ahavas Chinom ("selfless love")! You are ALL making yourselves into a laughingstock in full view of the world !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! To the Weisses and Dodelsons STOP IT and tell your warring kids who are fighting each other to grow up and stop acting like BABIES !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's a disgrace.

  45. Blatant - your comments are really off base. Stop throwing around words like "abuse" so freely. He did not abuse her! Save the word for real abuse. The liberal media has done a job on you! It is just like the word "bullying." If you say the wrong word to somone, you become a bully. Overused words that are becoming meaningless. Please learn how to think for yourself. I never said that Weiss was correct. I really do not know. I was pointing out that she likely has parents who interfered and did not understand the first thing about making a marriage work even if there were difficult times. He may have not known either, but for every bad man out there, there is a bad woman, so stop with your bleeding heart gut reaction defense of her and learn how to use your intellect.

    You said, "That's a strange take on things, as if, during a birth, the most important thing was to make the husband feeling important...

    I never said that. what I said is that when there is a healthy relationship betwen husband and wife, privacy is respected. A moment like this is a private moment and parents should not be there, plain and simple.

    You comment: "I think it would have been abusive to send her back to her husband, and I wonder how a person purporting to fight against domestic abuse can publish such a comment without at least calling such a position into question."

    Are you for real??? Abuse??? She kidnapped the child. That is inexcusable.

  46. Tootired:

    Maybe change your name to Toocrazy!

    You said, "You are crazy if you think you can tell a birthing women who she should want around her. Whatever makes her feel comfortable is the right answer. Including turning on a light for a blind midwife if the birthing woman so desires. For some people, even in perfectly wonderful marriages, it's not the husband. But then, you are probably one of the posters here who thought it was perfectly normal for a husband to have to approve his wife's obgyn. Here's a hint: IT"S NOT NORMAL.

    You are such a kool aid drinker, it is sad. Try to put aside the steady diet of liberal media that you have been fed your entire life. Realize that you have become a non-thinking automoton. What is NOT NORMAL is for a woman to need to have her parents in the room. It sounded like she wanted mommy in the room during birth but had to settle for them being in waiting room. It shows that she is incapable of freeing herself from her parent's control and probably should never have married. Liberals like you are always so understanding and compassionate, but once they are put in the situation, they start to sing another tune.

    He did not abuse her! Let's set that straight. She DID kidnap their child. Yes, it is his child every bit as much as it hers though in your liberal mind, the man probably has no rights at all because he is automatically a bad guy.

    It is time for you to start thinking on your own.

    1. the idea that a husband (or any man) should be present in labor is absurdly recent. the idea that it is somehow unnatural and anti-torah for a woman to want her "mommy" at this time is just absurd. here's a thought experiment: do you think 200 years ago in a shtetl poland, when a woman went in to labor, her companion was more likely to be her husband or her mother (assuming that both were available)?
      in any case, we are not even talking during labor, as she says her parents tried to come in "Afterward," ie after the birth. i did not want my parents (or in laws) in the birthing room right after birth, but is this really so insane? again, when people gave birth at home, do you think the rest of the family just stayed away so the mom and dad could bond with the baby? more likely the dad stayed away and the mom and her relatives/female companions took care of things.

  47. Daat Torah:

    One thing you have failed to explain in your defense of Weiss which I would appreciate your explaining.

    What was the halachic justification for Weiss going to court? Was it because she has kidnapped the child and he had no choice?

    It would help if you clarify because many people seem to think that he was wrong because he took her to court.

  48. The President Gives Obamacare a Get MerusaNovember 14, 2013 at 8:14 PM

    What does your post have to do with Weiss refusal to give Dodelson a get?

    You sound like President Obama.

  49. An Admirer of the Feinstein FamilyNovember 14, 2013 at 8:47 PM

    Dear Rabbi Eidensohn,

    You yourself have described the intensity of the pressure brought on the Feinsteins by Dodelson supporters:

    Weiss Dodelson: Gital threatens to destroy Rav Reuven Feinstein's yeshiva for supporting her husband

    Times of Israel Gital Dodelson is quite likely America’s most famous agunah. In recent weeks, the 25-year-old Orthodox law student has jumped to the headlines of major media outlets because of her struggle to force her ex-husband, Avrohom Meir Weiss, to give her a Jewish divorce, or get.

    On Tuesday, Dodelson’s enthusiastic and increasingly well-mobilized supporters noted a key victory as ArtScroll Publishing confirmed that Weiss’s father and uncle had taken unpaid leaves of absence from the prestigious publishing house. On the heels of their successful public pressure campaign, Dodelson’s supporters are now turning their sights toward the prestigious Yeshiva of Staten Island, publicly shunning the yeshiva’s leadership for allowing Weiss to continue to study there.[...]

    Are you a friend of the Feinsteins? I am.

    Please don’t just sit by and chronicle the downfall of the heretofore illustrious history and heritage of the Feinstein family.

    Sooner or later, the pressure you yourself describe will force them to give the get. Why incur more destruction when the outcome is inevitable and will be more painful as time goes by?

    As time goes by, ORA gains more publicity and adherents - thanks to Weiss. At the end, there will be even more people gloating of the destruction of noblest family in American Jewish History.

    For what principle? So Avrami Weiss will save money and get better child custody than he could obtain by paying his own legal fees?

    Please, I beg you, help your lifelong friends, the Feinsteins, people who have done so much for Klal Yisroel. They don’t seem to be aware that their dispute has gone viral! Do whatever you can to help the Feinsteins make this situation disappear from the public eye and just let Gital and Avrami fight it out in court, just between themselves, like everyone else who gets divorced.

    Yours to Help the Feinsteins, shilt'a

  50. I don't know what you are aiming at, but you fogot essential points when describing AMW's position.

    1) he entered marriage with a view in contrast to halacha, i.e. that he would not provide for his wife, nor for his children, but that his wife would provide for him, but at the same time, he wanted to be the boss and tell his wife how to spend the money she earned.

    2) He entered divorce procedure with a view contrary to halacha, by claiming alimony (i.e. support for himself from his exwife, health insurance, and child support from his wife.

    3) He maintained his halachically unjustified claims for alimony, child support, health insurance, life insurance plus legals fees all through the civil divorce procedure.

    4) The court did not give in to his demands.

    5) But AMW still thinks that the Dodelson family that he perceives as rich should provide for him.

    6) Therefore, he refuses to give a get unless he receives a payment amounting to 350'000 $ from his ex-wife.

    7) No-one can be sure that he will give the get once he has the money.

    8) He is ready to destroy himself and his family in the hope of obtaining said sum (or more).

    1. those aren't 8 points. just 2 or 3 points written with 8 numbers. Number one is not against halacha if it was understood and accepted by both beforehand. as a career woman marrying a learning guy she obviously knew this would be the arrangement.

  51. Thank you for showing that you know how to be Dan L'Kaf Zechus when describing Avraham Meir's position. Not all of supporters Avraham Meir would agree with your description of his position, but none of them would be offended by anything you wrote. Your description of Gital's position is very offensive and I challenge you to find even a single supporter of hers who would agree to it.

    You don't have to be unbiased or even intellectually honest to present a solution. However, if you want Gital’s side to listen to you and respect your ideas, you'd want to at least pretend to be honest and fair minded. Please rewrite your take on Gital's position so that people take you and your solution seriously, and not instinctively dismiss you as being yet another hater. Get respect by showing respect, even if you have to try hard and fake it. You’ll be happy you did. Hatzlachah.

    1. Anyone who knows anything about these halachos would agree 100% with RDE's explanation of the position of this rashanta. Unless they are noge'ah bedavar. I have never met either side, but one thing is evident: Gital is some piece of work. If I were AMW I'd make a boruch sheptarani and get as far away from her as possible. But he has the right to do what he is doing, and I applaud him for standing up and not issuing a phone get meusa that would be possul anyhow.

      She is operating keneged halacha. Period. The Torah does NOT provide for "no-fault" get on demand. Period. No matter what the reshaim at ORA or Yair Hoffman wish halacha would say.

    2. Michelob: Rav Eidensohn may be happy to know that he has at least one commentator who agrees with him when he wrote “She feels that Avraham Meir is only the sperm donor and her son is totally hers.” He may be disappointed by your tone though, as he’s careful when he uses the word Rasha.

      Rav Eidensohn: Most people feel the “sperm donor” line was a very foolish say to say which undermines your credibility. You know the big secret about Rashaim. They don’t think they’re Rashaim, and they're sure that they’re acting L’Shaim Shomayim. If you want to put words in Gital’s mouth, you should only put ones that a friend of hers could imagine her saying. Otherwise you may as well go all the way and use Michelob’s approach, and say something like “Gital is a rashanta who knows she is acting keneged halacha, but she hates Gedolim, Torah and Hashem, and nothing makes her happier than playing a part in a public Chillul Hashem.” If you want to appear to be unbiased and capable of explaining both sides in a charitable way, you must remove the “sperm donor” line.

  52. Recipients and PublicityNovember 14, 2013 at 10:58 PM

    This situation is like allowing two drunks to get control of the thermonuclear war buttons that could undo and destroy all the good that the yeshiva world has accomplished since the end of World War II in 1945.

    Even Hitler y"sh and the Nazis could NOT come up with a better way to smear and bring about the downfall of the good name of the Charedi Yeshiva world in America. The oilem makes fun of Chabad for its "meshichistim" but here you have two immature kids who have no clue how to love, stay in a relationship, be married, be parents, be a good wife, be a good husband, NOTHING, just fighting and machlokes like two drunks on a binge in a bar-room brawl destroying everything around them.

    The ones who say they want to "destroy" the Feinsteins and the jewel in their crown, their yeshiva on SI, realize that the mud can and WILL fly the other way about the Kotlers and BMG and their notorious bitter divorces (of RAK's daughter from R. Dov Schwartzman and what they did to him; of the still not finalized divorce of RMK from his wife the daughter of R. MICHEL FEINSTEIN in Bnai Brak.)

    But nobody cares what people will say. Everybody here forgets what gedolim said about posting on or using the Internet. The great asifas and the organizations to ban the Internet are given a "heter meah rabbonim" by the BMG bigs (or so it seems) to allow the Dodeslons to use "PUBLICISTS" ??????????????????????? to destroy a YESHIVA ???????????????????????? Just how nuts is that ????????????????????

    And does Lakewood think that if they destroy the Feinsteins' yeshiva (by not reigning in this strong meidel Gital and her even more powerful Mom) that sooner or later Lakewood will also be destroyed when the investigative media zeroes in on the history of the Kotler's divorces and sholom bayis problems and the rot they will uncover there ??????????????

    Everyone here is on the brink of a great precipice and seems intent on committing a communal SUICIDE as ordered up by the greatest anti-semites. Sure, Dodelsons, Weisses, Feinsteins and Kotlers GO AHEAD AND JUMP and destroy yourselves.

    Maybe it is bashert that the Torah world shall be rid of you as you commit group suicide that even a Jim Jones in his "Temple of Doom" could not dream up drinking your own cool-aid suicide by your own hand in Lakewood and Staten Island.

  53. SamNovember 14, 2013 at 10:22 AM

    You should do a new article for an expose on this Shira Dicker who is the Dodleson's PR firm they hired and got the NY Post to publish Gital's attack piece.

    You should also google Saki Dodelson, Gital's wealthy mother and instigator of this campaign. Her photos are plastered all over the internet. And she is the CEO of her well off firm."

    I must have missed the day in school that they taught that being a CEO of a company to support your husband sitting & learning was a horrible thing. If I'm right, Avraham Meir Weiss married a girl who was working for her mother who is the CEO of a company & was also going to school for a law degree. Doesn't sound like he thought that was a horrible thing then....

    This sad parsha causes people to behave irrationally. Most of you guys are just interested in belittling others & not, as Rabbi Eidenson calls for, finding a pragmatic solution. Name calling doesn't help anyone, & repeating things that one side says that the other side says are lies doesn't help anyone. How about you look at the two sides presented by Rabbi Eidenson, & instead of fighting out who is "right" or "wrong" try coming up with a solution that both sides would accept, even the side that is wrong(whichever side you think that is). Don't fight over who did or didn't do what when, that stage of this story is already in the rear view mirror.
    Bottom line is, there is tangible suffering in this parsha now for everyone involved. There is the girl who wants to be free of a marriage that has been over for years (doesn't matter whose fault that was) there is the boys family, where the father & uncle are now without employment & the grandfathers yeshiva is the focus of a PR campaign.
    And last but not least, there is the child, who is being deprived of any stability in his young & formative years, as his parents are fighting with each other in a very public way, & both sides are using him as a bargaining chip to use against the other. There is no way anyone can justify the long term damage being done to this child- from either side.

    Perhaps Rabbi Eidenson can repost (most of this) as a guest post, pin it to the top, & only approve comments that have solutions, not as hominem attacks.
    Thank you.

  54. It seems to me that the bigger issue here is the 350k - my guess
    I would be happy to redirect my annual donation to BMG for the next few years to help resolve this matter.
    Anyone else game
    ...No I cannot administer a fund. I live in Lakewood and send my kids to school here

  55. אשר פיהם דבר שואNovember 15, 2013 at 12:46 AM

    ספר גיטי אורה
    אמר רב קלונימוס בן ציון, אין בן גיטל לאברהם מאיר אלא כסף, והתניא כסף גדול? הא לן והא להו, איני והאמר רב חצקל אין בן דודלסון לוייס אלא בנו, לא קשיא כסף יענה את הכל. וכן אמר בר קישקא כסף יענה הכל. תנינא באמריקא אמרו כל מי שאינו נותן גט אפילו לאשה כאיזבל , הוא רשע כהמן, והתניא מבני בניו למדו בבני ברק, ואם איתא אין לו שורש וענף, לא קשיא דידיה גרוע מהמן , דאילו המן יש לו בני בנים לומדים תורה, אבל מי שאינו נותן גט כהרף עין אין כל משפחתו כדאי שתמסר תורה על פיהם. וכן פסקו הקול קורא.
    מיתבי אברהם מאיר לא סירב דין? ואם איתא אין כאן פסק דין ? לא קשיא באמריקה לא צריך דין. וכן אמר בר משוגא לא צריך דין באמריקה אלא כל דאלים גבר וכן עמא דבר כי הא דההוא גברא דהלך להתפלל, ולאחר כמה ימים מצאוהו בבית הקברות , אמרו לו מאי האי אמר להם גרשתי את אשתי אמרו לא באונס ? אמר להם כן. אמרו לו מזל טוב קיימת מצוה בעבירה . אמר להם לא עשיתי מאומה אלא כפאו אותי בקטלפרוד מיתבי יש הזמנות באמריקה ואם איתא הזמנות למה לי .? תיקו .

  56. I am just a horrified person reading all this and it is obvious that this is way out of line. I think that at this point, Gital seems like the controlling bratty woman - just based on her actions. I am not taking Weiss's side, but certainly it is very obvious that her side does not seem to be willing to give an inch. And if they really were worried about the child, they can sneeze up the money in two seconds, and come up with a reasonable settlement. I don't see them wanting Shalom at all, there is a lot of vindictive vengeance in their position, and it does not make them look good at all. He is the one that is getting bashmutzt, and being made to look like a creep, to me that looks like they are the ones that will stop at nothing to hurt him. I don't think you can use her as a flagship for the get/agunah issue, there is much she is doing because she has rabbinical power and internet savvy - these are not our ways and may this be stopped quickly - it is ugly and embarrassing for everybody.

    1. Heck, the broad hired a PR company for a social media and web campaign! That is virtually unheard of!

    2. there is much she is doing because she has rabbinical power and internet savvy - these are not our ways

  57. @Daas Torah - "She feels that Avraham Meir is only the sperm donor and her son is totally hers" -

    Please do not delete your statement about sperm donors, it is right on target even if its causing the OH-RAH feminists to howl with rage.

    Incessant harping by the feminists about an alleged "agunah" problem attempts to divert attention from one of the true causes of the intense divorce conflicts occurring - ie the perverse ideology of treating Jewish fathers like sperm donors.

    The methodology of the OH-RAH feminists is to constantly demand (based on a very phony non-Jewish morality) GITTIN for MOREDES women who maliciously interfere with the parenting rights of Jewish fathers, and who destroy these fathers and their families financially. Halachic compliance never seems to be demanded from the MOREDES women.

    Until the perverse, misandrist feminist ideology of OH-RAH is rooted out of the so-called Orthodox community, intense divorce conflicts are likely to continue.

  58. What do you want her to do? she sent him Hazmonos, he refuses to go to Bes Din!

    1. he refused her choice of bais din, which he is entitled to do, just as she refused his choice of bais din, which she is entitled to do.

      Zabla, where he chooses one,dayan and she chooses one and the two dayanim agree on a third dayan should have been the answer. does anyone here know why this was not done?

  59. DT,

    You keep comparing the Kol Koreh issued against Weiss to the one against Lipa Schmeltzer. However, it's been 10 months since these highly respected rabbis signed against Weiss and none of them have retracted. Surely at least one of them has looked into the matter and was aware of all the halachic ramifications here. In Lipa's case, they retracted within a few weeks, although the damage was already done. I don't think any retraction will be forthcoming in this case.

    1. See Korach ve'eidosoNovember 15, 2013 at 4:24 PM

      He also gathered signatures of reish nun Roshei Senhedroais, and did not retreat till veyerdu chaim sheailo.

    2. The Doddlesons and Kotlers are much wealthier and more politically powerful than the Lipa concert opponents -- so it is perfectly logical based on the laws of political physics, as opposed to the laws of Torah based justice, why there has not been a retraction on the kol koreh, nor should anyone suspect there ever will be a retraction. The political, monetary and inevitably resultant social pressure from Gital and her family on the Rabbis who signed it is just too great.

  60. Rabbi Eidensohn,
    Based on your description of the situation and the Dodelson's attitude (which I pray for everyone's sake is overly harsh, but suspect is actually far worse then you describe), if Weiss just gives the get, doesn't that leave Weiss to fight a vicious, nasty continuous battle for the next fifteen years (that will consume all of his emotional energy) if he wants to have any sort of meaningful relationship with the child? If he and his family are out of money, how will he afford to continue to hire a lawyer as Dodelson drags him back to court again and again trying to prevent the child from seeing his father? And in any case, how does that leave Weiss with the ability to move on with his life (that is, to get remarried and have another family)?

    And if Weiss were to give the get under these circumstances, wouldn't that just likely embolden the Dodelsons to act in an even more vicious manner against Weiss and the Feinsteins going forward? I suppose it is possible that if he agrees not to see the child (or see the child whenever Dodelson might allow, which probably amounts to the same thing) that they would then leave him alone, but even that seems doubtful.

  61. I dont understand what a consent order "ratified" by the judge means? The court has already ruled on custody. There is already a court ordered custody agreement. I also dont understand how he can expect her to pay court fees she never wanted to incur. The Dodelson's begged them to go to BD.

    1. He does NOT have to agree to THEIR choice of Bais DIn!!!!

      They also refused his choice of bais din!

      Zabla should have been the answer. Still waiting for someone to enlighten us as to why it was not effectuated

  62. Rabbi Eidensohn,
    Do you have more information about how the custody arrangement came about in court?
    You mentioned that at first Weiss tried to approach this matter in a conciliatory fashion and acceded to Dodelson's wishes regarding custody. Was the custody decision essentially a result of this, in other words because Weiss had tried to appease Dodelson and didn't strenuously fight from Day 1 when she kidnapped the child that the court basically ruled that because the child had mostly been with Dodelson before litigation (because Doldelson had kidnapped the child, and Weiss had not gone to court to fight this on Day 1) that the child should continue to be with Dodelson?

    Regarding the current custody situation, as the child grows older and has more schoolwork, how is Weiss and the child to spend weeknights together if she is in Lakewood and he in Staten Island? Even if this is technically feasible, isn't it likely that Dodelson would be able to convince a court to eliminate the child's time with Weiss during the week?

    1. Due to the problem,you raise, it would make much more sense for Weiss to get 3 out of 4 weekends a month rather than the midweek overnights. This what was eventually done in my case and it worked out very well for the child, though the mother was not thrilled. But its about the Best interest of the child and 3 out of four weekends with the father insures significant stable relationship with the father in the natural setting of his home and community while lessening transportation burdens on the child. It also insures less midweek disruption for the childs school schedule.

      The father should be given, in addition, one midweek dinner visitation to spend time with the child -- 1) to share the school week experience with his son 2) to have time to learn with him while the material from yeshiva is fresh in the child's mind from that day 3) to have time to do homework with him.

  63. Rabbi Eidensohn,
    For ORA, and Dodelson, as you note above, this case is not just about Dodelson and Weiss, but about establishing the larger point that a get must be given on demand in all case, and that not doing so constitutes domestic abuse (as opposed to kidnapping a child, poisoning a child against the father, or, for that matter, leaving a marriage without serious cause, which has become a "right" in secular American law only over the last twenty - thirty years years). It seems to me that they are extremely passionate on this point of view.
    If Weiss were to give a get, wouldn't that be used by ORA/Dodelson to prove their point that Weiss and his supporters (Rabbis Weiss, Rabbi Feinstein) are all domestic abusers?
    If Weiss gives the get, isn't it possible, even likely, that they will continue to hound him and any potential employer/yeshiva at which he learns in the future to try to prove their point that not giving a get upon demand constitutes domestic abuse and just like it is unfitting for someone who has beaten his wife for several years to be accepted in kollel (and thus supported by the community), it is similarly unfitting to have someone who didn't give a get?
    For that matter, isn't it possible that they will continue to hound Artscroll if Artscroll allows the Weisses back even if a get is given? Dodelson/ORA etc. would argue (similarly to their current argument) that it is unfitting for the Weisses to be at Artscroll if they openly supported ongoing domestic abuse for several years (even if that abuse had stopped)?

  64. Suggested guest post:
    The Jewish Jacobins: ORA and the other violence-supporting proponents of a woman's automatic right to a get in all cases

    Under Jewish Law, absent cause, a man may be divorced only of his free will and without coercion. Rabbeinu Tam essentially provided the same protection to women. This has also been the case under western culture for centuries. It has been only relatively recently that no fault-divorce is allowed in the US even under secular law. Given the recent FBI arrests of several prominent rabbis for allegedly employing all manner of violence and torture against Jewish fathers, as ORA has advocated [], it is fitting that ORA and company's position on no-fault divorce derives historical precedent from the murderous Jacobins of France.

    To decry the murderous violence of the Jacobins is not to defend the French monarchy that preceded it. Similarly, to denounce ORA is not to dispute that it is true that there exists a problem in the American Jewish community whereby Jewish women who are actually entitled to a get cannot obtain one as a practical matter because a beis din cannot as a legal matter enforce a ruling that a get must be given. [And this is also not to dispute the point that if a woman continually insists for a period of time that she wants out of a marriage for whatever reason that the husband should be encouraged -- although not coerced in any matter which would invalidate any get anyhow -- to give a get - but only if the woman acts in good faith regarding the resolution of the other matters involved in the divorce.] So yes, ORA's actions are not completely without basis in every case. But ORA's radical position that obtaining a get should be easy and that any women who wants a get is entitled to a get no matter what the circumstances, results in divorces that might otherwise be preventable, and also encourages women to engage in all manner of abuse of their husbands and children in the divorce process (making false allegations of molestation [at least some have seen the light in this particular situation:], kidnapping children etc.)


  65. Edmond Burke: Letters on a Regicide Peace:

    The practice of divorce, though in some countries permitted, has been discouraged in all. In the East polygamy and divorce are in discredit; and the manners correct the laws. In Rome, whilst Rome was in it's integrity, the few causes allowed for divorce amounted in effect to a prohibition. They were only three. The arbitrary was totally excluded; and accordingly some hundreds of years passed, without a single example of that kind. When manners were corrupted, the laws were relaxed; as the latter always follow the former, when they are not able to regulate them, or to vanquish them. Of this circumstance the Legislators of vice and crime were pleased to take notice, as an inducement to adopt their regulation: holding out an hope, that the permission would as rarely be made use of. They knew the contrary to be true; and they had taken good care, that the laws should be well seconded by the manners. Their law of divorce, like all their laws, had not for it's object the relief of domestick uneasiness, but the total corruption of all morals, the total disconnection of social life.

    It is a matter of curiosity to observe the operation of this encouragement to disorder. I have before me the Paris paper, correspondent to the usual register of births, marriages, [76] and deaths. Divorce, happily, is no regular head of registry among civilized nations. With the Jacobins it is remarkable, that divorce is not only a regular head, but it has the post of honour. It occupies the first place in the list. In the three first months of the year 1793, the number of divorces in that city amounted to 562. The marriages were 1785; so that the proportion of divorces to marriages was not much less than one to three; a thing unexampled, I believe, among mankind. I caused an enquiry to be made at Doctor's Commons, concerning the number of divorces; and found, that all the divorces, (which, except by special Act of Parliament, are separations, and not proper divorces) did not amount in all those Courts, and in a hundred years, to much more than one fifth of those that passed, in the single city of Paris, in three months. I followed up the enquiry relative to that city through several of the subsequent months until I was tired, and found the proportions still the same. Since then I have heard that they have declared for a revisal of these laws: but I know of nothing done. It appears as if the contract that renovates the world was under no law at all. From this we may take our estimate of the havock that has been made through all the relations of life. With the Jacobins of France, vague intercourse is without reproach; marriage is reduced to the vilest concubinage; children are encouraged to cut the throats of their parents; mothers are taught that tenderness is no part of their character; and to demonstrate their attachment to their party, that they ought to make no scruple to rake with their bloody hands in the bowels of those who came from their own.

  66. The Dodelson's have consulted with a psychologist who has emphasized the need for the child to have one home where he can feel secure. He noted that by having divided custody, the child really does not have a home or identity. Therefore the Dodelson's want a reduction from the court ordered custody arrangement. They also don't want their grandson to be too attached to his father and are hoping that when Gital remarries the child will accept his stepfather as his Tatty.

    R. Eidensohn -- what is the source of this statement? Because of anything should make a God-fearing Jew shudder, it is this. If accurate, it essentially means she wants to cut her child of from this father as a father. A more anti-Torah attitude is hard to imagine. Did they ever hear of Kibbud Av? You know, it is right there in the Aseres ha Dibros!

    (While this is no chiddush, as a general matter divorce with children cannot be a complete separation, because the parents still have a common child to deal with. That's the way of life, with or without a get -- your ex is still your child's parent, and has both the right and obligation to be a parent. Shocking that they found a psychologist to say otherwise.)

    1. @Benschar - "Did they ever hear of Kibbud Av?" - Its time for you to wake up and smell the coffee. Review the comments by Dodelson and her feminist comrades on the NY Post and other sites. ORA ideology holds that you're advocating some type of bronze-age patriarchy which the "progressive" feminist movement has managed to outlaw in most places, except of course the reactionary, patriarchal, misogynist Torah religion.

      The feminist movement's principles, fully subscribed to by the YU ORA group, enforces the wife's right to divorce on demand at any time, and only acknowledge two roles for Jewish fathers - sperm donors and ATM machines. The sperm donors can be replaced at any time with step-fathers (see Dodelson's comments).

      The YU prenup agreement, in cooperation with the RCA "Bais Din" feminist inquisition, basically facilitates the wife to remove the sperm donor from her life anytime she cares to do so. Any resistance offered by the sperm donor will result in the full weight of the OH-RAH terror machine and the feminist police state being brought down on the sperm donor.

  67. Your presentation of "Gitel's view" is a total joke. You are supposedly gleaning these from the NY Post article but it looks more like you are making it up. It would have been a simple matter to to have Gitel summarize her view in 5 points since she is very public about this matter. It is quite obvious where your sympathies lie and your distortion of her point is proof of this. As for Avrohom Meir's views, it would be interesting to make his points of view (uh, I mean demands) public, since we obviously cannot trust the veracity of what you claim in this post.

  68. "She has already struck out twice – there is no reason to believe that marriage to a 3rd person would not end the same way."

    Huh? Gitel was married to someone before Weiss and got divorced?!?!?

  69. Saki Dodelson is a Gazillionair - what makes anyone think that a mere $350K would prevent her from excising AMW completely after he gives a Get?

  70. Amazing how much hot air that DE and all those who are making assumptions can spew on this matter.
    How many people here have met or spoken with any of the involved parties?
    Yet so many people - chief amongst them DE - have such outspoken opinions.
    Would be comical if not so sad.
    Any objective outside observer would see this really simply:
    1) Both parties want to leave this marriage behind.
    2) A civil divorce is in place
    3) Finish off the marriage with a Get
    4) Work out custody/monetary issues with a Beis Din or within the legal system
    Using a Get as leverage is creating a mess which never needed to happen.
    Like most issues in life, this only gets complicated because people try to defend the absurd.
    This never would have gotten to where it is now if a Get was not being used as a weapon.
    Quite simple actually.

    1. since she went public with her side to the media and turned this into a public spectacle everyone has a right to form opinions of her and make assumptions based on her very public statements. no one needs to speak to her party to have oitspoken opinions since she has publicly stated her opinions.
      Quite simply actually.

    2. it would never have gotten to where it is if Gital had not been so intent on unilateral action and she and her family were not so determined to completely marginalize the child's true father from his life.

    3. great point dovy in j

  71. Balak went to Bilam and paid good money for PR to curse outNovember 15, 2013 at 4:31 PM

    Vayiftach H' es pi ho'ossoin, ein kocho elo bepeh. Venireh ma yihye chalomoisov.

  72. I look at it like this:
    People all over the world have messy divorces - Jew and non-Jew alike.
    The difference is once a Get is involved.
    If no Get was involved in this mess, this would never have attracted any of the attention which it did.
    If they have reasons to slug it out, just do it the same way the rest of the divorcing world does -- in courts (or in a Jew's case, a Beis Din).
    A Get should never be part of the mess.
    Once it is, a Chilul Hashem is lurking just around the corner.
    Why is this so easy for all to see except the operator of this blog and his cheering fans?

    1. because a Get is part of a halachic and spiritual system based on kiddushin that non-Jews do not share with us, we cannot emulate their divorce processes. A get is the final resolution of all ties and marital issues between husband and wife. It is not supposed to be simply given and then have the marital issues resolved afterwards. While the get should NEVER be used to extort unreasonable demands, the get, according to Jewish law, is the FINAL piece in the resolution of marital issues and the severing of the marital bond. Non-Jews don;t have a concept of kiddushin in the Torah sense, so therefore applying their divorce process to the get is nonsense and irrelevant,

  73. DE, as someone who knows neither party, but just sees a marriage that needs to end, it's so clear that the fellow just needs to give the Get, and deal with the mess in court / Beis Din.

    Had this been done at any point in the last 3+ years, they and we would not be where we all are now.

    Simple as that.

    No need for lengthy pilpul and diatribes where all sorts of ridiculous assumptions and slanderous things are said about people you've never met.

    The good old 'Okhum's Razor' rule comes to mind (see below)

    Ockham’s razor, also spelled Occam’s razor, also called law of economy or law of parsimony, principle stated by William of Ockham (1285–1347/49), a Scholastic, that Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate, “Plurality should not be posited without necessity.” The principle gives precedence to simplicity; of two competing theories, the simpler explanation of an entity is to be preferred. The principle is also expressed as “Entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity.”

  74. The proposed settlement is basically Weiss's position.

  75. if AMW gives a get now it will empower ORA and make every other female stuck in a divorce or custody fight believe that going to the secular media is an effective and legtimiate means to obtain a get. The chilul Hashem will increase manifoldly.


please use either your real name or a pseudonym.