Sunday, April 15, 2012

Cohabiting doesn't prevent divorce


Cohabitation in the United States has increased by more than 1,500 percent in the past half century. In 1960, about 450,000 unmarried couples lived together. Now the number is more than 7.5 million. The majority of young adults in their 20s will live with a romantic partner at least once, and more than half of all marriages will be preceded by cohabitation. This shift has been attributed to the sexual revolution and the availability of birth control, and in our current economy, sharing the bills makes cohabiting appealing. But when you talk to people in their 20s, you also hear about something else: cohabitation as prophylaxis. 

In a nationwide survey conducted in 2001 by the National Marriage Project, then at Rutgers and now at the University of Virginia, nearly half of 20-somethings agreed with the statement, “You would only marry someone if he or she agreed to live together with you first, so that you could find out whether you really get along.” About two-thirds said they believed that moving in together before marriage was a good way to avoid divorce. 

But that belief is contradicted by experience. Couples who cohabit before marriage (and especially before an engagement or an otherwise clear commitment) tend to be less satisfied with their marriages — and more likely to divorce — than couples who do not. These negative outcomes are called the cohabitation effect.[...]

Coaches Face New Scrutiny on Sex Abuse


The case of Jerry Sandusky, a former defensive coordinator for Penn State’s football team accused of child sexual abuse, is now working its way through the courts. But it is already having an impact on thousands of other coaches, both volunteer and paid, who find themselves facing new scrutiny from parents, sports organizations and even state legislators. 

Since the Penn State scandal came to light in November, lawmakers in more than a dozen states, including New York, California and Pennsylvania, have introduced bills adding coaches, athletic directors or university officials to the list of “mandated reporters” of suspected child abuse or neglect. In the past month, such bills have been signed in Virginia, Washington and West Virginia, with several other states expected to follow suit.[...]

Gedolim suspected Chazon Ish & Ben Gurion of compromise

The Pesach edition of Mishpacha has a very strange story about the meeting of the Chazon Ish with Ben Gurion concerning the issue of religious women participating in national service. The head of the Eida Chareidis Rav Bengis and apparently the Brisker Rav - suspected that the Chazon Ish was planning on compromising with Ben Gurion. They wrote a letter to the Chazon Ish to clarify whether the rumors of compromise were true. Chazon Ish replied that he never intended to compromise with Ben Gurion.

 Rav Bengis explained why he suspected the Chazon Ish. "Ben-Gurion is no fool. He will not allow himself to leave the meeting without having accomplished anything. If he has decided to visit the Chazon Ish's home - with all the publicity his appearance there will generate - it must be that he knows, or that they already arranged that he will come away with some sort of agreement. Clearly this meeting is only going to be the final state in the process."

This is an  adaption of an article which appeared in"Yeshurun" (Vol. 20, Nissan 5768, pp. 296-299)

Minchas Yitzchok: Awarding father - son's custody

Question: There is a boy - the son of one of the Jerusalem community leaders and his wife whose marriage ended in divorce – who has been in his mother’s custody for a year and a half. The wife is now living with her parents in Los Angeles which is far from Brooklyn where the father now lives. The father’s home is in fact in Jerusalem while in New York he doesn’t own a home. Therefore it is basically impossible for him to see his son and to be with him in either spiritual or materialistic ties. All those who have been in his house saw directly that the child had a very strong ties with his father besides the physical materialistic aspect but there was also a strong spiritual connection. Even when the child was in a cradle the father would bring him to the beis medrash for chagim in order that he should hear holy words.... It is obvious that if the son remains in Los Angeles which is very far from the father – there is no possiblity for the father to educate him but the he would have to spend all his time in travel between the two places... And the father is an important leader who is much needed by the community. In addition his main home is in Jerusalem and it would be very degrading to require him to travel to his former wife’s home in order to educate his son... For all the above reasons and others like them it is simply impossible for his son to receive a proper education if he is not with his father. Thus the question is whether the Torah requires that the boy be given to him in order to raise him properly. It is not relevant to claim that he needs his mother because when she was married the child was raised by a baby sitter from whom he received care that was superb. Therefore it would seem that to the one who is asking the question – that the father is correct and he should regain custody. [ after four pages of careful analysis he concludes]. Answer... According to all we have discussed it would appear in my opinion that there is no question that the father is correct in his desire to have custody of his son in order to raise him and educate him in his way and that of his holy ancestors. It is obviously understood that this is to be done in a manner that the mother is not prevented from having the opportunity whenever she wants to come and to see her son and to get joy from her offspring...

Rape victims labeled crazy by military


Stephanie Schroeder joined the U.S. Marine Corps not long after 9/11. She was a 21-year-old with an associate's degree when she reported for boot camp at Parris Island, South Carolina. "I felt like it was the right thing to do," Schroeder recalls. A year and a half later, the Marines diagnosed her with a personality disorder and deemed her psychologically unfit for the Corps.

Anna Moore enlisted in the Army after 9/11 and planned to make a career of it. Moore was a Patriot missile battery operator in Germany when she was diagnosed with a personality disorder and dismissed from the Army.

Jenny McClendon was serving as a sonar operator on a Navy destroyer when she received her personality disorder diagnosis.

These women joined different branches of the military but they share a common experience:
Each received the psychiatric diagnosis and military discharge after reporting a sexual assault.

Saturday, April 14, 2012

NYS:Yeshivas must report abuse & Rabbis not asked first


VIN reported In order to clarify existing regulations requiring all staff members in New York state non-public schools to report suspected incidents of child abuse to the authorities, the New York State Education Department has updated its web page  to eliminate any possible ambiguities. 
 =======================================
Thus Yeshiva staff are officially mandated reports and are not to ask  permission either from the administration or their rabbis before reporting suspected child abuse.
Q: Before making a report to the Statewide Central Register of Child Abuse and Maltreatment, is a mandated reporter in a school legally permitted to first ask permission from the person in charge of the school?

A:  No.  Section 413(1)(b) of the Social Services Law provides that when a mandated reporter is required to make a report (which would be when the mandated reporter has reasonable cause to suspect that a child has been abused or maltreated), the mandated reporter must make the report.  After making the report, the mandated reporter must notify the person in charge of the school that the report was made.  That notification comes after the report was made, not before.
Q:  Is the answer any different if the mandated reporter works in a school that is religiously affiliated and the person in charge of the school is a member of the clergy?

A:  No.  The mandated reporter must make a report once the mandated reporter has reasonable cause to suspect that a child has been abused or maltreated.  The mandated reporter may not ask permission from the person in charge of the school, even if that person is a member of the clergy. 

Thursday, April 12, 2012

Charity:Rav Belsky & Rav Shachter

Female circus volunteer removed by Chareidi protest


A female audience member who was invited to participate in a circus performance in Modi'in on Sunday was removed from the stage after a religiously observant viewer complained.

Rafi Vitis, an acrobat and host of "The Shambuki Show," at the city's Anabe Park, consented to the request of an ultra-Orthodox woman who found the participation of women offensive. He invited a male volunteer to replace the teenage girl, but was forced to suspend the show for a few minutes because other members of the hundreds-strong audience objected to the switch.

Fraud allegations against Hazon Yeshaya charity


The Rishon Lezion Magistrate’s Court ruled on Wednesday to extend the remand of a senior employee of the Hazon Yeshaya charity for a further seven days, following his arrest on suspicion of widespread misuse of funds. Police arrested four members of the charity last week. A strict gag order prevents publication of their names. Judge Michael Karshen said the suspect, who is currently in hospital and did not appear in court, was suspected of aggravated fraud, money laundering, falsifying corporate documents and forgery, but that police had dropped an additional suspicion of extortion.

In extending the suspect’s remand until April 18, Karshen said Hazon Yeshaya had received substantial donations totaling tens of millions of shekels for food distribution to the poor and for Holocaust survivors but police suspect a significant portion of those funds were not used for their stated purpose.

Rav Y. Belsky: Objections of Rav S. Miller & Rav A. Schechter

These are documents relating to a dispute a number of years ago. I am not chas v'shalom setting myself up as a judge in this case - but the gedolim were clearly very upset with what Rav Belsky- he should have a refuah shleima -  was doing in the case. As anyone who has met Rav Belsky - he is a very impressive talmid chachom - both in terms of his knowledge of  Torah and his readiness to act forcefully for what he thinks is correct. He also has managed to upset others over the years by his independence.  I happened to have had a meeting with Rav Belsky at this time and he noted that there were wall posters all over Jerusalem signed by Rav Eliashiv but he told me that in reality Rav Eliashiv agreed with him. There is also disagreement as to whether Rav Belsky was merely trying to frighten the husband into giving a get or that he was willing to issue a heter to remarry based on these ideas. The major concern with gittin and permitting a woman to remarry is that the get and the ability to remarry should be generally accepted by gedolim. Anytime a rav is involved in these areas and is viewed as doing things unacceptable especially when he does them repeatedly -  is something to be concerned about.