December 26, 2010 12:12 am at 12:12 am #593738
I was reading the Jewish Press last night, and they have a section where they list people who are withholding a Halachic divorce from their spouse in violation of Beis Din’s orders.
Why were there no women on the list?
In halacha, the man can withhold the get if he does not want to give one, until he is physically forced to give it. Likewise, since the time of Rabeinu Gershom, a woman can refuse to accept a get until she wishes to do so. The man really has no advantage, except if he can convince 100 rabbis to allow him to remarry.
I have heard that the incidence of women withholding the get is as common as men withholding it. I believe that, since they both have the same things to gain. Whoever is at a disadvantage in the proceedings withholds the Get as a bargaining chip.
So I ask: Why are there never any women on the list? Why is this half of the issue less important than the the men’s wrongdoing?December 26, 2010 1:44 am at 1:44 am #746792
It’s them liberals, man. Women, blacks, Muslims can do no wrong.December 26, 2010 1:44 am at 1:44 am #746793
“I have heard that the incidence of women withholding the get is as common as men withholding it”
Well maybe the answer lies in the source of your information. Where have you heard that a woman withholding a get is as common as a man doing so?
If you know someone who’s wife withheld a get, that does not mean that it is as common as the opposite.December 26, 2010 1:44 am at 1:44 am #746794
For every woman refusing to take a divorce there are ten men doing so.December 26, 2010 2:03 am at 2:03 am #746795
For every woman refusing to take a divorce there are ten men doing so.
Where did you conjure up those “statistics”?December 26, 2010 2:15 am at 2:15 am #746796
you answered your own question!
If a man withholds a get the woman is stuck an agunah forever
If a woman withhold getting a get the guy CAN remarry with the condition of 100 rabbisDecember 26, 2010 2:29 am at 2:29 am #746797
I would imagine one of the reasons women tend to take the get is because they can usually get most of what they want in the American courts, which tend to favor the women. Therefore they have less of a need to blackmail their ex-spouse.December 26, 2010 2:58 am at 2:58 am #746798
its because as you said…teh man can get a heter meah rabbonim the woman cannotDecember 26, 2010 3:08 am at 3:08 am #746799
It is the man who has to give the Get, in order to dissolve the marriage.
Halachicly, if a man remarries without giving a Get to his 1st wife, the 2nd wife is not considered a bigamist, and his children from the 2nd wife are not Mamzayrim.
However, if C”V a woman remarries without a Get from her 1st husband, she’s still considered married to her 1st husband, and any children from the 2nd marriage are Mamzayrim.December 26, 2010 3:12 am at 3:12 am #746800
It could be because if a woman gets really unreasonable, there is always the Hetter Mey’a Rabbanim option.December 26, 2010 3:23 am at 3:23 am #746801
The reason why there are no woman on the list is because if a woman does not want to take the get the man allways has an option on getting remarried through a heter meah rabonim, which in such a case is simple to get.December 26, 2010 3:27 am at 3:27 am #746802
Quite frankly, the fact that you refuse to consider the possibility, kind of proves my point.December 26, 2010 5:03 am at 5:03 am #746803
I know someone whose wife refused to accept a get. As the rabbis in his case (as in most cases) were very reluctant to grant the heter meah rabbonim, it really soured him on Judaism. I saw some statistics from Israel from a few years ago and there were about the same number of women as men on the chief rabbi’s office list of persons who were in violation of beit din orders to grant or accept a get. It is possible that the Jewish Press may be concentrating on the women because in most cases there is no halachic option for them when the husband is recalcitrant. Have you written to the Jewish Press? I’ve corresponded with their editor and found him very willing to communicate.December 26, 2010 5:50 am at 5:50 am #746804
who still reads the jewish press?December 26, 2010 6:20 am at 6:20 am #746805
Moderator: The double negative in the title makes no sense. Perhaps you would like to edit it?
correct. double negatives are a big no-noDecember 26, 2010 12:31 pm at 12:31 pm #746806
I lost you at Jewish Press.December 26, 2010 2:24 pm at 2:24 pm #746807
“I would imagine one of the reasons women tend to take the get is because they can usually get most of what they want in the American courts, which tend to favor the women. Therefore they have less of a need to blackmail their ex-spouse.”
The courts maybe pro women but the Beis Din is not.December 26, 2010 4:47 pm at 4:47 pm #746808
Women do not withhold a GET, some MEN do. Women may refuse to accept a GET, but the man still has an out with a heter meah rabbonim. In the very olden pre-takanas R’ Gershom days, he was permitted to marry a second wife anyhow. She was NEVER permitted to take a second husband! The agunah problem is pervasively the woman’s problem. yes, there are exceptions to this, but the man still has an option to take.December 26, 2010 6:08 pm at 6:08 pm #746809
Oh come on. Find me ten people that actually got a heter me’ah rabbanim. I don’t know statistics, but I assume it isn’t very common. In fact, in halacha the man is not called a b’yado l’garsha ba’al korcha, (See Rema E.H. 178) so clearly this heter is not very accessible.
Funny story; I once had a farher at a yeshiva and had to tell the Rosh Yeshiva a shtickel, and I said over a vort based around this Rema. He was very attentive and asked a few questions. At the end he asked me how I came to this sugya. I told him from the last mishnah in Nedarim. Suddenly I realized that this Rosh Yeshiva himself was once very involved in a heter me’ah rabbanim, v’day l’meivin. Well, he let me in, but it was quite an awkward moment for me that I am not going to forget.December 26, 2010 7:29 pm at 7:29 pm #746810
Yitay, can you please explain that b’yado expression from the Rema? and why was it awkward for that RY? ThxDecember 26, 2010 9:33 pm at 9:33 pm #746811
I’m surprised no one has yet to mention the real reason.
The real reason is also the reason for the Jewish Press’s fascination with the “Aguna Chronicles”.
Years ago a female member of the Klass family was an Agunah, and If I recall correctly, the husband insisted on going to NY courts, which later resulted in the enactment of the NYS Get Laws.
They will only target the men as it hits close to homeDecember 26, 2010 11:38 pm at 11:38 pm #746812
First of all the Jewish Press no longer calls the column “The Agunah Chronicles,” but rather, “Chronicles of Crisis,” and has done so for a long time, now. They do not focus on Agunos, but rather on all aspects of social problems in the Jewish Community.
Second,re: “It could be because if a woman gets really unreasonable, there is always the Hetter Mey’a Rabbanim option.”
It is usually the other way around. I have friends who were held up for GET ransom. That is a disgrace that any man who calls himself frum should disobey a Mitzvas Asai D’Oraisah, to give his wife a GET, by trying to get money out of her, when HE is the one responsible to give her the value stipulated in the Kesubah.December 27, 2010 12:23 am at 12:23 am #746813
Sam l AmMember
All aspects of the divorce must be handled in Beis Din, including the actual divorce/gittin issuing, assets dispersal, custody decisions, etc. And the must be in accordance of Torah/halacha only.
Once any party attempts to circumvent the above, by going to a secular court for monetary issues, custody issues, etc., they lose their standing to make any demands in Beis Din, including for a Get issuance.
They cannot demand halacha be upheld only in the issuance of the get, but halacha not be upheld in asset dispersal or custody decisions.December 27, 2010 12:26 am at 12:26 am #746814
Anyways what will a seruv do to a woman? will she not be permited to have an aliye in her shull?….December 27, 2010 1:17 am at 1:17 am #746815
good point deiyezoogerDecember 27, 2010 4:20 am at 4:20 am #746816
Why can’t people get along together peacefully?December 27, 2010 8:23 am at 8:23 am #746817
We talk about a seruv here but does it really mean anything?
What about those rabanim who will not uphold the seruv? I am talking about cases (I personally know some) where one side violated Beis Din, went against Beis Din orders, brought the matter to secular court after being in Beis Din, or would not go to Beis Din when asked to ect. Then the Beis Din did nothing to enforce their ruling! They did not call a seruv ect. those people still were counted as part of the minyan, got aliyos ect.
What good is a seruv if it is not enforced?December 27, 2010 5:03 pm at 5:03 pm #746818
seichel I cant agree more with you, saddly thats so true.December 27, 2010 8:43 pm at 8:43 pm #746819
A few years ago someone in my neighborhood failed to comply with an order from a beit din to offer his wife a get. The rabbi of his shul, a prominent talmid chacham, banned him from the building and forbid anyone from giving him any social or other benefit according to the harchakot of Rabbeinu Tam. One member was instructed that he needed to be disinvited from a family simchah.
He went to the other synagogues figuring that the other rabbis in the neighborhood wouldn’t honor the ban. To the contrary, not a single rabbi in the neighborhood would have anything to do with him! After three months he finally relented and gave the get.
If all neighborhoods would be like mine, we wouldn’t need as many listings of agunot in the Jewish Press.
Oh, the Shabat after he gave the get he was back at his old shul. The rabbi who had banned him ordered the gabbai to give him the shlishi aliyah. All was forgiven.December 27, 2010 9:23 pm at 9:23 pm #746820
Charlie wow! I geuss some stories do have a good ending.December 27, 2010 10:11 pm at 10:11 pm #746821
Sam l AmMember
To the OP (popa_bar_abba):
The reason the JP doesn’t list women is because there is often a “his” and “her” beis din. The woman gets a seruv from her beis din, while the he gets a seruv against her from his beis din. Since the JP takes the side of the women, they only print what they want.December 28, 2010 4:17 pm at 4:17 pm #746822
Basically the halacha is that a woman’s words are not upheld in beis din (to demand a divorce) if she ‘admits’ to her husband that she cheated on him willingly, unless he believes her. The reason is that maybe she is just saying this because she wants to force him to let her get out of the marriage so she can be with someone else. If she wants a divorce that’s fine, but she has to go through the process like everyone else. The man, according to the din of the gemara, is believed in a parallel situation, without going into details. The reason he is believed, again without going into details, is because he has something to support his claim – that is, according to the din of the gemara, a man can force his wife to accept a divorce, so since he could’ve done that anyway, he’s believed with this claim. This is called “b’yado l’garsha ba’al korchah”. However, the Rema (quoting a Hagahos Maimonis b’shem the Ri M’gash) says that being that we have accepted Rabbenu Gershom’s cherem that a man may not force his wife to accept a divorce, he is no longer ‘b’yado’, and therefore nowadays he will need further proof of his claim to demand a divorce. My point was to say that if indeed a heter me’ah rabbanim is so common, then perhaps it should still be considered b’yado. After further thought however, I think that this may be a faulty proof, because there is a Tosafos Yeshanim in Kesubos 22a, which, while it is ambiguous, I understood it to imply that anything which requires the consent of others is not called b’yado. V’tzarich iyun.
Disclaimer: This has been written from memory.
As for the story, I’d rather not go into details. If someone understood, fine, and if not, I’m not really sure I should’ve posted it in the first place, so we’ll leave it at that.December 29, 2010 7:39 am at 7:39 am #746823
Sam- what kind of seruv can be made against a woman? like other posters have said… what kind of social pressures can be induced upon the woman? wow, excluded from getting an aliyah- hopefully the shul wouldn’t give her one anyways.
What do you mean, “his and her” beis din? Doesn’t the Beis Din summon the other party (when asked by one side) and they have a choice to come to that one or any one of their liking? (of stature, frum ect). How could a Beis Din issue a seruv against one side if the other side is not there or has not said their opinion/side of the story? Isn’t that contrary to halacha?December 29, 2010 2:19 pm at 2:19 pm #746824
hss: it would have the effect of people disassociating and no longer socializing with her, until she follows Beis Din’s orders. A seruv is more than shul and aliyos.December 29, 2010 3:31 pm at 3:31 pm #746825
There is a case I know of where the husband went out of his way to give the Get as needed. However, he has not been able to get a civil divorce for over 10 years because she has been fighting him all along in court. When you add to this the fact that she is the one that wanted the divorce, it is really outrageous. She deserves the the actions that Cedarhurst above mentioned.December 29, 2010 3:47 pm at 3:47 pm #746826
Nice story Charlie. I had a similar case with B”D which, would not give me a seruv, but told me to go to secular court. The ending was quite a C”H, which I won’t mention.December 30, 2010 6:43 am at 6:43 am #746827
This is Popa. My account has been blocked since sunday, and is still blocked despite that my username does not show it.
You can see the background at:
Mods: You ought to let this through.
I think we solved the problem. Try signing in now. If it doesn’t work, try clearing your cookies and cache. Just make sure that your browser only used Chalav Yisroel or Parve cookies from now on. And send all your extra cache to YW HeadquartersDecember 31, 2010 2:05 pm at 2:05 pm #746828
1.My (female)friend had a siruv put on her without even getting a hazmanah to beis din!She found out about the letter quickly because she immediately lost her job.
2.I only know 2 women who didn’t take a get when it was offered.You know why?BECAUSE THEY WERE TOLD THEY WOULD HAVE TO GIVE UP THEIR KIDS!December 31, 2010 2:13 pm at 2:13 pm #746829
eclipse: And why should the father have to give up their kids more than the mother? They should not.December 31, 2010 2:32 pm at 2:32 pm #746830
I never implied that.December 31, 2010 8:07 pm at 8:07 pm #746831
The reason why there are no women listed in JP is because of who runs the page.
There is a lot of history there, and you can hardly call the editor objective.December 31, 2010 8:22 pm at 8:22 pm #746832
Kids and money are what is always being fought over. The guy usually withholds the get because he wants more access to the kids or to give less money.January 2, 2011 3:55 am at 3:55 am #746833
I meant the women were told to GIVE UP THE KIDS.Completely.
And using the get as blackmail for the reasons you gave is just as wrong.(I know you were not necessarily endorsing it.)January 2, 2011 5:14 am at 5:14 am #746834
or to give less money.
The amount of money he must give is specified in the Kesuba. To demand more is wrong of her. To give less is wrong of him.January 2, 2011 5:21 am at 5:21 am #746835
Why is it always wrong?
If one has unfairly gotten the courts to give him or her the kids, why shouldn’t the other party use their leverage to get the other spouse to be reasonable?January 2, 2011 5:45 am at 5:45 am #746836
If one has unfairly gotten the courts to give him or her the kids, why shouldn’t the other party use their leverage to get the other spouse to be reasonable?
popa, using your logic that its okay for the wronged party to the revenge their wrong, you shouldn’t have any complaints if one withholds or refuses the get because the other party did something bad/wrong in the divorce process. That is what your logic would indicate.
I’m not commenting if that is fair, but is that what you are saying? Otherwise it would seem hypocritical.
Additionally, if I recall the halacha correctly, custody is halachicly given to the mother if the child is nursing — until he/she stops nursing when he/she goes to the fathers custody. Children above nursing age are halachicly in the fathers custody.
Furthermore, on the issue of asset separation in halacha, the wife takes any assets she had from prior to the marriage. Any money/assets accumulated during the marriage belong to the husband.
I suppose if one wants to get a get per halacha, they should need to follow the halacha of the gitten process in all its areas.January 2, 2011 6:06 am at 6:06 am #746837
I have a lot to share on this matter,but I’ve learned from other threads that unless a person really is involved in a matter,they will just keep on playing devil’s advocate until everyone is mad at everyone.So…may you never know all that I know the way I got to know it…And I will graciously exit.January 2, 2011 6:23 am at 6:23 am #746838
Actually, I believe it is age 6, not nursing. Thereafter it is boys – father, girls – mother.January 2, 2011 6:36 am at 6:36 am #746839
That wasn’t directed at anyone in particular;just a general thing.January 2, 2011 11:23 am at 11:23 am #746840
According to halacha the man should get the boys when they reach the age of chinuch, otherwise the mother gets the children.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.