Close this search box.

Justice Minister’s Bill Promoting Prenuptial Agreement

chupJustice Minister Tzipi Livni stands behind a bill that addresses a prenuptial agreement. Livni explains that there are thousands of women in the process of divorce and many are unable to receive a bill of divorce from a beis din until she announces her willingness to forfeit many of her rights to obtain her husband’s agreement to give the get. If passed into law a mesader keddushin would have to suggest a couple signs a prenuptial, an agreement that would prevent many women from becoming agunos.

The bill would compel either side to pay alimony to the other for refusing to honor a request to separate from the marriage. The bill includes a six month period or longer if applicable to permit one side to persuade and/or reach agreement with the other providing both sides agree to the effort. The couple would work with the court’s social workers and mediators, specially trained for such situations.

Livni feels the current situation in which some women are trapped if they are unwilling to sign away their rights may not be permitted to continue. She adds “The bill can correct this injustice and assure us that Jewish Law will not be narrowly interpreted or used to take advantage of another and not used to harm women”.

The Ministerial Law Committee is set to discuss the bill on Sunday, 10 Sivan.

(YWN – Israel Desk, Jerusalem)

7 Responses

  1. I hate to admit it, but regarding this issue I think Livni is right.

    Of course many fine details have to first be worked out, such as Custody and alimony issues.
    (If the husband is denied proper visitations, or if there is a religious dispute related to raising the children, then SOMETIMES withholding a “Get” is temporarily justified.)

    Bottom line, a “Prenup” is generally not a bad idea….

  2. Rav Eliashev paskened that even the so-called halachic prenup promoted by the BDA in America (and a similar one in Israel) causes a “get me’usa”, an invalid Get, if later the couple get divorced since the husband feels pressured to give the Get even if he doesn’t want to. And the wife remains an eishes ish despite the Get Me’usa.

    So much more this government mandated and drafted prenup certainly causes a Get Me’usa, invalid get, and the wife remains an eishes ish even according to the more lenient opinions that might have allowed the other type of prenup.

  3. The only grounds for refusing to give a Get is if the husband is still trying to save the marriage. That doesn’t last long. If one spouse wants to preserve the family, regardless of the legal system, they’ll probably wait until they either reconcile of both agree the marriage is over.

    Note that by halacha, until the husband gives the Get he is responsible for supporting the wife. Israeli courts refuse to support this principle (if they did, the husband would rush to give a Get in order to turn off his financial liability).

    The problem is the reluctance of courts to act – the laws are already in place to resolve the matters, and passing a new law won’t help. What would help is courts enforcing the law (allowing the wife to spend all the husbands assets is one way – incarceration is less effective).

  4. Good idea, but if a recalcitrant low life is going to hold his wife hostage, why would he honor a pre-nup?

  5. “Rav Eliashev paskened”

    Most poskim disagreed with Rav Eliashev z’tz’l on this one.

    “The only grounds for refusing to give a Get is if the husband is still trying to save the marriage.”

    Correct. If the husband no longer wants to be married, he has a chiyuv to give a get. Period.

    “why would he honor a pre-nup?”

    His assets can be seized to pay the support demanded by the pre-nup.

  6. charliehall: Rav Eliashev’s halachic position on this matter, as with most matters he has ruled on, is agreed with by the vast majority of contemporary poskim.

    akuperma: A wife, whether she lives in her husbands home or she left it, halachicly cannot spend her husband’s money or assets without his express given permission. So your idea is silly, unimplementable and contrary to halacha.

    And a husband has the halachic right to try to save and preserve the marriage however long he wishes even if his wife gave up long before.

  7. akuperma, the husband has the right to offer the support he is obligated to provide (room and board, food, etc.) in his home and advise his wife that he is providing her support and it is available to her in his home and she is welcome to move in to utilize and accept his support that he is obligated to her. If she declines to move to his home to receive his support, he has no further obligation of support as he is already making it available to her in the marital home.

Leave a Reply

Popular Posts