Macha against men not giving gittin

They should not hold a get but make sure you do not get into a trap of paying your ex too much $$ get a lawyer and don’t sign any agreements without a lawyer looking at it

The only time public shaming is allowed for any violation of such things is when a beis din that both have accepted upon themselves – without another beis din taking the other side – says rhat one party, either husband, wife, business associate, etc, is in breach of beis din.

In most of these cases, there is always another side. R. Daniel Eidensohn on his site clarifies this with proof in most of the high profile cases. In one neighborhood, placards with a man’s face and name were distributed on streets, while one beis din was apparently on his side. That is indefensible. Women sometimes wish to take away mens’ entire lives, both in terms of their children and their money. There needs to be a bargaining chip; the man can say that if you want to extort me and take money just because goyishe law says you’re entitled to it (even though she didn’t work for it at all, and even if she was working her wages go to her husband) then you won’t be able to remarry.

I don’t see what’s wrong with that scenario, bitter and sad as it may be. Are there cases where one party is clearly wrong? I’m sure there are, but mindlessly shouting how many years a woman has been an Agunah (and exactly how many are there? 50 in the nyc area?) does not mean she is right.

In almost all of these cases, if a woman would agree to not take any money besides her kesuvah(if she’s entitled to it…her wanting a divorce because she isn’t happy makes her lose that right, a taanah of “maus alai”, which is extremely common) and agrees to joint custody, I’m sure that 95% of the time this wouldn’t be an issue.

Mecha’a, not “Macha”.

A husband doesn’t have to give a divorce (Get) if he doesn’t want to if he wants to remain married to his wife. Even if she wants a divorce. That’s the rule and law in the Torah and as codified as Halacha in Shulchan Aruch.

There are a very small number of exceptions where she’s entitled to a Get upon request, when the situation meets one of the few exceptions specifically listed by Chazal stating so. But as Avira pointed out even in those exceptional cases he’s not obligated to give a Get unless and until a bona fide Beis Din that both parties agreed to its jurisdiction over their case rules he’s obligated, after conducting a full Beis Din trial and reaching a Psak Halacha whether an obligation exists or not.

“If you want to extort me and take money just because goyishe law says you’re entitled to it (even though she didn’t work for it at all, and even if she was working her wages go to her husband…”

Yasher koach…true enlightenment cloaked in daas torah.

“I’m sure that 95% of the time this wouldn’t be an issue.”

This does not seem to be your area of expertise. You are quoting party lines and it doesn’t match up with real life.

Yserbius; what strategies does a man have besides the ability to withhold a get? It might be a stronger weapon, but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be used – obviously it should not be used to simply get what he wants or something he isn’t entitled to, but when a woman uses secular court to get her way, which is a very powerful tool indeed (the court can put him in jail if he refuses), why is it unfair to allow him to do so?

My main issue is with the fact that these activists believe the woman without exception; the mere fact that she has been unable to get remarried for whatever amount of years it is, is sufficient to demonize the husband. Are there mean spirited men who wish to torture their ex wives? I’m sure there are a few. It’s possible that there are a lot, but the activists do not know – all they know is that there were some rabbis somewhere who said she was right and that she’s been an agunah for 15 years, therefore the husband is wrong.

Syag – I don’t know about party lines, all I know is that the activists are employing tactics which are usually against halacha, that can potentially render a get pasul and the resulting children mamzerim. Is my assumption about peaceful resolutions wrong? Could be. It could be that there are a lot of husbands who want to take revenge on their ex wives and ruin their lives. It doesn’t change the fact that in practice these social media and protest campaigns are not acceptable. If even one of the accused men are innocent, they have done more harm than good. You are correct that I do not have halachik experience in this area, but then again, who here is a dayan? I think we all know people who were involved in divorce cases.

Benephraim…hafkaus kidushin was discontinued in the times of the rishonim. It also is not up to us to make new scenarios beyond when chazal make them, as we are only doing the shlichus of the former Sanhedrin. What you are suggesting is extremely dangerous and banned universally by the poskim.

GH – I don’t claim to be enlightened; maaseh yadehah lebaalah is a mishnah; or is the mishnah outdated to you? There is a device of aini nizones ve’aini oseh, that a woman can claim independence financially from her husband (aside from achilas leros in nishsay milug, tzon barzel etc) and keep her wages, but the default is that the husband keeps everything in exchange for his obligation to feed the wife. In these cases, the women did not make thus stipulation, so their wages go to their husbands.

Didn’t Zablon Simintov refuse his wife a divorce for decades?

Philosopher, i mentioned that above – it’s the clause of aini nizones ve’aini osah, but that’s not the default relationship.

AviraDeArah, I am assuming that a woman who demands a get supports herself and therefore the husband would have no rights to wages . (This is much more pro-woman and fair than the so-called “enlightened” US laws that devide all of a couple’s assets evenly regardless of who actually worked for the money or inherited it.)

That should be achilas peros and nichsay milug**

In secular law, a marriage is an equal partnership and thus when it is disbanded, an equal split is appropriate. In halacha, that is most certainly not the case. The same way a woman was supported by her husband (or at least he was obligated to do so) she can be supported again by her next husband. Why should she get half or even anything when halacha does not entitle her to it?

Having actually been through this process here are words of wisdom
Ideally the civil divorce and get should be executed at the same time with the process being guided by a frum mediator or bais din.
No one wins. There are compromises necessary. But if people actually want to follow halacha and do what is best for the kids they need to accept the rulings of the impartial parties outside of the fighting.
The problems start when one side isn’t interested in guidance but winning or his/her own cheshbonos. And with such a person what use is a macha? You can have all the gedolim in the world line up on one side and he will still have his cheshbonos.

Same topic, different label. So we see the same comments, many sane, others, not. But mostly all are unwelcome because they generalize. And this is ridiculous because every situation is different. There are men who are jerks, and refusing to give gittin because they are simply not mentchen. I’m not sure that much is accomplished by the drama that some people and organizations do to these individuals, but it does create chilul Hashem, bizyonos, and often damage. And there are many cases, probably the majority that involve delays in giving gittin because the affirs of division are not resolved.

I have encountered many cases where the women made their husbands miserable in court for prolonged months, even years, with no legitimate claim. According to matrimonial attorneys, a huge percentage of claims of abuse, whether against the children or domestic violence, are simply fabrication. (And sometimes they are true.)

While the guy is busy defending himself, having legal expenses that she does not have (she uses the prosecutor’s office), and being publicly shamed much of the time, she has the court fighting for her, penalizing him constantly. Moreover, she finds the tricks to withhold the children from him while making him pay for that, too. No, withholding is cruel. But the issues are not resolved yet, and the severance of the gett is not complete.

This same mecho’oh against men for withholding should also address the women who withhold resolution. And the statistics are alarmingly close to 50-50. So we need not to make generalizations. It’s not the greedy women, and it’s not the cruel men. Divorce is a painful process, and it brings out the worst midos in a person. And way too many divorces are bitter battles, costing everyone lots of money and anguish. The wreckage left behind is horrible for all. Everyone loses (except for toanim and lawyers). The now divorced and single men, women, and the children all suffer.

We should all take note that the organizations that exist to provide support for either the men or the women must be considered suspect here. It is not uncommon that there are individuals who provide “emotional” support for divorcing people, actually guiding them to make the process riddled with accusations and counter accusations, prolonging the cost and agony. How rich the community would become if we concentrated on ways to bring shalom to couples, and assisting them in parting (when this is inevitable) in a peaceful manner.

“This same mecho’oh against men for withholding should also address the women who withhold resolution. And the statistics are alarmingly close to 50-50. So we need not to make generalizations”

Most would agree that each case is unique and we should “avoid generalizations”. However, you make an even more important point that is new to me that “the statistics” prove that women obstruct resolution in roughly 50 percent of contested divorce cases. Could you provide the source of those “statistics” or the name of the author(s), government agency or organization who published those results (since you cannot post a link). Thanks.

Thank you smerel.

It is no surprise to me that Joe and Avirah continue to sock puppet each other with extremist views in the name of Torah. And always in regard to punishment, women and children. If you follow closely you will find they rarely have others agree with their views or their presentation as stated. Are they the only 2 real talmidei chochomim here and everyone else just isn’t in the know? And how odd that so many of the batei din don’t pasken that way? Are they also deficient in learning, ch”v, and not as committed to truth, ch”v? I wish these 2 would take some time to learn from a live rav about use of internet to spark controversy in the name of halacha, use of internet to “spread truth”, and some social understanding of those they believe to be “helping”.

GHadora: The Israeli rabbanut has posted statistics stating that about 50% (slightly more if I recall) of Get refusers are women.

Syag; can you please explain how batei din do not pasken “that way”? I have not received shimush in choshen mishpat – maybe there’s something i missed in learning, but all of what i said above (along with UJMs posts) were straight gemara, rishonim, and shu”a. Is there a bais din that obligates a man to give child support at the discretion of his wife and not on his own, alimony, or division of estates and property? If so, please name them and their halachik rationale; until such time I’ll assume that you’re going by what people do in practice, which is that money is divided etc….but who says that’s right? Just because people do things in order to get money, doesn’t mean it’s ok. Many “frum” businessmen take jews to court; I’ve even heard some say it publicly in shul without shame – that doesn’t make it right.

Divorce is obviously messy; I do agree with “the little i know”s description, also to those who wanted a source, there was an article about it on YWN a few years ago that has been quoted on this forum many times.

Smerel; I’m sorry, but to assume that the husband is always wrong is gross jurisprudence. I cannot fathom how a rov can have a bias so much, to the point of believing at face value whatever a woman alleges without derisha and chakira (she’s not even kosher le’aidus!). My rebbeim often said that a marriage not working out is more often than not, the fault of the husband, but whatever mistakes he makes have bearing on her rights in a divorce only in regards to obligating him to divorce and forcing him to pay a kesuvah; if his faults are at a certain degree, if he is abusive(not to be confused with being a jerk), doesn’t provide, has addictions, or any number of major problems, then she is entitled to her full kesuva(nowadays with tosefes, it’s about $20k), but if she’s just unhappy, or he is not communicative, or other common complaints, she is saying “maus alai”, that she is disgusted by him and she relinquishes her kesuvah. Those degrees are to be worked out by a beis din who will do proper derishah and chakira, which at the minimum requires knowing both sides of the story.

It’s like the kangaroo courts of college campuses where any and all claims by women are believed without question….a horrible neuvas hadin that i am shocked a dayan would employ.

I agree that there are more male deadbeats and abusers than women; perhaps far more, but there are at least a “miut hamatzui” of horrible women as well.

UJM: I’ve done a reasonably comprehensive search of the Rabbaniut website (the gov.IL URL followed by “chief_rabbinate_of_Israel” sublinks) and there is NO posted reference to any statement, study, or estimate of any such statistic. Perhaps you might provide the date or the sublink (since we can’t post full URLs) that might lead to this statistic. Tks

TLIK – it’s more than there not being an obligation to pay alimony, as UJM said, it’s straight thievery to take such money, but many disgruntled wives feel that they deserve it – women talk a lot about “hitting him where it hurts”, getting what they feel owed for all their suffering (sometimes real, sometimes imagined).

Is this what gadolha and syag are defending?

TLIK: As I mentioned earlier I agree with your general view and approach on this issue. One nekuda, if I may beg to respectfully differ, is that I think you’re giving to much deference to secular courts/law. M’ikur hadin, the secular courts and the secular law should have absolutely zero bearing on this (or any) proceeding, case or dispute between two Jews, on matters of divorce, assets ownership, custody, visitation, child support or any other issues between Yidden, whether husband and wife or between strangers.

I understand your concern regarding the non-Jewish courts demanding to enforce various secular law as they may pertain to custody, child support or possibly other issues. But since, I believe, we are discussing Yirei Shamayim, who want to strictly and completely follow Halacha — even if and when they may be engaged in a dispute with another Yid (i.e. a spouse), therefore we should be operating under the assumption that both parties will do what is right Al Pi Torah and Din. Which means they’ll both naturally insist to completely adjudicate their dispute in Beis Din, exclusively using Halacha to determine the resolution of all issues.

If a married couple decide to split and amicably reach an agreement between themselves on all issues, including assets separation, custody, visitation and child support, as well as any other issues, and simply go through the legal process to technically formalize obtaining a writ of divorce so that they’re legally not married any longer, I don’t believe any judge will override their amicably and jointly presented agreement to the court. Even if there is some law on that books giving the judge that technical right. In fact, regarding a couple that have children but were never legally married to each other, as a large percent of gentile couples these days live, they can reach whatever amicable agreement they want regarding the money and children without even involving any court or filling any court case. In the vast majority of states any court will be elated and more than happy to accept a mutually agreed arrangement as is. It’ll save the overworked, overbooked, backlogged court docket from having to spend countless of tens or hundreds of hours of court time litigating issues that the parties mutually reached an agreement.

On that token, if two Yidden fully adjudicate all their outstanding disagreements in Beis Din (or mutually, privately, outside of Beis Din) and come to court with the Beis Din ruling and present it as their joint mutually agreed arrangements on all issues, including monetary separation, custody, visitation and support, it is extremely highly unlikely that any court will demand a court case be held to relitigate what was agreed to.

In fact, in many states if they reached an agreement and have no no dispute, they don’t even need to file any court case or involve the court whatsoever. They can simply carry out what they agreed to and have no dispute over. Obviously these are state laws and each of the fifty states (or foreign countries) will have their own legal nuances.

And that is the way to live Al Pi Torah and Halacha without utilizing any arkaos, c”v. So for any and all Yirei Shamayim, the above is how they would and should approach this.

So then we are left with the cases of where we are dealing with one of the parties to the dispute is not a Yirei Shamayim. And their lack of Yiras Shamayim is evidenced by the fact that they refuse to accept full and complete adjudication of all outstanding issues via Beis Din, utilizing halacha exclusively to determine the outcome. For example, if one disputant refuses to let the secular court know that all issues have been resolved (if a secular court is somehow necessary in the process, let alone if he/she kneged halacha initiates a secular court case). So what do we do about such a situation? The Beis Din should then put a Siruv on that party. And deny that party any halachic rights he/she would otherwise have been entitled to (i.e. a Get), until they reverse their kneged halacha actions and reverse/repay any gains they illicitly (kneged halacha) obtained from the secular system.

But since the large majority of frum Yidden have a chazaka of being Yirei Shamayim, the last type of unfortunate situation should be a distinct minority of divorces. But nevertheless an option in the toolbox of Butei Dinim, should it be necessary.

But to reiterate, I generally agree with the points you’ve made on these issues.

But since the large majority of frum Yidden have a chazaka of being Yirei Shamayim, the last type of unfortunate situation should be a distinct minority of divorces. But nevertheless an option in the toolbox of Butei Dinim, should it be necessary.

The limited available data I’ve seen and my own anecdotal experience do not support the assertion that the vast majority of divorces in the frum tzibur involve two parties with equal bargaining power and resources willingly submitting themselves to a final adjudication by a beis din and subsequently willing to submit the psak din to a secular court in a settlement context. Nor have you supported your assertion that in 50 percent of cases, it is the woman who is making “unreasonable” demands of the husband or otherwise seeking use the secular courts to “destroy” their him. The halacha is what it is and is not the issue being debated.

GHadora, you’re conflating part of my comments with parts of comments from another poster, in making a cojoined response to a point that wasn’t made. (I said nothing about 50% or about unreasonable demands.)

That being said, the majority of frum divorces, in fact, do NOT end up in contentious/bitter secular court proceedings. I certainly stand by my assertion that the large majority of frum Yidden are Yirei Shamayim.

Ujm, your comment that it isn’t obligatory to give a get is absolutely disgusting. If a woman wants a get she has to get a get unless she is making unreasonable demands or withholding visitation rights from the husband. I am not saying that every single divorce was done out of necessity, but I believe the vast majority was necessary.

You know what, a lot of things are not obligatory according to halacha, that does not mean we don’t do it. Withholding a get for no valid reason gets a man on the path straight to gehinom.

“the large majority of frum Yidden are Yirei Shamayim”

Yes. But that does not mean at perhaps the most emotionally stressful time of their lives when they feel that their own well-being and and that of their children is at risk, frum yidden will act rationally and strictly in accordance with the technical requirements of halacha. I’m not sure anyone is suggesting that “the majority” of frum divorces, end up in contentious/bitter secular court proceedings. However, in cases of wholly-inequitable proposals based on the financial history of that relationship (not that infrequent as more women work outside the home as the primary or supplemental income earner) or where there has been any history of verbal/phsyical abuse, don’t expect otherwise “yirai shamayim” to act rationally. Sadly, the frequency of contested outcomes is higher than you seem willing to accept. Further, the statistics from EY you cite to may not be comparable to those in the US and UK where there is much easier access to secular courts to redress perceived inequities).

ujm:

The deference I give to the secular court is not because I feel they should have a role. It is the consensus of the overwheming majority of rabbonim, batei din and toanim that it is necessary to be in accordance with the court to avoid the potential for other conflict. This might be made into a stronger argument because the batei din (or any other arbitration situation) have no jurisdiction in custody or visitation. And these agreements get filed in secular court. In NYS, anything in the agreement reached in BD concerning these matters is ignored. And the court reserves the right to litigate. In other states, the arrangement might be different. So it is the batei din that defer to the court, or look to rule in accordance. It should also be noted that batei din have a glaring distinction from the courts. The goal of the psak is that both parties agree to it, and that the BD not impose its psak on the two parties. Court does not do that. It rules and imposes.

You seek that BD should rule according to Halacha. Yes, in an ideal world, that might be possible. But I draw you to the Gemora (Bava Metziya 30A) לא חרבה ירושלים אלא שהעמידו דבריהם על דברי תורה. The finality of halacha requires something else besides the strict application of halacha. I would not say this alone. This is a Gemora. In reality, BD tries to “work things out”, which is about creating compromises (also required in halacha).