Get Refusal

[avromie7]

I have a friend who got divorced years ago. She went to court against Rabbanim's advice and got everything. He lost his expensive house and everything else. He was allowed to take a few pieces of cutlery. Had to move into a dingy basement, pay a fortune in support and was left with literally nothing. He didn't have money for food and literally subsisted on coffee.
In these cases, such a person might be justified if he wanted to withhold. But most cases are not this and we should therefore hear what the involved legit Rabbanim say.

Why does it need to get be extreme? What is the halachik source to say "a get may never be withheld"?

[avromie7]

Your overwhelmingly sexist tone is really bothersome

Please be more specific?

[aygart]

to me its very simple, there is no excuse to not show up to beis din when called upon, there is no EXCUSE PERIOD!
If someone doesnt show up you are automatically in the wrong. There is no being dan lekaf zchus. You can say the wife was abusive etc etc etc..
Show up to beis din & speak to them, air your grievances or go to a dif. beis din.
But to not go to beis din & not giving a get you deserve everything & everything thrown your way.
I am very happy to see that this is being brought into the public light. If the husband has a beef with his wife there are solutions, but not showing up means automatically guilty even though he may have had a very strong case against her.

What about when that is the only thing bringing her to bais din?

[TimT]

There are monsters on either side. One side has social warriors while the other doesn’t.

[Mootkim]

1) It's not an even playing field, the courts are stacked against the man.
2) Why should he give her an even playing field to drag him through the mud? While it may sound good in theory, when you look at it from the perspective of a man who just wants to move on with his life while having reasonable custody and being able to eat after paying child support and alimony, it really makes no sense.

But the law is the law regarding custody and child support. Is it unfair? Possibly. Do we need to listen to the law regardless? Yes. Using a get to force her to forgo her lawful rights to the law is in my opinion corrupt.

[aygart]

The law has nothing to do with the get. If the divorce is not finalized in a halachikly acceptable manner, the case is still open. There is no reason he should be forced to give her a get so she has nothing stopping her from dragging him through the mud. As soon as she stops dragging him through the mud and they come to a halachikly acceptable agreement it's all over and he will give the get. This is the reality of the overwhelming majority of cases, when these women cry that they are "agunos"; and people run around defending them, they cheapen the case of the real agunos.

I can't speak to which is the majority, but I am personally familiar with cases where the husband withheld a get to be paid off.

[PlatinumGuy]

Using a get to force her to forgo her lawful rights to the law is in my opinion corrupt.

Why?

[Mootkim]

And correct me if I am wrong but I dont believe that it is so simple to get a siruv on someone. Most of these people have a siruv from a competent beis din. What is the excuse to ignore this and not show up to discuss it?

[avromie7]

But the law is the law regarding custody and child support. Is it unfair? Possibly. Do we need to listen to the law regardless? Yes. Using a get to force her to forgo her lawful rights to the law is in my opinion corrupt.

If all you're worried about is the law, leave the get out of it. Why should these people subject themselves to severe torture because the law says so? IMO this attitude is halachikly and morally corrupt.

I have a friend who got divorced years ago. She went to court against Rabbanim's advice and got everything. He lost his expensive house and everything else. He was allowed to take a few pieces of cutlery. Had to move into a dingy basement, pay a fortune in support and was left with literally nothing. He didn't have money for food and literally subsisted on coffee.
In these cases, such a person might be justified if he wanted to withhold. But most cases are not this and we should therefore hear what the involved legit Rabbanim say.

This is very true, I recently heard first hand from someone who had an employee that had to take a serious pay cut because he was being over compensated at his previous job. The judge's response was "if you were able to make that much for 5 years, it's your problem". He literally couldn't even take home enough money to pay his rent. Even when he was given full custody she still got child support because she had supervised visitation, he was finally able to take away the supervised visitation and stop paying child support when she showed up to her supervised visitation high on narcotics.

[Mootkim]

Why?

because you are using the Torah to bypass the law

[avromie7]

And correct me if I am wrong but I dont believe that it is so simple to get a siruv on someone. Most of these people have a siruv from a competent beis din. What is the excuse to ignore this and not show up to discuss it?

He has a halachik right to go to a different BD.

[avromie7]

because you are using the Torah to bypass the law

The torah supersedes the law.

Using feminist morals to bypass halacha is reprehensible

[Mootkim]

If all you're worried about is the law, leave the get out of it. Why should these people subject themselves to severe torture because the law says so? IMO this attitude is halachikly and morally corrupt.

100% they should leave the get out of any law issues. It should be given regardless of any court/law/monetary fights. As for your question can you rephrase it because I don't think I fully understand your question.

[Mootkim]

He has a halachik right to go to a different BD.

Do they go though?

[PlatinumGuy]

because you are using the Torah to bypass the law

Not exactly sure what you mean? 'Using the Torah' sounds nefarious, but every marriage 'Uses the Torah' - the Torah was meant to be used. 'Bypassing the law' sounds like disobeying the law, but there is nothing in the law that prohibits a woman from voluntarily relinquishing her rights?

Of course that's before going into the fact Dina Demalchusa Dina does not permit one to circumvent Din Torah and approach a court. 

[Mootkim]

The torah supersedes the law.

this is true when there is a conflict between the Torah and the law

[AsherO]

100% they should leave the get out of any law issues. It should be given regardless of any court/law/monetary fights. As for your question can you rephrase it because I don't think I fully understand your question.

That doesn’t make sense. It has to be גט כריתות so the legal issues have to get sorted out as well. I’m not a posed, but its possible that if he’s still legally married to her and they’re still having a legal battle in court over custody, alimony, child support etc. then the Get’s validity might be put into question.

[avromie7]

100% they should leave the get out of any law issues. It should be given regardless of any court/law/monetary fights. As for your question can you rephrase it because I don't think I fully understand your question.

These are halachik issues, what the law judge says has no bearing on halacha.
In a situation where the woman is subjecting the man to severe torture by taking his children and not allowing him to keep enough money to live (while she lives the high life off his hard work), why should he give up the only power he has to stop her abuse?

[Mootkim]

That doesn’t make sense. It has to be גט כריתות so the legal issues have to get sorted out as well. I’m not a posed, but its possible that if he’s still legally married to her and they’re still having a legal battle in court over custody, alimony, child support etc. then the Get’s validity might be put into question.

you're right but most of these cases have already been civilly divorced.

[avromie7]

Do they go though?

This is usually where things get stuck, she doesn't like his choice of BD and he doesn't like hers.

this is true when there is a conflict between the Torah and the law

Like when the law judge says she gets full custody and all his money while halacha says otherwise?