Get Refusal

[Mootkim]

You mean if people will stay in bad marriages rather than deal with a potential agunah situation?

No I mean that people will give get sooner instead of holding out long after the legal divorce

[Mootkim]

In this generation of "guilty until proven innocent" everyone blames the husband.  Many many men are guilty. (So anyone that wants to argue make sure you read this),  but so many women don't let the fathers see the children, take to shul, be involved in chinuch etc. I really hope before people come to a conclusion regarding a specific case that try to hear the husband's side

If that is the case though there are normal civil ways to deal with the latest either in beis din or in court. Either one will force the person to allow custody etc if deemed to be eligible. A get though is sort of unenforceable until the guy actually gives it. Give the get and work out any concerns after in a legal or halachik manner.

[Mootkim]

the torah set the standards, and we need to deal with it

The standards were never set for the guy to use as a bargaining chip to extort the girl. If anything, the Torah allows beis din to physically harm him until he gives it. Without a beis din being able to enforce these issues nowadays, the closest possible avenue is cherem or completely excommunication someone from every community.

[PlatinumGuy]

The standards were never set for the guy to use as a bargaining chip to extort the girl. If anything, the Torah allows beis din to physically harm him until he gives it.

A husband can be compelled to divorce only under an extremely narrow set of circumstances. From the Torah's perspective, a wife is property and a husband isn't obligated to divorce his wife at all, so he's entitled to ask for whatever he wants in return for relinquishing his ownership. The accepted norms of decent behavior evolved and it is now considered abusive to maintain a marriage against the wife's wishes, but that is a departure from the Torah, much as a father marrying off a 3 year old or a 12 year old marring a 13 year are now morally inappropriate.

Without a beis din being able to enforce these issues nowadays, the closest possible avenue is cherem or completely excommunication someone from every community.

A get given under undue duress is void. As critical as the divorcees wellbeing is, the Torah comes first.

[Mordyk]

If that is the case though there are normal civil ways to deal with the latest either in beis din or in court. Either one will force the person to allow custody etc if deemed to be eligible. A get though is sort of unenforceable until the guy actually gives it. Give the get and work out any concerns after in a legal or halachik manner.

Civil due process?  In court when there is he said, she said, the verdict is to go by "she said "

[Lurker]

No I mean that people will give get sooner instead of holding out long after the legal divorce

Not any more than kneeling during the anthem is ending racism.

[aygart]

Get refusal is abuse. If you have a custody battle or whatever, hash it out in Beis Din or the courtroom. Using a get as leverage is an incredible act of cruelty. If there is ever an excuse it would be the one in a thousand exception.

Any time you hear a get apologist excuse a guy because of some custody battle or the like, you find out that either the guy didn't even try visit his kids when he was asked to by the wife in the early stages of separation, or he was being kept away from the kids because he abused them.

Due process and innocence until guilt is proven are important and necessary ideals. However when you witness someone getting abused, if your gut reaction is "let's hear out the abuser" and not "gevalt! Let's protect the abused" there is clearly something amiss. Too often we hear people trying to "both sides" a get refuser when the reaction should be to protect the women.

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

[drosenberg88429]

There are husbands that are forced to pay absurd amounts of alimony and support so their exes should never have to work a day in their lives. The crippling of these men financially makes it almost impossible for them to remarry, as they cannot support a second household so long as they are chained and enslaved financially to their former wives. For all practical purposes, these men are nearly agunos. You'll never hear of anyone protesting such conduct on the woman's side, though. Demanding primary custody or full and full support seems to be par for the course. All is fair when it comes to family court, and if one side is given more leverage and rights by the court system due to their gender, then so be it. However, when the other side decides to exercise the only leverage given to the male in an attempt to force a more equitable settlement that will allow them both to move on in life, he is dubbed a monster. Life is not always so black and white. Two wrongs may not make a right, but it does puts a person's behavior in perspective before casting judgement without jury or trial.

[Mordyk]

There are husbands that are forced to pay absurd amounts of alimony and support so their exes should never have to work a day in their lives. The crippling of these men financially makes it almost impossible for them to remarry, as they cannot support a second household so long as they are chained and enslaved financially to their former wives. For all practical purposes, these men are nearly agunos. You'll never hear of anyone protesting such conduct on the woman's side, though. Demanding primary custody or full and full support seems to be par for the course. All is fair when it comes to family court, and if one side is given more leverage and rights by the court system due to their gender, then so be it. However, when the other side decides to exercise the only leverage given to the male in an attempt to force a more equitable settlement that will allow them both to move on in life, he is dubbed a monster. Life is not always so black and white. Two wrongs may not make a right, but it does puts a person's behavior in perspective before casting judgement without jury or trial.

+1000

I have a family member that had to pay full child support even after most were married.  He didn't realize they out this in his divorce agreement.   He expected it to go down with each kid over 18 or married. When he got divorced he had to give up his whole house with not even a penny left for him. 

[yuneeq]

Exactly.   That's why I said try to find out about each individual case. Don't jump to conclusions simply because it's trending in Instagram

In the cases that I have seen the instagrammer/s have verified the case before hand with rabbis and others, and even give the husbands a chance to speak for themselves before going after them.

Was it the protests or the arrest on separate charges?

It was the protests

[yuneeq]

+1000

I have a family member that had to pay full child support even after most were married.  He didn't realize they out this in his divorce agreement.   He expected it to go down with each kid over 18 or married. When he got divorced he had to give up his whole house with not even a penny left for him.

To me the biggest issue here is that he hired an extremely incompetent lawyer

[avromie7]

There are husbands that are forced to pay absurd amounts of alimony and support so their exes should never have to work a day in their lives. The crippling of these men financially makes it almost impossible for them to remarry, as they cannot support a second household so long as they are chained and enslaved financially to their former wives. For all practical purposes, these men are nearly agunos. You'll never hear of anyone protesting such conduct on the woman's side, though. Demanding primary custody or full and full support seems to be par for the course. All is fair when it comes to family court, and if one side is given more leverage and rights by the court system due to their gender, then so be it. However, when the other side decides to exercise the only leverage given to the male in an attempt to force a more equitable settlement that will allow them both to move on in life, he is dubbed a monster. Life is not always so black and white. Two wrongs may not make a right, but it does puts a person's behavior in perspective before casting judgement without jury or trial.

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.

[Lurker]

On the flip side, I've seen a ridiculously wealthy family bury a father's mental health issues and drug addiction and get away with giving $250/mo in child support.

There is no black and white here. Neither women nor men have the monopoly on abusing or being abused. These broad generalizations are killing me.

[yitzgar]

השיבה שופטנו כבראשונה.....

[avromie7]

Get refusal is abuse. If you have a custody battle or whatever, hash it out in Beis Din or the courtroom. Using a get as leverage is an incredible act of cruelty. If there is ever an excuse it would be the one in a thousand exception.

Any time you hear a get apologist excuse a guy because of some custody battle or the like, you find out that either the guy didn't even try visit his kids when he was asked to by the wife in the early stages of separation, or he was being kept away from the kids because he abused them.

Due process and innocence until guilt is proven are important and necessary ideals. However when you witness someone getting abused, if your gut reaction is "let's hear out the abuser" and not "gevalt! Let's protect the abused" there is clearly something amiss. Too often we hear people trying to "both sides" a get refuser when the reaction should be to protect the women.

Where does this attitude of "withholding a get is always abuse" even if it's being used as a tactic to fight against abuse (withholding kids or taking money she is not halachikly entitled to) come from? This is completely hepach hatorah and it's the way feminism has infiltrated much of the frum world. This in not 1 in 1000, it's closer to 99 in 100. If the get is being used as leverage for him to get what he's not entitled to I agree, but it's rarely the case.

[Yehuda57]

Where does this attitude of "withholding a get is always abuse" even if it's being used as a tactic to fight against abuse (withholding kids or taking money she is not halachikly entitled to) come from? This is completely hepach hatorah and it's the way feminism has infiltrated much of the frum world. This in not 1 in 1000, it's closer to 99 in 100. If the get is being used as leverage for him to get what he's not entitled to I agree, but it's rarely the case.

It is cruel and abusive behavior. Are there instances where the wife is in the wrong? Sure. I'd wager it's about 50/50. Do secular courts unfairly favor women in custody and alimony battles? Yes. Does that give you a right to behave in a cruel and abusive way? No.

Note that in my post I allow plenty of room for exceptions, the question is where your gut reaction lies. Get refusal is abusive behavior, it is as clear as day.

You're bringing up cases of (prolonged) legal battles which are not the cases of agunos in question. There are no social media campaigns blasting pictures of abusive husbands when they are in the midst of an halachic or legal process.

[avromie7]

It is cruel and abusive behavior. Are there instances where the wife is in the wrong? Sure. I'd wager it's about 50/50. Do secular courts unfairly favor women in custody and alimony battles? Yes. Does that give you a right to behave in a cruel and abusive way? No.

Note that in my post I allow plenty of room for exceptions, the question is where your gut reaction lies. Get refusal is abusive behavior, it is as clear as day.

You're bringing up cases of (prolonged) legal battles which are not the cases of agunos in question. There are no social media campaigns blasting pictures of abusive husbands when they are in the midst of an halachic or legal process.

-1,000,000,000

More often than not, when you see pictures etc. it's when they're in the midst of a halachik or legal process. Withholding a get for many years in spite is exceedingly rare, very often the woman will claim it's all over when it's not.

When I see a poster put out by ORA, my first reaction is if they're going to that crooked organization they're probably not all that innocent.

[pbf]

Wow.

I have to say I'm horrified and shocked at the general mindset here.

[Moshe123]

This is why you need Rabbanim's backing. If they back harassing the refuser, you know that the above reasons are invalid in that case.
The Rabbanim must be that community's Rabbanim.

[avromie7]

This is why you need Rabbanim's backing. If they back harassing the refuser, you know that the above reasons are invalid.

Unfortunately this is far from always true. As we've seen with Mendel Epstein, rabbanim can get their emotions involved too.