Longest Serving Chained Wife Is Finally Freed

Susan Zinkin divorced her husband in 1962 but was forbidden from looking for new love for almost 50 years. Only when he died an old man this week was she released from being a "chained wife" under Jewish law.

 

Longest-serving 'chained wife' finally breaks free after 48 years
Susan Zinkin divorced her husband in 1962, but only now is she able to marry again
By Jerome Taylor • The Independent

Susan Zinkin divorced her husband in 1962 but was forbidden from looking for new love for almost 50 years. Only when he died an old man this week was she released from being a "chained wife" under Jewish law.

Ms Zinkin, 73, a retired Orthodox Jewish teacher from north London, divorced Israel Errol Elias in Britain's civil courts 48 years ago but she was never able to obtain a Jewish divorce (known as a "get") from him. And yesterday she spoke of her relief at finally being freed from her status as the world's longest-serving "chained wife".

"As awful as it may sound my ex-husband's death is a great relief and a huge weight off my shoulders – to be stuck like that was so cruel," she said yesterday in an interview with The Independent. "I'm quite convinced that had the rabbis wanted to get their act together they could have done something within Jewish law and found a solution."

She had made repeated attempts to get her former husband to grant her a Jewish divorce, which would have allowed her to remarry. She, and many others, even resorted to regular protests outside his house in Golders Green, north London, in a bid to publicly shame him into granting her a religiously sanctioned separation, but the protests only seemed to strengthen his resolve.

But despite widespread public outcry, her "agunah" (literally "chained") status remained in force until earlier this week when Mr Elias, 86, died.

Speaking from her home in Kfar Saba, near Tel Aviv, Ms Zinkin called on Britain's network of beth dins (Jewish courts) to do more to help chained women and to speak out against husbands who refuse to grant divorces. "The Jewish religious authorities come together to talk about and solve all sorts of religious and social problems but they never seem to get around to discussing [agunahs]," she said. "It is time they did."

Under halakha (Jewish law) only men have the power to grant a get. Women who cannot persuade their husbands to free them from marriage become known as "agunahs" or chained wives. Although they are legally divorced under British law, chained wives (particularly those within Orthodox and Ultra-Orthodox Jewish communities) often find themselves ostracised if they dare to remarry or speak out.

Ms Zinkin, who describes herself as "mainstream Orthodox", said she felt unable to find a new husband because, without a get from her first partner, any new marriage would be considered unlawful by the wider community. Her children – and any of her future offspring – would also be shunned as mamzers, a halakhic term to describe the offspring of adulterous or incestuous relationships. "That's a terrible stigma for the child," she explained. "They're illegitimate for Jewish purposes and I just couldn't do that to any child of mine. Even Jews who aren't very religious wouldn't necessarily want to marry someone and have children born with mamzer status."

Attempts by rabbinical authorities to tackle recalcitrant husbands has been met with varying degrees of success. Rabbis from the Liberal and Reform schools of Judaism will often issue gets to women if a husband refuses three times, but the more orthodox branches are notoriously reluctant to intervene, believing that any sort of coercion would invalidate the get.

In the United States, some Orthodox rabbis have encouraged the use of pre-nuptial agreements which financially penalise a stubborn husband. Jewish courts in Israel have even gone as far as placing intractable husbands in prison until they grant a get. But campaigners say the Orthodox beth din courts in Britain have been much slower to look for solutions.

"It's a very frustrating process," says Sandra Blackman, a co-founder of the Agunot Campaign who regularly used to protest outside Mr Elias's house alongside Ms Zinkin. "We need the Orthodox beth dins to be courageous and recognise the appalling injustices that are being carried out by some husbands. Other countries have found solutions but people seem afraid to implement them here."

One academic hoping to find a way out of the impasse is Professor Bernard Jackson, an expert in Jewish law who until last year was head of the Agunah Research Unit at the University of Manchester. Last summer he published proposals which offered courts viable alternatives that still conformed to Jewish law, including the promotion of pre-nuptials, provisional gets that would be issued in advance of marriage, and the retrospective annulment of a marriage by a rabbi. The response from the Orthodox community has been limited.

"I can only say that meetings have been initiated, and there clearly is some willingness to look at our work and discuss it with us," he said. "The problem is that batei din are generally reluctant to go out on a limb alone, for fear of appearing 'divisive'. They are looking either for a consensus or for a lead from the greatest rabbinic scholars of the generation."

Hopes for such a lead were dashed in 2006 when an international conference to discuss agunahs was called off by Israel's chief rabbi, Shlomo Amar, just five days before it was due to begin. It was widely reported in Israel that pressure from the Ultra-Orthodox community led to the cancellation.

"I'm convinced there is a way," said Ms Zinkin. "We need to get all the rabbis together to reach some sort of consensus on how to solve this problem within Jewish law."

Until rabbis take a stand, there is little that chained women can do, other than resort to public protests in a bid to shame their former husbands. "I just hit a brick wall and there didn't seem to be anything I could do," she recalled. "I knew I just had to carry on with my life and try to forget about it."

Few women dare to speak out about their agunah status for fear of reducing their chances of ever obtaining a get, or because they are worried about how the community might react to such public criticism. Ms Zinkin did speak out. By the end of the 1990s she was approached by a small group of Jewish women who, like her, had either been or still were chained women. The first the mainstream press in Britain heard about agunahs was when a devoted band of Jewish women bewildered north London motorists with regular protests outside Mr Elias's home in Golders Green, calling on him to free his wife. Week after week they met outside his home but Mr Elias dug his heels in. The public coverage of the protests did, however, spur the rabbinical authorities into trying to persuade Mr Elias.

"Prior to [those protests] the Jewish authorities hadn't even been prepared to make a phonecall or approach him in any way," she said. "Whenever I approached Jewish judges they just said they couldn't do anything. So the protests might not have worked in my case, but they did with others."

The demonstrations also thrust the issue firmly into the wider public's consciousness: "People just didn't realise that this sort of thing can drag on for so many years. When I told people what had happened they were absolutely stunned that you can be an agunah in Britain for more than 40 years. I just hope I'm the last of a long line of agunahs."

For the meantime, Ms Zinkin is happy just to reflect on the fact that – for the first time in nearly five decades – she is officially free. "I suppose it is a bit of a record but it's not exactly one I'm proud to hold," she said. "I'm just glad it's finally over. I feel a great sense of relief, but also sadness because it was all so unnecessary. I just hope that other men will think twice about the enormous distress they can cause by not granting their wife a get."

Comments

[David]

Until the Rabbis get their act together on this, I think the only solution is for these ladies to marry non-Jews. Their children will be still Jewish but they won't be mamzers, and the ladies will not be Halachically married therefore they won't be guilty of taking a second husband.

[Common Sense]

David- interesting idea. However, the women will still be shunned and cursed at by the fanatics in the community, and labeled "shaygetz". Unless she is willing to leave the frum community this is not viable, especially if she has children who must attend school.

[former masmid]

A terrible tragedy in Las Vegas. A haredi man allegedly fell from the 10th floor of his hotel building. רב הנסתר על הגלוי at this point.

B.D.E.

http://www.kikarhashabat.co.il/%D7%A0%D7%A4%D7%9C-%D7%90%D7%9C-%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%AA%D7%95.html

[menashe lustig]

a goy having sex with a married jewish woman the kids would still be mamzer

[Jeff]

Horrible - so many lives destroyed so these miserable, dried-up old relics don't have to peek over the walls of the fortresses in which they've ensconced themselves.

[george]

menashe lustig

The rule is that they would NOT be mamzer. Maimonides Yad - Issurei Bi'ah 15:3.

[Isa]

"""menashe lustig

The rule is that they would NOT be mamzer. Maimonides Yad - Issurei Bi'ah 15:3.

Posted by: george | June 21, 2011 at 07:47 AM
"""

I AFFIRM!!
This taught to me by an MO rav who also did and was recogized for issuring 'gets' [bill of divorce]
Isa

[Isa]

Now having said this...
It would be wise to limit husband choice to Reform converts and Conservative converts who never went into the mikva [as some (maybe not anymore) Conservative converts were recognized as being Jewish]

[Loshonhora]

NU Nu efshar atker Shmaryahooo A Shidduch?

[Andrew]

A tragic story indeed -- but it is from February 2010. Just curious -- why is it being published again now?

[Sam the Man]

David: these woman should leave the insular sexist community they live in and marry Jewish or non-Jewish men (or women) and enjoy their lives, instead of letting a piece of paper get in the way of their happiness. Its the woman who give the rabbis the power over their lives, and they can take it back. It has long been my opinion that a get is not a valid marriage contract because it is not signed by the woman. It is also a sexist instrument, and outdated.

[Guest]

Many times, the Orthodox community tries to force these husbands to give a get by using the threat of violence. Many times, it works. About eight months, such a story happened in Lakewood.

See here:

http://failedmessiah.typepad.com/failed_messiahcom/2010/10/lakewood-couple-charged-with-kidnapping-assault-theft-robbery-456.html

I guess the Orthodox do try to correct this problem, when possible. Changing Halacha is obviously not going to happen. But if the wider secular world would let the Orthodox use violence against these evil husbands, just as in the old times, I guarantee you that every woman would have a get pretty quick.

What are the chances the secular world will let the Orthodox force the evil husbands to give a get?????

None.

[Shmarya]

if the wider secular world would let the Orthodox use violence against these evil husbands, just as in the old times, I guarantee you that every woman would have a get pretty quick.

What are the chances the secular world will let the Orthodox force the evil husbands to give a get?????

Again, you prove yourself to be either ignorant or troll.

Most haredi rabbis today hold that NO physical coercion of any kind may be used.

In Israel, where the state court system and police enforce beit din rulings, the number of husbands imprisoned or otherwise sanctioned for not giving a get is miniscule, but the number of agunot is much higher.

Why?

Because haredi rabbis won't use the legal means at their disposal to coerce the husband, because haredi rabbis now hold that most coercion makes the get invalid – a position that would have puzzled Maimonides and almost every other medieval rabbi.

[The Real Joe]

The big problem in the get cases is that its whomever is more hooked up in the community gets the support if the husband has big $$$$ and relatives in powerful positions its very hard for the women to round up support and even when she does its going to be small and all most pointless I guessing that the majority of the cases where people go after the husbands and in not so pleasant ways force him to give a Get its probably because the wife has more family and friends within the community I hope the Jewish community starts being more serious about this issue

[adam]

To be honest it doesn't add up. If the women feel that the biblical law that gives the man the right to give a get then why do they care about the Rabbis approval in the first place if they got a CIVIL DIVORCE.

Why don't they just remarry. They think the religion is made up by men anyway.

I do have to say I have a friend who has given the Get but the women won't take it and they continue to claim he didn't so they can continue to harass him wherever he goes and gain sympathy for their cause.

I worked with a woman who are widows and were widows young and have no interest in getting remarried and have been single for 30, 40 years.

I am sorry but something just doesn't add up because if women think the bible is sexist they wouldn't care what the Rabbis say either way if they got a civil divorce.

I am just playing the other side here. Maybe she was given a divorce didn't want to take it and had no interest in getting remarried in the first place and decided by not taking it she could use this for propaganda purposes to which it was found out she was already given a divorce but never accepted it to which of course they couldn't do anything of if they helped her get a divorce she would refuse that one as well.

[R]

only way to correct this problem is to create a clause in the ketubah. It would solve the problem as there would be no such thing as an agunah. BUt the rabbis are men and men like to have the power.