Agudah Tries To Spin Its Position On Reporting Child Sex Abuse

No matter how Agudath Israel of America tries to spin it, according to them you'll have to ask a rabbi about reporting suspected child sexual abuse. And that consultation could easily take days – days that the child is still in danger, days that other children are still in danger, days that you may be breaking the law.

 

A few Minutes With...
Rabbi Chaim Dovid Zwiebel • Mishpacha Magazine 8-3-11, pages 30-31

Agudath Israel of America recently clarified its position on when one is halachically permitted to or required to report suspicions of any form of child abuse to authorities. That clarification led to further debate on a potential clash between halachah and secular law. Agudah's executive vice president, Rabbi Chaim Dovid Zwiebel, discussed this further with Mishpacha's news editor; Binyamin Rose

Would the Agudah support the formation of or put resources into a hotline or a board of rabbanim with the knowledge and expertise to guide people who suspect abuse?

We are definitely looking into this. I had a discussion with a member of the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah about how we should be following up. There are some concerns about a hotline in light of the fact that the sensitivity of the issues might require a face-to-face conversation rather than just an anonymous call over the phone. Certainly we believe that in light of everything that's going on in the world today, rabbanim should familiarize themselves with the signs and symptoms of abuse, as well as the issues involved in how and when they should be reported, and to whom. Agudath Israel has organized conferences and seminars for rabbanim and mental health professionals. We feel there is room to expand such forums to include a wider list of rabbanim who would familiarize themselves with all the issues and who would then be qualified and capable of providing guidance to Klal Yisrael who have these kinds of sh'eilos.

What categories of people are considered by law to be mandated reporters, and what happens if there is a clash between the law of the land and the halachah? Does dina d'malchusa dina prevail?

 This is something that is usually subject to state law jurisdiction, so each state will have its own laws and regulations. The law that applies in New York, in general, lists a dozen or so categories, including teachers, pediatricians, and other health providers, who encounter children in their professional capacities and have reasonable cause to suspect that a child has been abused. Other people, such as the next-door neighbor, are not mandated reporters under the secular law. They are permitted and maybe even encouraged to report, but there is no New York statute that requires them to do so.
Regarding the second part of your question, I think those clashes will be few and far between. The secular law in New York State mandates you to make a report if you are on their list of categories and have "reasonable cause to suspect." Under the guidelines of Rav Elyashiv shlita and other gedolim, raglayim I'davar comes mighty close to "reasonable cause to suspect." They are so very close in my opinion, that I don't envision frequent clashes between the secular law and the halachah.
Where a conflict could arise would be in a case where a rav says not to report, but the person's lawyer says he must. In that case, I suppose part of the process of the sh'eilah to a rav could also be where the person goes back to the ray and says, "You told me not to report, but my lawyer says I have to, so does that in any way affect your psak?" The moreh hora'ah will then have to decide how that fits in with the overall equation in determining his final answer to the sh'eilah.

Wouldn't the requirement to consult with rabbanim first delay the reporting process, thus leaving children at greater risk?

Under secular law you are required to report promptly according to the statute. Even under secular law, if an inexperienced pediatrician sees something that makes him nervous, he may wish to consult with a more experienced doctor. Senior law enforcement officials have told me that such a consultation does not conflict with the law.
Where the process outlined by the gedolim under raglayim I'davar requires consulting with a rav first, a conflict might arise if that consultation would interfere with the immediacy of a report, but it should not delay the process any longer than the length of time it would take for two doctors to discuss the case between themselves.

Are there efforts underway to reconcile the reported differences on this issue between the Agudah and the Rabbinical Council of America?

We haven't had formal conversations with the RCA, but there are rabbanim engaged in informal discussions at all times. But I would also like to clarify what we have been referring to as the Agudath Israel position. We don't take positions. AII we did was present the issues at a halachic conference a few months ago and then issue a synopsis of the written teshuvos of gedolei haposkim, mostly in Eretz Yisrael. Not withstanding the very serious prohibition against mesirah, where there is raglayim l'davar, the gedolei haposkim are telling us today that we should report. While this is something very important that we wanted to bring to the community's attention, at the same time, we need to recognize the weightiness of the matter. People should be consulting with a ray who is knowledgeable in this area before coming to conclusions of their own. There is still an attitude that exists in certain quarters of the chareidi world that these matters have to be handled internally and not by the authorities. But today, the mainstream chareidi authorities hold that if there is raglayim I'dav ar, it should be brought to the authorities. In that respect, l don't think the position of the gedolei haposkim is substantively different from that of the RCA.

People are concerned that incidents of abuse have been swept under the carpet and that victims were even hushed up by prominent community members. Since this feeling has gained validation in people's minds, is there anything in the new Agudah guidelines that alleviates these concerns?

 To the extent that the hushing up that may have taken place was a byproduct of halachic concerns about mesirah, I think the teshuvos of the gedolei haposkim that we brought out in our statement should provide the framework that will at least minimize such instances. We can no longer hide behind a blanket prohibition against reporting to the authorities if the gedolei haposkim are saying you should report to the authorities. That was one of the reasons we decided to publish our statement, even though we knew it would generate some backlash and controversy.

It is clear that allegations of abuse can destroy a person’s reputation and family forever, and that people have misused the system to exact revenge. ls this due to a flaw in the system, and is it correctible?

One of the advantages of the raglayim l'davar standard is that the halachic authorities are telling us you need to be very careful before you report. If it is eizeh dimyon, as in the phrase Rav Elyashiv used- mere conjecture – or if you have some vague sense, that's not enough. Part of what Rav Elyashiv and the other poskim are telling us is, this is dinei nefashos on both sides of the equation and we have to find a balance. We are concerned about some of the statements made by a few advocates for the victims, because there seems to be a lack of appreciation that sometimes allegations of this nature can be destructive to people who are entirely innocent.

Is there any community-wide effort to raise awareness among children and parents, or is this just up to devoted volunteers?

 Over the last number of years, this issue has come out of the closet and has become a part of our community's consciousness. The Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah took a step, which would have been unimaginable 10 or 15 years ago, to encourage parents to talk to their children about good touch and bad touch and what to do if someone touches them inappropriately. There are seminars for summer camp personnel on this subject. I don't know that we are where we need to be yet, but I think very meaningful movement has been made, and further steps are under consideration.

This part is especially rich:

Where the process outlined by the gedolim under raglayim I'davar requires consulting with a rav first, a conflict might arise if that consultation would interfere with the immediacy of a report, but it should not delay the process any longer than the length of time it would take for two doctors to discuss the case between themselves.

That might be true if one doctor is in California and the other is in New York, and they're communicating by carrier pigeon.

Other than that unlikely scenario, Zwiebel is doing what he does best and frequently: lie.

It can easily take days to get a senior rabbi on the phone or to get a personal audience with one. And then you have to allow time for the possibility that the rabbi will want do do a little halakhic research or consultation of his own.

Contrast that with walking down the hall and asking a collegue to come look at certain bruises or her opinion of a child's behavior.

And that does not free the doctor from the law which requires him to report.

It is not his job to determine abuse took place. It is his job under the law to report the suspicion to police or ACS, which will then investigate and, if warranted, make an arrest.

Zwiebel tries to distort that process to justify Agudah's position, which is illegal for mandated reporters and unethical for everyone else – and which has caused hundreds of kids to be sexually abused by pedophiles like Rabbi Yehuda Kolko rabbis have ruled could not be reported to police or ACS.

The more things "change" in Agudah-land, the more they stay exactly the same.

[Via Daas Torah. Hat Tip: PostDogma.com.]

Comments

[jancsipista]

i feel it is a matter for the parents to decide not for any rabbis or anyone else this whole situation is out of hand never should a rabbi be consulted always parents, and the police it is so absurd to go to a rabbi after so may cases have been tottaly ignored by them that i came to the conclusion it is them who are protecting the moleters since it is one of them who is being accused.

[Adams]

THe mind set has got to change. No asking Rabbi's on this period.
Aren't the Rabbi's overworked anyway by the Klal?
In my community, they ask him shtickel questions day and night and he suffers enough already. We are small community with many smaller shules but one main one.
Daas Torah is not infallable. Take the matter to the police, let them handle it. Enough.Dai.

[jancsipista]

this is insane this agudah is inept alway looking into it but never acting on it its like paralyses by anylasis what a buch of laidigers.

[jay]

zweibel. who are these gedolim that we are meant to consult with? are these the same gedolim who are ok with chai life line and BMG of lakewood to honor the biggest menuvel on 2 Feet? yess they both honored kushner and not a single rav or rabbi got up to demonstrate. aare these the ggedolim u want us to consult with?

[seymour]

Even under secular law, if an inexperienced pediatrician sees something that makes him nervous, he may wish to consult with a more experienced doctor.

yes and not a rov who knows nothing about abuse and has a conflicting interests of not reporting.

also they always bring up false reporting when all know that is very very unlikely even in the secular world and even more so the frum world

his analogy is like saying I will not wear set belts because in 2% of the cases one is better off not wearing them

also why not name all the gedoleim who he always quotes all of them

[PulpitRabbi]

Just a little question: Does the law require that mandated reporters report abuse immediately, or does the stated law, or at least case law recognize that people may struggle with figuring out the right response and a reasonable delay (reasonable is very ill defined and can be unreasonable, but it's a legal concept) may be acceptable?

I am not advocating any delay (I did not delay when faced with such a situation), but I do wonder what the legislator's intent is.

[Kol Tzfardayah]

Adams.. Please clarify...

These overworked 'rabbis' you speak of.. are they the 33 concert ban ones who are constantly bombarded with 'community activists' , and who are trying to track down Lipa? Are you referring to levin who is 'busy' and 'overworked' with his radio show, and 'protests'? Maybe you are talking about rubashkin', shereshefsky, drek and his father who are very 'overworked' committing crimes? Is it possible these 'rabbis' are'overworked' and busy selling organs, abusing...? Maybe they are extremely busy and 'overworked' covering up 'get' issues?

[just curious]

Let me pose a hypothetical question - let us say that an honest impartial look at halacha does in fact lead to the conclusion that reporting to the police is mesira and is forbidden unless a beis din or at least a rabbi have first attempted to stop the molester unsuccessfully.
Would you say that the Agudah or whoever else should just do away with the halacha or should they openly come out and say ignore secular law, or should they try and find the position that will juggle these two as best as halacha allows?
Just curious.
Please don't respond that there are poskim who say go straight to the police - let us assume that well intentioned people could learn the sugya differently.

[jancsipista]

just curious- a normal person does not need any rabbi to decide for him he is mature enough to know what to do untill now we see this molestation has been going on for many years and it was ignored the rabbis are worhtless they wont go against their own if you think after all this they should still consult with a rabbi youre insane haucha is a fantasy not reality keep on deluding youreself about halacha it is impotent and meaningless and all theese rabbis are bozos who like to think of themselfs as somebodies when in fact they have proven themslefs to be worhtless zeros.

[Adams]

Kt, no, the Rav is not in the limelight. I feel bad for him because day and night he has to deal with a LOT of difficult situations. My point is that, even if you would rather go to your Rov, why not have mercy on them a bit.

[Shmarya]

Does the law require that mandated reporters report abuse immediately, or does the stated law, or at least case law recognize that people may struggle with figuring out the right response and a reasonable delay (reasonable is very ill defined and can be unreasonable, but it's a legal concept) may be acceptable?

I am not advocating any delay (I did not delay when faced with such a situation), but I do wonder what the legislator's intent is.

Posted by: PulpitRabbi | August 07, 2011 at 12:26 PM

It envisions immediate reporting.

[Kindred]

Actually, the law is quite clear - immediate report is required of a mandated reporter. Further, if you are an inexperienced opediatrician you immediately call your supervisor and the psych. department. This is all immediately documented. Also, if you have a question about reporting you are obligated to call the hotline to ask an anonymous question to determine if the situation roses to a necessary report.
Let's just say that in my experience as a mandated reporter I have worked with Rsabbis ONLY to tell them at the request of the patient, that I made a report. Several abused patients have said to me "I came to you and not to a Rabbi for a reason."
I also like to take exception with the Agudah's position that only "advocates" are making a stink about this. It's as if it is a put down of people who have information regarding how their system works.

[Visting the sick]

I disagree Shmarya. Here's Rav Shmuel Kamenetsky's phone number at the Talmudical Yeshiva of Philadelphia. (215) 477-1000

If you're in doubt about your neighbor's kid being abused, call him. You now have his number. Any other way I can help you?

[Shmarya]

I disagree Shmarya. Here's Rav Shmuel Kamenetsky's phone number at the Talmudical Yeshiva of Philadelphia. (215) 477-1000

If you're in doubt about your neighbor's kid being abused, call him. You now have his number. Any other way I can help you?

Posted by: Visting the sick | August 07, 2011 at 04:59 PM

You never cease to amaze me with your ignorance.

Do you think Rav Shmuel picks up the phone when someone calls? Returns calls in a few minutes or even the same day?

He doesn't.

And many so-called gedolim never return phone calls.

Do you have any idea how many families of victims went to these 'leaders' for help and didn't get their phone calls returned or an audience?

Your ignorance is appalling.

[Hersh Man]

I dont understand. With all the issues that are out there - shidduchim crisis and teensagers on drugs...why only on this is Aguda so strong minded to take this stance? Is the Aguda the address to help us with all our issues. I dont think so. So in my opinion Aguda should go back to the hole they hide in when we have all out other hard situations to which they seem not to give a crap about. Aguda - get lost!

[A. Nuran]

Just curious, halacha has changed plenty over the last couple thousand years. This is one area where it should change quickly.

[Flatbusher]

It is just amazing how the child molesting problem in our community mirrors our historical nemesis the Catholic Church.

Only one thing talks in our egel ha'zahav times: MONEY.

The Bishops took notice only when they lost their (financial) pants lawsuit after lawsuit.

After the Agudah. Yeshivas who harbor molestors, enbablers etc. lose a $10,000,000 lawsuit because of negligence, and they will have to sell that fancy building, so Joe Shmoe can at least have money instead of a life, they will be singing a different lchuh dodi.

Everything else is a waste of time.

[BeenThereDoneThat]

The foxes still want to look after the hen house.

And they want to be the first to know if any issues arise, so that they can circle the wagons.

[jewishwhistleblower]

Agudath Israel is an embarassment to the Jewish people.

If you have any suspicion of abuse go directly to the police and report. Period.

It is interesting to see how Agudath Israel is becoming a joke by its continued absurd explanations and clarifications as it continues to desperately cling to its communal power to protect the abusers and silence the survivors of abuse.

Rabbi Eidensohn rips up the latest Agudath Israel obscenity. I guess Agudath Israel will just have to go back to the "clarifying board".

see:
http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2011/08/reporting-abuseat-last-r-zweibel.html

1) this is rather embarrasing reading - when compared to the early versions. Originally he claimed there was no conflict with mandated reporting. Now he is claiming that there is no conflict since it is no different than a doctor consulting is senior. But this is a clearly a false analogy. He needs to get a statement that allowing a rabbi to moderate mandated reporting is acceptable to the secular authorities. He obviously can not get it so he presents a false analogy.

He also hasn't explained what the rabbi is doing. He clearly isn't paskening the guilt or innocence - since he isn't functioning as a beis din. That requires hearing testimony. If he is determining that there is a reasonable danger - but the rabbi doesn't have special competence in this area and obviously needs to consult a genuine expert.

Finally his assertion that it is nefashos on both sides - is not a relevant. The issue is how a person can protect himself against real or even possible harm. The poskim clearly state that to protect yourself and others that you can take measures such as calling the police even if the possible damage to the perpetrator is greater than the potential Torah punishment. BM (83) Even a sofek rodef can be killed

In short this is an embarrassing mixture of halachic half truths and false logic while avoiding presenting a genuine halachic view.

August 7, 2011 12:35 PM

2)
Daas you are mistaken and obviously haven't seen the relevant Torah sources. Take a look at BM 83a where the result of turning the Jewish thief over to the Romans was death based solely on circumstantial evidence - and yet he did it and the gedolim pasken like this gemora.

Minchas Yitzchok (8:148): Is it permitted to report to the police reckless drivers who are a danger to other motorists and pedestrians? Concerning the question regarding motorists who drive their vehicles in a manner which endangers all those who are on the road with them by means of the means different scenarios that are described in his letter. Is it permitted to report them to the police? This will typically result in a monetary punishment or the cancellation of their driver’s license for a fixed period or incarceration in jail and it serves as a deterrent to actions which endanger others. Answer: Even though halacha prohibits causing a Jew to be given bodily or financially to the secular justice system, nevertheless a Jew who endangers other people is not included in this prohibition. This is explicitly stated by the Rambam (Hilchos Chovel u’Mazik 8:11) and Shulchan Aruch (C.M. 388:12): “All those who disturb the community and cause it distress it is permitted to give them over to the secular government to be punished whether by beating, imprisonment or fines…” It is obvious that all those who drive carelessly and in a wild manner, endanger the lives of all those are near them. We in fact have been commanded to avoid danger and to prevent it from happening. Perhaps by taking actions against these drivers it will prevent danger and reduce the number of accidents. …

Rav Silman says we posken like the view that a sofek rodef can be killed. There is a general principle that a person's life takes precedence of that of others

Bottom line a person is allowed to defend himself and others against perceived danger - even if it is possible that he is mistaken. And it doesn't require a beis din to make the decision.

For additional sources see Child and Domestic Abuse Volume II - in particular Rav Silman's discussion of sofek rodef - an issue that the Aguda says is irrelevant!

August 7, 2011 8:30 PM

3)
Rav Yehuda Silman (Yeschurun volume 15 page 662):. … The commentaries explain that the obvious reason for not needing witnesses but they could rely even on circumstantial evidence is because this was not a court procedure to punish wrongdoers. Rather it was either done to obey the law of the kingdom or it was to stop someone from sinning. The Rashba is cited in the Beis Yosef that witnesses are not needed in such a case…”. That is because we are concerned only with the knowledge of truth in order to stop the harm and to make protective measures against iniquity. Furthermore according to what I said that even a doubtful rodef is permitted to be killed, it is obvious that it is permitted for us to take protective action even if we have unresolved doubts.

August 8, 2011 12:33 AM

4)
Rav Eliashiv's teshuva which mentions raglayim ledaver is not dealing with the case of mandated reporting. In other teshuvos where there is pikuach nefesh he does allow a doctor to report even if the child might be placed in a non religious foster family.

In addition R Gottesman said that the Aguda poskens like the Yam Shel Shlomo. Who - contrary to what was stated as the Aguda position - does not require a rav but says a distinguished person should report to the police.

Rav Yehuda Silman (Yeschurun 15): Nevertheless the decision to report the perpetrator to the police is not given to everyone to decide. Rather as the Yam Shel Shlomo has said it is given to a rabbi or to a distinguished layman who will judge the matter objectively.

The issue is to be objective - and this is also what Rav Eliashiv states that we don't want reporting because of some fantasy or vendetta.

In contrast if you read the Aguda position you see that the prime consideration is that a rabbi must moderate the position - even if he is not an expert and not objective.

In sum - the issue is whether a rav is required to moderate reporting in the case of mandated reporting. Rav Eliashiv does not address this issue. Secondly the main concern of the Yam Shel Shlomo is objectivity - not whether a rav is involved

Yam Shel Shlomo (Bava Kama 3:9): … We see also in Erchin (16b) that it is permitted to hit another to chastise them. However this permission to hit another Jew for the sake of chastisement is not given to all Jews but only those who have a reputation for integrity that it is clear they are only doing it for the sake of Heaven. And he must also be a very distinguished person. But an ordinary person is not allowed because if so than there would be anarchy and society would be ruined. Every low life will go and hit his fellow and claim it is chastisement because in fact there is no perfect tzadik. In truth the Torah only gives permission for judges to hit other people or an important person whose words should be listened to – if he sees his fellow attempting to commit a sin he is permitted to stop him by hitting him. All depends on what the judges see fit to do. This that there is a restriction that only judges or very important people are allowed to hit others to stop them from sinning is in regards to mitzvos concerning man and G d. However concerning issues between men – for example if a person witnesses another person hitting someone – it is permitted for all men even the most simple – to save their fellow. To save a person from a beating it is permitted to beat the attacker in order to save the victim, as I will explain.

August 8, 2011 3:29 AM

[visiting the sick]

"Do you think Rav Shmuel picks up the phone when someone calls? Returns calls in a few minutes or even the same day?

He doesn't."

Shmarya, it was sarcasm and satire! Take it easy. Better yet, don't. Flood the phone line!

[Tziporah]

I have personally gotten through to Reb Shmuel just fine. Maybe not on the first try, but if you are persistent, it is doable. There are many community rabbanim who are more easily reached and particularly if you are dealing with an individual in the same community, would have a faster response time and possibly prior knowledge to advise someone who is unsure whether to report suspected abuse. As a mother of young children I am as scared as the rest of you of child molestors, however, you all take the path that if there is smoke there is fire. Unfortunately, smoke is sometimes a false illusion, and before you go ruining a life, the wife, the children, the parents etc of an individual, perhaps you would be well advised to seek advice and clarification. The response here, as well as Reb Shmuel's response, are not meant for a case where there is not reasonable doubt. But woe is to the person who takes the life of another into his hands for smoke where there is none. Assuming you all believe in afterlife, the fires of hell burn a lot stronger...

[BeenThereDoneThat]

Dear Tziporah, Jewish people do not believe in the concept of hell. It is a xtian creation.

By the way, what kind of investigative skills do the rabbis have? Have they been proven to be effective? I think you know the answer.