Congressman Won't Respond To Questions About Staffer's Get Refusal

Rep. Dave Camp's office has not responded to a request for comment from FoxNews.com. His office previously has downplayed the issue as an internal matter, and "gossip." But Rabbi Shmuel Herzfeld, at Ohev Sholom -- The National Synagogue in Washington -- said Camp is "almost condoning this behavior" by not speaking up. "People don't only see this as a religious issue. People view this as domestic abuse," he said.Herzfeld said he is trying to engage the U.S. legal system on the overall issue, to see if it could view these kinds of situations as a "civil rights" matter.

Rep. Dave Camp (r)

Congressman facing pressure from Jewish groups on adviser's religious divorce dispute
Judson Berger • FoxNews.com

A top House Republican is facing a swell of pressure from Jewish communities across the country as they lobby, not for legislation, but for his intervention in the personal life of an adviser.

The adviser, Aharon Friedman, has been shunned by Jewish leaders for refusing to grant his ex-wife a religious divorce known as a "get."

His behavior has been described by critics as a form of domestic abuse -- without a get, ex-wife Tamar Epstein is forbidden under Jewish practice from remarrying or having another child. Though they were divorced in civil court in early 2010, Epstein still cannot so much as date.

As Friedman's refusal emerges as a women's rights issue in the Jewish community, his boss Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich., chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, is becoming the focus of a tough social media campaign.

Protesters recently swarmed his Facebook page as part of a concerted effort to pressure Camp to coax his employee into granting his wife the divorce. Camp's office partially shut down his Facebook wall comments, but people are still writing about the issue in the comments section under Camp's posts.

"Give Tamar her freedom like every human deserves!" a recent post reads.

A separate petition on Change.org has garnered roughly 2,500 signatures, urging Camp to "take a stand against abuse by condemning Aharon's abusive behavior."

This comes on top of occasional protests outside Friedman's apartment, and even in Brooklyn where a relative lives.

Camp's office has not responded to a request for comment from FoxNews.com. His office previously has downplayed the issue as an internal matter, and "gossip."

But Rabbi Shmuel Herzfeld, at Ohev Sholom -- The National Synagogue in Washington -- said Camp is "almost condoning this behavior" by not speaking up.

"People don't only see this as a religious issue. People view this as domestic abuse," he said.
Herzfeld said he is drafting a letter to the House ethics committee to request the panel examine the issue, claiming Friedman's behavior is disreputable.

"There's no reason whatsoever that Aharon Friedman should not give her a get," he said. "He wants to inflict pain and torture upon her, and that's it."

The dispute, among others, has prompted some discussion within the rabbinical community of how to avoid these situations. Herzfeld said that, for any wedding he officiates, he always requires the bride and groom to sign a prenuptial agreement of sorts -- it stipulates that the husband will pay a fine if he does not consent to a get in the event of divorce.

Epstein and Friedman, however, never signed such a document. Asked whether rabbis could just agree to permit a religious divorce without the man's consent, Herzfeld said, "It's very complicated."

One rabbi could agree to do it, but another rabbi might not necessarily recognize that divorce as legitimate. Herzfeld said he is trying to engage the U.S. legal system on the overall issue, to see if it could view these kinds of situations as a "civil rights" matter.

But for Epstein, he said, "The only solution is for Aharon Friedman to give her a get."

Herzfeld said Epstein could finalize the Jewish divorce in an hour, and could do it without his ex-wife being present.

"Dave Camp wouldn't have to worry about his Facebook page anymore," he noted.

Epstein and Friedman were first married in 2006. But by 2008, the two had separated.

According to the source familiar with the situation, she moved back to Philadelphia while he remained in Silver Spring. This became a source of contention as the two battled for custody of their daughter.

He wanted her to move back to Silver Spring, but she was pursuing a degree in nursing in Philadelphia -- where she is now a nurse practitioner.

The source said Friedman withheld the get as a means to compel her to meet his demands.

However, the source said the finances and the custody issues pertaining to the divorce have since been resolved. Epstein and their daughter continue to live in the Philadelphia area.

As Friedman has declined to grant the divorce, faith leaders have increasingly put pressure on him as well as his boss.

The Organization for the Resolution of Agunot (figuratively "chained") has been leading a campaign against Friedman. In a letter to Friedman last fall, director Rabbi Jeremy Stern called his actions "tragic." 

"We see the refusal to issue a get as a form of domestic abuse," Stern told FoxNews.com.

He said the Jewish community certainly has started to discuss whether a rabbi should be able to officiate a divorce without one party's permission -- but said the community "is not at a point right now where they're willing to fundamentally change how Jewish marriage and divorce works."

He explained that a Jewish marriage is effectively a "private transaction between the two parties" -- so for a marriage and for a divorce, "you need the willful participation of both parties."

Hence the pressure on Friedman. Stern said Camp, as demonstrated by his response on Facebook, has started to pay attention to this campaign.

A national rabbinic court also issued what amounts to a finding of contempt against Friedman in the case. And local rabbis have called on synagogues in the Washington area to bar Friedman from their congregations unless he grants his wife's request.

The dispute between Epstein and Friedman is hardly unique. A study released in October 2011 identified 462 cases of agunot over a five-year period in the U.S. and Canada.

However, Friedman's role on Capitol Hill has served to attract more attention to this particular case.

Barbara Zakheim, who worked on the study and sits on the board of The Organization for the Resolution of Agunot, said she hopes Camp does not brush off the pleas from the Jewish community.

"If Aharon Friedman had any decency, he'd realize he's put his boss in a very uncomfortable position," said Zakheim, who also founded the Washington-area Jewish Coalition Against Domestic Abuse.

Comments

[TheRealJoe]

Wow Pressure from the left via Politico and pressure from the right via Foxnews I see a turn for the better in this story coming soon IY'H.

[Lubavitchers are Christians]

If the congressman so much as makes one move to pressure his employee over religious issues, he is inviting a huge lawsuit over freedom of religion.

What amazes me is that liberal Jews in America will only support freedom of religion when it's a secular vs religious.

But they have no problem using religion against a Republican, or against a relilgious person. Suddenly, they will find any excuse to conveniently forget about freedom of religion.

[seymour]

not sure what camp can do since this issue is not job related

I do not understand, halachca can't solve this the rebbie with their ruach hakodeh could not figure out a soulution and created a situation that Jews need to go to secular root to solve the problem

i guess they did not have ruach hokodesh or they did and did not care about the woman who would be effected.

[revenge]

What about Avrohom Meir Weiss grandson of Reuven Feinstein who has been withholding a get for over 2 years - with the support of his grandfather!!!

[WoolSilkCotton, rock star and sports superstar]

++Lubavitchers are Christians | February 29, 2012 at 05:46 PM++

How exactly did you involve liberal Jews?

The problem is not liberal Jews, the problem is that the rabbis cannot get their brains out of the Dark Ages, as so we have the Get issue, because is a woman is a piece of subhuman property according to our wonderful rabbis.

So what are liberal Jews supposed to do about the rabbis who are incapable of change?

[seymour]

So what are liberal Jews supposed to do about the rabbis who are incapable of change?

Posted by: WoolSilkCotton, rock star and sports superstar | February 29, 2012 at 06:01 PM

it is not that they cannot change they are unwilling to challenge any previous ruling of great rebbies.

It is sort like if scientist know that the earth rotate the sun, but simply ignore it.

of course if that would be truth many technical advanced would never have been made, and we would be still living in the dark ages

[WoolSilkCotton, rock star and sports superstar]

Seymour, indeed, the frumma are still living in the dark ages. They want the rest of the world to obey their system and also enter the dark ages. And this is why they want the congressman to pressure his employee with the Get.

Congressman, get involved, and join the Dark Ages!

Just imagine is this employee was a Moslem and they were pressuring the congressman to enforce a Sharia Law against an employee. (I think someone mentioned that on the other thread.)

[Lubavitchers are Christians]

WSC

I involved liberal Jews because this Rabbi who is speaking out against the congressman is a liberal Jew.

I am pointing out his hypocrisy.

As you said, imagine if it was a muslim and the congressman was being asked to enforce sharia law.

Or a Christian, and the congressman was being asked to enforce the Bible.

No liberal Jew would ever demand that of a congressman, or any employer for that matter.

So why is it ok to demand that of a Republican congressman?

Why isn't anyone calling this liberal Jew on his hypocrisy?

FREEDOM OF RELIGION. FREEDOM FROM RELIGION.

Nobody should ever be required to give a get. If she wants to marry someone else, its a free country. But she cannot force him to give a religious divorce. And his employer definitely cannot force him, or he will be sued big time.

Why isn't this liberal Rabbi being called out for his hypocrisy???

[Eli]

Dear Rep Camp,
My wife and me are ardent believers in FSM* and as a Pastafrain my wife who is on your staff is wrongly refusing to talk like a pirate.
As you are aware, the decrease in global pirates coincides with the increase in global warming over the last two centuries.
So please fire her, ok?
Hugs,
Eli
* church of the flying spaghetti monster (currently rated on Amazon as a more fun and popular religion than Chabadism and Scientology put together)

[Eli]

Dear Rep Camp,
PS: if you don't intervene in our private dispute as I demand, me and all my FSM cohorts will flood your Facebook page with nasty posts. And you will be denied access to the Beer Volcano in heaven.
Ay, matey, ya best capitulate if ya know what's good fer ya.

[seymour]

I understand why the wife is doing this

because she lives in a system
that renders her totally powerless she need to go outside the system to get her wish.

what other options does she really have.

I guess she can leave but i assume that is not a option she wants to entertain

[rebitzman]

I involved liberal Jews because this Rabbi who is speaking out against the congressman is a liberal Jew.

He's Modern Orthodox, which is not "liberal". By the way - the "liberal" ketubah actually has a clause (called the Leiberman Clause) that makes a get binding if either party requests one.

[Lubavitchers are Christians]

Posted by: rebitzman | February 29, 2012 at 06:55 PM

According to wikipedia, he is very involced in gay rights. He is a liberal Jew.

He is a hypocrite.

He should instead be demanding that the wife get married without her get. Who needs a get?!

But instead he is demanding that a congressman force his employee to do a religious act.

Is this America or is this Tehran?

[Zefardeoh]

Its fascinating watching cutting edge Open orthodox rabbis of the YCT cohort trying to pass off responsibility on the employer of the accused " bad guy".
If they are so into Open orthodoxy and assert that halacha can deal with Modernity and and women's rights, why doesn't Rabbi H and rabbi Weiss a have a Beth Din give her a Get. Rabbi Rackman ZTL did this a number of times. A least Rabbi Rackman walked his talk. These guys don't wish to do anything innovative in Halacha except talk for hours about females reading the megilla and women learning Shaas and Poskim.
And they want others in this case non jews to do what they refuse to do force the husband to grant a get or figure out a way where this sort of legal fiction would not be needed.

[WoolSilkCotton, rock star and sports superstar]

Lubavitchers are Christians 6:29, you could have made your point, maybe even better, without the word 'liberal'.
It is irrelevant to the issue, and just labels you as a political hack.

Otherwise, I agree with your point. It is absurd for a rabbi to go to a secular authority to enforce a rabbinical Jewish law.

[Betzalel]

Leave the poor Congressman alone. He can't do anything about it.

[Waiting4Moshiach]

It is always a mistake for Yidden to get the goyim involved in our busines. always!

[Lubavitchers are Christians]

Posted by: WoolSilkCotton, rock star and sports superstar | February 29, 2012 at 07:15 PM

WSC -

I wasn't going to bring it up. But I was scratching my head trying to figure out what this rabbi's logic is. Who ever heard in America that an employer should force an employee to do a religious act. You only hear of such things in Tehran.

Then it hit me. The word "congressman"!! Maybe this is just a political ploy. So I checked, and sure enough the congressman is a Republican, and the rabbi is a liberal.

Which tells me that this rabbi is just using this "get" fiasco as a political tool against his political opponents.

On the other hand, if the rabbi is doing this "leshaim shomayim", he needs his meds. This is not Tehran.

[Haimish McHorny]

As so often is the case here, the point is totally missed.

Any guy sad enough not to realise that its over when the horse has not only bolted but has long ago been turned into fucking glue is not fit to be let out alone unsupervised much less be working in a public role.

on that basis and only on that basis he should be fired.

using religion this way or the other by her or him is idiotic and vile - or business as usual is what the religious call it.

[Riverdaleapikorus]

Well said Zefardeoh. Herzfeld is simply an attention seeker who learned this at the feet of his protoge Avi Weiss, during the time Herzfeld spent as a Rabbi in Riverdale.

[Talking Donkey]

Do the anti-discrimination statutes apply to members of Congress? I really don't know. But in the context of a private or state employer, it's very likely that firing someone for not giving a get would qualify as religious discrimination. Giving a get is a purely religious act, much like keeping kosher or going to confession. It happens to be a religious act that affects someone else's mental state (such as a priest withholding eucharist from a pro-choice Catholic, or a Jew demanding interest payments from a fellow Jew), but it's still just a religious act. The secular act was the divorce. And, at least where standard employment discrimination laws apply, you can't make employment decisions based on an employee's performance or non-performance of a religious obligation, or abide by the rulings of a Beit Din.

[Critical minyan]

I love rabbi herzfeld. He always takes the side of the underdog and the oppressed. It's not a liberal or conservative issue dumkopfs. It's that a woman is being bullied by a man using Halacha as the object. That is wrong and that's why the rabbi is becoming vocal.

[Jerry]

Wait! Is there a side to the story that's missing? Perhaps a reason why this guy isn't giving his wife a get? Perhaps she's holding him hostage with something in return?

http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/a-congressman-and-his-adviser-in-hot-water-with-jews-over-get-refusal/2012/03/01/

[Shmarya]

Please.

What idiocy.

This issue has been hashed and rehashed here and dozens of other blogs and newspapers for a couple years already.

DC to Phili is a very short trip. The problem is that Friedman refuses to make it and he refuses to leave work even a few minutes early.

That's why a judge ruled against him.

As for Yanover , he's as dishonest as ever. He has long history of deception, of advocating for a rabbi who seduces his female students and then gets them into heavy sexual sadism, and he wrote a news report for the Forward about Chabad that alibied for Chabad's messianism at a time when he was being PAID BY CHABAD to spin for them. He failed to disclose that fact to the Forward. When it found out, Yanover was in effect banned. He has a long history of misogynist advocacy, as well. And then the JP lets him write on the Epstein-Friedman get? And the JP doesn't cite any of Yanover's problematic background?

I suspect "Jerry" is Yori Yanover himself. His comment was posted from Israel, and Yanover recently returned to live there.

Yanover is completely dishonest.

[Just Looking]

DC to Phili is a very short trip. The problem is that Friedman refuses to make it and he refuses to leave work even a few minutes early.

I am curious, with visitations starting at 6pm on Friday, and say at the earliest when shabbos starts at ~4pm, just how many minutes would he have to leave earlier from his job to drive from DC to Philadelphia, pick up his daughter and drive back home to DC in time for shabbos?

Since he only has her for 3 times a month maybe his visitations should begin at Thursday night so all these issues can be avoided?

Just a thought.

[Just Looking]

... from Google maps

Phili to DC driving time each way

135 mi, 2 hours 42 mins

[zalman Alpert]

The next thing you know some rabbis will be demanding that thye fire staff for not eating kosher or working on the Sabbath.

The rabbis need to work out the divorce settlement. After all they trumpet themselves as teachers,pastors men of oeace scholars etc. Yet they can't arrange for a simple divorce . Where is the dog buried ?

[Gevezener Chusid]

He explained that a Jewish marriage is effectively a "private transaction between the two parties" -- so for a marriage and for a divorce, "you need the willful participation of both parties."

Not anybody else's business.

If she wants to refrain from remarriage because of the lack of some mumbojumbo that is her choice as much as it is his choice to refuse to sign on to the mumbojumbo. Yes he might be a prick for behaving that way as it is no skin of his butt; however it's not anybody else's business. Period.

[Boots]

Let him give the Get all of these issues will go away bottom line, he will be permitted to go on with his life and instead of making a Chillul Hashem (which by the way he is there was no reason to bring his dirty laundry into the public eye all he has to do is give the Get period) she is entitle to it according to jewish law be-it there are no lables such as "liberal" or Frum Machmir, chasidshe, or any other title. he has a brilliant future ahead of him go and do what u r required to do according to the torah and let it be the next womans problem who involves herself with such a person!

[dh]

What exactly did she think she was doing when she got the get, getting out of the get when she got sick of the ill gotten get?

[Truth Detector]

... from Google maps

Phili to DC driving time each way

135 mi, 2 hours 42 mins

Also Google Maps assumes the traffic will be good. It would seem to me that Freedman would be leaving work at or near the rush hour on Friday afternoon.

Seems Shmarya has eben caught lying with his pants on fire by suggesting a short Friday afternoon drive for Friedman.

[Shmarya]

Seems Shmarya has eben caught lying with his pants on fire by suggesting a short Friday afternoon drive for Friedman.

Posted by: Truth Detector | March 01, 2012 at 03:54 PM

Please.

Hundreds of schochtim who produced the meat you stuffed down your throat made drives just like that every erev Shabbos and motzoie Shabbos for years.

But Friedman chose not to.

[Just Looking]

made drives just like that every erev Shabbos

Posted by: Shmarya | March 01, 2012 at 04:40 PM

The problem here is that he has to drive to Phili AND back. That is a total of 5+ hours driving. You do the math if shabbos starts at 4pm and yes, it is true, Google Maps assumes no traffic.

[Talking Donkey]

Sharmya,

You can take Tamar's side without being an ass or denying reality.

I lived almost this exact situation from a child's perspective 25 years ago. My mom raised us in Philly, about 3 miles away from where Tamar now lives. My dad lived in Silver Spring, and actually attended Aharon's synagogue (though he doesn't know Aharon personally). About the only difference is that both my parents were from Philly. It was my dad who moved down to Silver Spring after the divorce.

So I'm speaking from personal experience when I say that there's no practical way for a father to maintain a meaningful, active relationship with his child at such a distance. It's absurd to ask Aharon to miss work every Friday so that he can make a 6 hour round-way drive to Philly to pick up his daughter and make it home before sunset, then do that 6 hour loop again every Sunday. It's equally absurd to ask Aharon to maintain two households (a house in Silver Spring and a Shabbat apartment in Philadelphia) on a government salary so that he can only miss half a day's work every Friday and have a cold, empty place to take his daughter to each weekend.

I might add that my parents BOTH drove and met in right in the middle for weekend dropoffs, about 90 minutes away from each of them. Why can't Tamar do the same? Why is all the burden on Aharon, particularly when it was Tamar who left and took the kid with her?

Beyond that, they were married and maintained their household in Maryland. I think it's perfectly fair and just to say that the presumption should be that the kid should stay in Maryland, so that both parents can play an active part in his life - even if Tamar would rather be near her family.

Has Aharon behaved immorally with respect to the get process? Probably, from what I can tell. But it's also immoral to take someone's child away so that they cannot, practically, share equally in the child's upbringing. It's hard for me to have much sympathy towards her.

[WoolSilkCotton]

Talking Donkey,
Thank you, thank you, thank you.

[Shmarya]

Please.

It's absurd? Ever hear of staying Philadelphia for the weekend?

Ever hear of summer Shabbats?

It was his obstinacy that put him in this situation.

What you call unreasonable, hundreds of schochtim did every week, 50 weeks per year.

Did they have relationships with their children?

Or is it okay to do this to schochtim because you crave steak, but not okay to do it to Friedman?

Please.

[Talking Donkey]

I happen to love staying in Philadelphia for the weekend. But my family is there, so I can stay rent free with Mom. Aharon's family isn't. Where's he going to do? Rent a hotel room every weekend on a government salary? Rent an apartment in Philly while maintaining a home in Maryland, and paying child support to Tamar? Why is all the burden on Aharon? My mom drove us half way to meet my father. Tamar can't do the same?

I'll note that - even in the summer, Shabbat only starts around 8. With a 6 hour roundtrip (including bathroom breaks), he'd have to leave work at 2. So, even during the summer, he'd have to miss practically half the day. What if Aharon's employer doesn't let him take off every Friday during the winter, and every Friday afternoon in the summer? Most employers wouldn't. . .

And what's your evidence that it's only his "obstinacy" that's put him in this situation. Do you have proof that Tamar offered to move back to Silver Spring, or at least Baltimore? Do you have proof that Tamar offered to drive half way for drop offs? Or are you just sprouting your mouth off?

[Shmarya]

Please.

There were frum families people willing to host him and his daughter. And he could have rened a studio apartment in the eruv or even a room in a private home, as well.

[Pagan]

"Give Tamar her freedom like every human deserves."

Tamar already has all the freedom from her ex-husband that the civil law can provide. What she needs now is freedom FROM a cruel religion that has brainwashed her into slavery.

And putting pressure on the employer to violate an employee's freedom OF religion is an absolute outrage.

[disillusioned]

It's hard for me to have much sympathy towards her.

Talking donkey,

If you knew what Friedman put her through and how unstable he is, you would likely have sympathy for her. Can you entertain the possibility that there is a lot here that you don't know?
You spoke about your experience and that was interesting, but it doesn't say anything about Tamar's experience.
It's so typical for guys like him to be abusive throughout a marriage and then whine afterwards when they lose control. All they want is control and they are their own worst enemies because after battering their wives (emotionally) they are shocked that they lost the control that they craved so desperately.
If you want to have a relationship with your kids, act like a human being. There are consequences to our actions. There is a legal system and for reasons that you may not understand it is supporting Tamar's staying in Philly right now and it is doing so in the interest of the child.

[Just Looking]

even a room in a private home, as well.

Posted by: Shmarya | March 02, 2012 at 01:43 AM

How nice, what a wonderful shabbos atmosphere, spending shabbos with your daughter in a room in somebody else's house, week after week.

[Eli]

Pagan, not only. Putting pressure on an employer to meddle in a divorce is itself outrage. Adding religion to the meddling is just more bad.
Shmarya, what's his reason for withholding - does he have a demand and not just spite? And if a demand, what's her reason for refusing?
But Tamar can take away his leverage in a heartbeat by forgetting the get and acknowledging she isn't interested in an archaic rule. Or, put differently, it is in her power to walk away and nothing changes in the status quo regime that favors her custody. Is there a reason SHE should not compromise if this idiot rule is so important to her?
Frankly this all sounds like the Ultimatum Game in which both parties refuse compromise against their self-interests in order to punish the other.