Welcome, Guest! - or
Easy to remember!  »  VinNews.com

Washington - ORA Posts Billboard To Force Recalcitrant Husband To Give A Get

Published on: September 20, 2012 07:22 PM
Change text size Text Size  
Bookmark and Share
Using a billboard in DC Metro to coerce Aharon Friedman to give ex-wife Tamar a get.Using a billboard in DC Metro to coerce Aharon Friedman to give ex-wife Tamar a get.

Washington - The Organization for the Resolution of Agunot (ORA) has taken a new approach in trying to force Silver Spring resident Aharon Friedman to give his ex-wife, Tamar Epstein, a get. The organization has posted a large billboard with Friedman’s photo and the message, “AHARON FRIEDMAN GIVE A GET NOW” in the Wheaton metro station, according to a report in the Washington Jewish Week (http://bit.ly/Uj5jcE).

Friedman and Epstein married in April 2006 and had a daughter the following November. By March 2008, the couple had separated and was civilly divorced in April 2010, but Friedman refused to give Epstein a get. The couple had previously lived in the Kemp Hill neighborhood of Silver Spring. Epstein has since relocated with the couple’s daughter to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Advertisement:

Rabbi Jeremy Stern, executive director of ORA, confirmed that the ad was paid for by a sponsor and out of the organization’s budget. He indicated that the advertisement was intended to “raise awareness” and that additional billboards may be posted around the area. Stern said ORA wants “to make this a social media campaign.”

For more information, visit freetamar.org.


More of today's headlines

Jerusalem - After a series of attacks by vandals on Christian holy sites in Israel, normally tight-lipped Roman Catholic officials are beginning to speak out, publicly... New York - The myth that an Israeli-American producer and group of Jewish investors financed the virulently anti-Islam film "Innocence of Muslims," despite being...

 

Total28

Read Comments (28)  —  Post Yours »

1

 Sep 20, 2012 at 07:39 PM Eagle Says:

When will the Men Rights organizations post billboards to ask the wives not to deny their Husbands rights to share time with their Children? Until then I have no sympathy for these campaigns.

2

 Sep 20, 2012 at 07:46 PM Robert Says:

they obtained a civil divorce but no get...
that is bad
the wife took the child away from the father to philadelphia
that is also bad

i hope that God helps both of these prople to find comfort and both meet their obligations as former spouses and as parents

3

 Sep 20, 2012 at 08:21 PM CSLMoish Says:

For anyone that is interested in "agunas" there exist far more Men agunas then women, (I'm sure you never knew this)

4

 Sep 20, 2012 at 08:40 PM AMJC7 Says:

before you put this garbage on line, why don't you check your facts?
the av bais din of the only bais din that heard both sides of this story has said that l'halacha there is no chiyuv for a get to be given in this case.

5

 Sep 20, 2012 at 09:06 PM feinshmeker Says:

Well the whole thing does'nt sound right, we don't know the facts and. Who's to blame for this, for all we know, she dosent wana give him vistation right's

6

 Sep 20, 2012 at 09:21 PM qazxc Says:

Loser. Can't keep a wife happy so he keeps her prisoner.

The rumors about his strange life style are probably all true.

7

 Sep 20, 2012 at 09:21 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #4  
AMJC7 Says:

before you put this garbage on line, why don't you check your facts?
the av bais din of the only bais din that heard both sides of this story has said that l'halacha there is no chiyuv for a get to be given in this case.

Since when is there an option if a get is a chiyuv or not?? My mom has been waiting for her get almost 10 years now and these organizations dont or cant do anything about it.

8

 Sep 20, 2012 at 10:59 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #5  
feinshmeker Says:

Well the whole thing does'nt sound right, we don't know the facts and. Who's to blame for this, for all we know, she dosent wana give him vistation right's

sorry but he has visitation rights

9

 Sep 20, 2012 at 11:34 PM Passaicguy Says:

Reply to #4  
AMJC7 Says:

before you put this garbage on line, why don't you check your facts?
the av bais din of the only bais din that heard both sides of this story has said that l'halacha there is no chiyuv for a get to be given in this case.

By March 2008, the couple had separated and was civilly divorced in April 2010

If they are no longer living together than that is aboslutely a valid halachic reason for the Husbad to give a get.

10

 Sep 21, 2012 at 12:20 AM just explaining Says:

Reply to #3  
CSLMoish Says:

For anyone that is interested in "agunas" there exist far more Men agunas then women, (I'm sure you never knew this)

A man cannot be an "aguna". Technically, he may remarry. In certain cases the beis din will give a "heter mei rabonim" which frees him to marry. A woman does not have that option ever.

11

 Sep 21, 2012 at 03:02 AM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #4  
AMJC7 Says:

before you put this garbage on line, why don't you check your facts?
the av bais din of the only bais din that heard both sides of this story has said that l'halacha there is no chiyuv for a get to be given in this case.

That statement may have been true at the time, but was almost certainly qualified, even then, by conditions. Despite the Ashkenazi custom not to force a husband to divorce his wife, the Rema rules that when a marriage has broken down completely, the husband is obliged to divorce his wife. However, if she refuses to appear before a beis din to come to a settlement (for example), the situation is likely to be considered as pre-divorce and at that point in time there is technically not yet an obligation to divorce. However, although this article is clearly news-worthy, it appears to paint an extremely one-sided picture of a complicated case. It should not be left up to the talkbackers to fill in the missing facts.

12

 Sep 21, 2012 at 05:37 AM AMJC7 Says:

Reply to #9  
Passaicguy Says:

By March 2008, the couple had separated and was civilly divorced in April 2010

If they are no longer living together than that is aboslutely a valid halachic reason for the Husbad to give a get.

learn hilchos gitten...you don't know what you are talking about

13

 Sep 21, 2012 at 09:23 AM Butterfly Says:

None of us know what kind of father he may be. Is he abusive?? Maybe she is protecting her child?? There has to be a reason. Has he been supporting the child all these years?? Nobody knows??These are questions that we do not have answers for. I don't think she should be imprisoned for the rest of her life because she was married to him and he refuses to give her a get!!

14

 Sep 21, 2012 at 10:30 AM clear-thinker Says:

Reply to #13  
Butterfly Says:

None of us know what kind of father he may be. Is he abusive?? Maybe she is protecting her child?? There has to be a reason. Has he been supporting the child all these years?? Nobody knows??These are questions that we do not have answers for. I don't think she should be imprisoned for the rest of her life because she was married to him and he refuses to give her a get!!

Maybe maybe maybe. You have no answers nor does anyone else. The posts are divided into two. Those who back the husband because he has a "right" not to give a get. Those who think the woman should have a get.
The marriage is over. The denial of a get is an embarrassment to Friedman, to the frum community and to klal yisrael. There is no excuse other than he wants to keep some control over his former (atleast in American law) wife. To those who believe him correct, what is wrong with you?

15

 Sep 21, 2012 at 11:57 AM benalt Says:

Reply to #9  
Passaicguy Says:

By March 2008, the couple had separated and was civilly divorced in April 2010

If they are no longer living together than that is aboslutely a valid halachic reason for the Husbad to give a get.

Its a common tactic here amongst those who want to justify the aggressor or criminal and blame the victim. Easier to just make up and facts to twist things around and show how it is all the victims fault.

16

 Sep 21, 2012 at 12:02 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #12  
AMJC7 Says:

learn hilchos gitten...you don't know what you are talking about

My father-in-law separated from his wife for 2 years, got a civil divorce (in the U.S.) where he lives and the Bais Din in Israel where she is living forced her to accept a get from him. She was threatened with jail if she didn't go to the Bais Din. If that didn't work, she would be in jail and he would have permission to remarry anyway (I presume by heter maya rabonim).

17

 Sep 21, 2012 at 12:20 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #14  
clear-thinker Says:

Maybe maybe maybe. You have no answers nor does anyone else. The posts are divided into two. Those who back the husband because he has a "right" not to give a get. Those who think the woman should have a get.
The marriage is over. The denial of a get is an embarrassment to Friedman, to the frum community and to klal yisrael. There is no excuse other than he wants to keep some control over his former (atleast in American law) wife. To those who believe him correct, what is wrong with you?

" There is no excuse other than he wants to keep some control over his former (atleast in American law) wife. To those who believe him correct, what is wrong with you? ”"

Maybe, maybe not, but that's certainly his right, and good for him for exercising it, just like women exercise their one sided biased rights in secular court. But I think that he is doing it in order to keep some control over his Children, which we all know which side the secular courts favor.

18

 Sep 21, 2012 at 12:58 PM myownopinion Says:

Reply to #10  
just explaining Says:

A man cannot be an "aguna". Technically, he may remarry. In certain cases the beis din will give a "heter mei rabonim" which frees him to marry. A woman does not have that option ever.

Beis din will "give".
do you know what it takes to get a valid heter meya rabbonim, its close to impossible.

19

 Sep 21, 2012 at 01:19 PM ShmuelG Says:

Reply to #3  
CSLMoish Says:

For anyone that is interested in "agunas" there exist far more Men agunas then women, (I'm sure you never knew this)

No, I didn't. Nobody did. There are no "Men agunas." Period.

20

 Sep 21, 2012 at 01:35 PM ShmuelG Says:

The poisonous woman took the man's daughter 3 hours drive away from him. Unless she or the daughter was in physical jeopardy from him, and nothing like that was ever claimed here, this step alone tells me more than I need to know about her. I hope Mr. Friedman holds out and does not give her a get at least until she
1) resolves her daughter's residence to his satisfaction, i.e. either relocates back to reasonable distance from him or lets her daughter live with him and
2) stop using goyisher/modern-orthodox tactics, such as damaging man's reputation, and fairly compensates him for the damage she already inflicted.

21

 Sep 21, 2012 at 04:17 PM clear-thinker Says:

Reply to #20  
ShmuelG Says:

The poisonous woman took the man's daughter 3 hours drive away from him. Unless she or the daughter was in physical jeopardy from him, and nothing like that was ever claimed here, this step alone tells me more than I need to know about her. I hope Mr. Friedman holds out and does not give her a get at least until she
1) resolves her daughter's residence to his satisfaction, i.e. either relocates back to reasonable distance from him or lets her daughter live with him and
2) stop using goyisher/modern-orthodox tactics, such as damaging man's reputation, and fairly compensates him for the damage she already inflicted.

I am looking at the poster. Goyisher/modern orthodox tactics indeed. Mr. Friedman does not look like any type of Chossid or Litvisher Jew.
Why do you hate other Jews to such an extent that you do loshon haroh this week. You are a hypocrite who defames other Jews.
You think you have the answer, but be careful. Someone is probably coming from your right (if there is such a thing) and will call you an apikores. Of course he will be wrong. It will be an insult to any true apikores, be he Chareidi or modern orthodox.
As to number 17. Having gone through a contentious divorce many years ago I know exactly what you are saying. Still, at some point a Get should be given. It effects not only his wife, but his children. The refusal of a Get is often a power play and nothing more. His "control" of his children will lead to nothing but misery. Not only to the wife, but also to the husband and most of all to the children. Sad.

22

 Sep 21, 2012 at 04:21 PM rivka Says:

Reply to #20  
ShmuelG Says:

The poisonous woman took the man's daughter 3 hours drive away from him. Unless she or the daughter was in physical jeopardy from him, and nothing like that was ever claimed here, this step alone tells me more than I need to know about her. I hope Mr. Friedman holds out and does not give her a get at least until she
1) resolves her daughter's residence to his satisfaction, i.e. either relocates back to reasonable distance from him or lets her daughter live with him and
2) stop using goyisher/modern-orthodox tactics, such as damaging man's reputation, and fairly compensates him for the damage she already inflicted.

I agree with you . And let me add, that I am usually for women's rights and especially for true Agunot. But ever since this story broke in the NY Times a couple of years ago, Ms. Tamar Epstein and her organizational "handlers" have been abusing this aguna travesty and will ultimately make it harder for true agunnot to receive ther gets. From the very beginning , Ms. Epstein could have allowed Mr. Friedman fair and REALISTIC visitation rights. The ball was in her court but she was either vengeful or was taking bad advice form organizations who were using her situation for their own purposes. Unfortunately, the Get is the only card Mr. Friedman can play. Once he gives it to her, he will have even a smaller chance of having fair and equitable visitation.

I just have one complaint Mr. G - why do you have to use the descriptive expression "goyish/Modern orthodox" tactics. Just like there are good/bad Jews in all categories of Judaism, I am sure many fine Italians would object to being grouped along with the term "Mafia". Why not just say to "stop using tactics such as.........." without describing these tactics as Modern Orthodox or Goyish. Thank you.

23

 Sep 21, 2012 at 04:43 PM Wise-Guy Says:

Reply to #11  
Anonymous Says:

That statement may have been true at the time, but was almost certainly qualified, even then, by conditions. Despite the Ashkenazi custom not to force a husband to divorce his wife, the Rema rules that when a marriage has broken down completely, the husband is obliged to divorce his wife. However, if she refuses to appear before a beis din to come to a settlement (for example), the situation is likely to be considered as pre-divorce and at that point in time there is technically not yet an obligation to divorce. However, although this article is clearly news-worthy, it appears to paint an extremely one-sided picture of a complicated case. It should not be left up to the talkbackers to fill in the missing facts.

Here is the other side of the story:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhFQA1VP5Fs&feature=related

(You can begin at 4:00 minutes.)
(I love it when I can hear BOTH sides.. )

p.s. I'm not taking sides here, but I've personally witnessed a number of cases where the wife was behaving like an Achzer toward her husband in regard to the children.
Perhaps the husband deserved losing his wife, or maybe that Shidduch was a mistake to begin with, but by severely limiting a parent's relationship/contact with the child(ren), well, it can only be described as having his/her heart ripped out!
It's no wonder that the suffering parent will go to extremes.

I have to admit that, so far, (and I'm still not presuming to know the whole truth) it seems that Mrs. Epstein could obtain a "Get" by being accommodating to the father's needs.
It's very difficult to put oneself in an adversary's shoes, but sacrificing for the sake of peace (and a child's relationship with BOTH parents) is what "V'asisu Hayoshor V'hatoyv" is all about.

All too often this sadistic behavior is instigated by "well meaning" friends and relatives.
As they say, "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions"...

24

 Sep 21, 2012 at 11:29 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #17  
Anonymous Says:

" There is no excuse other than he wants to keep some control over his former (atleast in American law) wife. To those who believe him correct, what is wrong with you? ”"

Maybe, maybe not, but that's certainly his right, and good for him for exercising it, just like women exercise their one sided biased rights in secular court. But I think that he is doing it in order to keep some control over his Children, which we all know which side the secular courts favor.

well said!

25

 Sep 21, 2012 at 11:35 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #21  
clear-thinker Says:

I am looking at the poster. Goyisher/modern orthodox tactics indeed. Mr. Friedman does not look like any type of Chossid or Litvisher Jew.
Why do you hate other Jews to such an extent that you do loshon haroh this week. You are a hypocrite who defames other Jews.
You think you have the answer, but be careful. Someone is probably coming from your right (if there is such a thing) and will call you an apikores. Of course he will be wrong. It will be an insult to any true apikores, be he Chareidi or modern orthodox.
As to number 17. Having gone through a contentious divorce many years ago I know exactly what you are saying. Still, at some point a Get should be given. It effects not only his wife, but his children. The refusal of a Get is often a power play and nothing more. His "control" of his children will lead to nothing but misery. Not only to the wife, but also to the husband and most of all to the children. Sad.

Jews are taught not to defame anyone and I do not find Tamar's tactics right in ANY way. The one using "control" is Tamar and that is in regard to restraining her child from knowing her loving father, who is willing to be defamed just to be given the right to see and know his one and only daughter who was taken away from him in a coniving way. The one who is really suffering is the daughter and it is a real shame.

26

 Sep 22, 2012 at 09:18 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #19  
ShmuelG Says:

No, I didn't. Nobody did. There are no "Men agunas." Period.

There could be, if woman refuse to accept/ pick up the get, but I do not know if there actually any cases like that.

27

 Sep 22, 2012 at 09:20 PM GS Says:

Reply to #11  
Anonymous Says:

That statement may have been true at the time, but was almost certainly qualified, even then, by conditions. Despite the Ashkenazi custom not to force a husband to divorce his wife, the Rema rules that when a marriage has broken down completely, the husband is obliged to divorce his wife. However, if she refuses to appear before a beis din to come to a settlement (for example), the situation is likely to be considered as pre-divorce and at that point in time there is technically not yet an obligation to divorce. However, although this article is clearly news-worthy, it appears to paint an extremely one-sided picture of a complicated case. It should not be left up to the talkbackers to fill in the missing facts.

Exactly!

28

 Sep 24, 2012 at 08:46 AM benalt Says:

Reply to #23  
Wise-Guy Says:

Here is the other side of the story:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhFQA1VP5Fs&feature=related

(You can begin at 4:00 minutes.)
(I love it when I can hear BOTH sides.. )

p.s. I'm not taking sides here, but I've personally witnessed a number of cases where the wife was behaving like an Achzer toward her husband in regard to the children.
Perhaps the husband deserved losing his wife, or maybe that Shidduch was a mistake to begin with, but by severely limiting a parent's relationship/contact with the child(ren), well, it can only be described as having his/her heart ripped out!
It's no wonder that the suffering parent will go to extremes.

I have to admit that, so far, (and I'm still not presuming to know the whole truth) it seems that Mrs. Epstein could obtain a "Get" by being accommodating to the father's needs.
It's very difficult to put oneself in an adversary's shoes, but sacrificing for the sake of peace (and a child's relationship with BOTH parents) is what "V'asisu Hayoshor V'hatoyv" is all about.

All too often this sadistic behavior is instigated by "well meaning" friends and relatives.
As they say, "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions"...

Thank you very much for this!

29

Sign-in to post a comment

Scroll Up
Advertisements:

Sell your scrap gold and broken jewelry and earn hard cash sell gold today!