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

New Haven, CT - Connecticut Judge Sets Precedent In Beth Din Ruling On Prenuptial Agreements

Published on: February 11, 2013 10:36 AM
Change text size Text Size  
Bookmark and Share
FILE - Connecticut Superior CourtFILE - Connecticut Superior Court

New Haven, CT - For the first time since its creation in the early 1990s, a Connecticut Superior Court Judge has affirmed the constitutionality of the Modern Orthodox prenuptial agreement created by Beth Din of America aimed at protecting the agunot.

The Jewish Daily Forwrad (http://bit.ly/VNmUWZ) is reporting that the ruling paves the way for the agunah in the case, Rachel Light, to possibly demand over $100,000 from her husband according to the terms of their prenup.

The decisions has sent shockwaves through both the Jewish and the legal community.

Susan Aranoff, director of the advocacy group Agunah International, called the decision a ‘breakthrough for women,’ saying, “The unanswered question with regard to the prenup was always will it be enforceable in court. Now that is has been enforced husbands know there is a cost for withholding a get.”

Pepperdine University School of La w professor, Michael Helfand, said that while the ruling does not preclude the prenup from future challenges, it establishes precedent, making the prenup harder to defeat.

“Next time a judge gets one of these, there’s an opinion he can look at and say it’s enforceable,” said Helfand.

Rachel and Eben Light signed their version of the prenup in 2001. At the time, they chose to omit the document allowing a beit din to arbitrate their divorce, signing only the document pertaining to financial penalties for failure by Eben to grant a get.

Last July Rachel sued in Connecticut Superior Court , saying that while she and Eben had separated years earlier, Eben refused to grant her a get. Rachel asked the court to enforce the provision in the prenup in which Eben agreed to pay $100, plus adjusted inflation, for every day he refused to grant the get.

Eben argued that the prenup was a religious matter, and as such, it was uncon stitutional for a secular court to enforce the document.

Eben Light has appealed the decision, and a hearing has been set for March.


More of today's headlines

Irvine, CA - A $1 million reward for a fugitive ex-police officer wanted in the slayings of three people took authorities to a San Fernando Valley home improvement store... Israel - While pundits pontificate over what will be discussed between US President Barack Obama and Israel's leadership when Obama arrives in Jerusalem next month...

 

Total43

Read Comments (43)  —  Post Yours »

1

 Feb 11, 2013 at 11:12 AM c Says:

I signed one of those. Luckily my wife lost it :).

2

 Feb 11, 2013 at 11:42 AM AshMan Says:

Good first step. In order to strengthen the power of Beis Din, couples should commit, in a pre-nup, to resolving these issues as part of binding arbitration. Both parties should give their Beis Din the power of k'nas, like discussed in this article, for any infraction the Beis Din deems appropriate. And, the big one, this final ruling of Beis Din needs to be entered as the the final divorce agreement in State court.

3

 Feb 11, 2013 at 11:13 AM zevvy Says:

What wonderful news...finally, some relief for long suffering women, victims of our unfortunately one-sided system of divorce.

It's time for the Chareidi (whom do they really fear?) community to do something about the Agunah travesty.

4

 Feb 11, 2013 at 11:39 AM morris Says:

FYI the Gemara in Bava basra 28A states that any ruling in regards to giving a GET that is issued by a secular court is invalid. Why doesnt this woman obtain a bais Din ruling that he must give a GET? Rashi there states that if he grants her a GET because of the pressure imposed on him from secular court, and then she remarries with such a GET, She will need now 2 GETS from both husbands. She should be advised to withdraw her superior court petition. However if the Superior court is enforcing a Bais Din ruling then its o.k.

5

 Feb 11, 2013 at 11:22 AM TexasJew Says:

It's about time. Great day for hundreds of Agunote.

6

 Feb 11, 2013 at 11:23 AM mytaxguy Says:

Eben, wake up....since it a religious matter you don't need to adhere to it?

7

 Feb 11, 2013 at 12:06 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #4  
morris Says:

FYI the Gemara in Bava basra 28A states that any ruling in regards to giving a GET that is issued by a secular court is invalid. Why doesnt this woman obtain a bais Din ruling that he must give a GET? Rashi there states that if he grants her a GET because of the pressure imposed on him from secular court, and then she remarries with such a GET, She will need now 2 GETS from both husbands. She should be advised to withdraw her superior court petition. However if the Superior court is enforcing a Bais Din ruling then its o.k.

The courts are simply enforcing a commercial contract where the parties agreed to use a certain form of mediation/arbitrartion which in this case happens to be a beis din...it could have just as easily been the American Arbitration Association. There would be no difference if two muslim parties had agreed in a civil contract to settle their disputes under Shariah law. Its the same as resorting to a beis din for a din troah.

8

 Feb 11, 2013 at 12:12 PM ayjay Says:

Reply to #4  
morris Says:

FYI the Gemara in Bava basra 28A states that any ruling in regards to giving a GET that is issued by a secular court is invalid. Why doesnt this woman obtain a bais Din ruling that he must give a GET? Rashi there states that if he grants her a GET because of the pressure imposed on him from secular court, and then she remarries with such a GET, She will need now 2 GETS from both husbands. She should be advised to withdraw her superior court petition. However if the Superior court is enforcing a Bais Din ruling then its o.k.

please provide a better source because the gemara at bava basra 28a says nothing about a GET

9

 Feb 11, 2013 at 12:26 PM Avi Says:

A pre-nup is a contract. Parties can agree to anything, religious or not, as long as it's legal, and the court WILL enforce it. That's the whole point of contract law! If that's the only defense Eben has, he's going to be having a very rude awakening.

10

 Feb 11, 2013 at 12:31 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #4  
morris Says:

FYI the Gemara in Bava basra 28A states that any ruling in regards to giving a GET that is issued by a secular court is invalid. Why doesnt this woman obtain a bais Din ruling that he must give a GET? Rashi there states that if he grants her a GET because of the pressure imposed on him from secular court, and then she remarries with such a GET, She will need now 2 GETS from both husbands. She should be advised to withdraw her superior court petition. However if the Superior court is enforcing a Bais Din ruling then its o.k.

Hang on a minute! She is suing for damages incurred in the past. She isn't forcing him to give a get now. He has the option to grant a get immediately and avoid future damages.

11

 Feb 11, 2013 at 12:33 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #3  
zevvy Says:

What wonderful news...finally, some relief for long suffering women, victims of our unfortunately one-sided system of divorce.

It's time for the Chareidi (whom do they really fear?) community to do something about the Agunah travesty.

Unfortunately one-sided system? Perhaps you haven't read chumash recently.

12

 Feb 11, 2013 at 12:46 PM Voice-of-Reason Says:

Isn't this a get under duress? I can't see how this would be valid.

13

 Feb 11, 2013 at 12:46 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #3  
zevvy Says:

What wonderful news...finally, some relief for long suffering women, victims of our unfortunately one-sided system of divorce.

It's time for the Chareidi (whom do they really fear?) community to do something about the Agunah travesty.

That is an unfair statement. It is totally not one sided. Since everyone is so sensitive to the aguna plot a lady can easily take advantage of the situation. She can demand cash and / or deny all children rights to her husband. And if the husband does not agree she can then play the aguna card in which most people will be sympathetic towards. I know plenty of men who got burnt that way.
This is not to say that the men never take advantage of the system. But women know how to play it too.
Bottom line it varies by each case But It is far from a "one sided system aguna travsety".

14

 Feb 11, 2013 at 01:08 PM DoctorD Says:

Reply to #4  
morris Says:

FYI the Gemara in Bava basra 28A states that any ruling in regards to giving a GET that is issued by a secular court is invalid. Why doesnt this woman obtain a bais Din ruling that he must give a GET? Rashi there states that if he grants her a GET because of the pressure imposed on him from secular court, and then she remarries with such a GET, She will need now 2 GETS from both husbands. She should be advised to withdraw her superior court petition. However if the Superior court is enforcing a Bais Din ruling then its o.k.

Wow, u read this article without comprehending the simple English in it. The judge didn't force him to give a Get. She only enforced the panelty that HE committed to when he signed the prenups.

15

 Feb 11, 2013 at 01:37 PM Chuna Says:

C. The rabbi who directed it should have a copy. Sorry bub.
As for Morris, a beis din has very little real authority. They are viewed more as arbitrators, and someone who does not care to give the Get will likely not care to adhere to what Beis Din recommends he do.
I am aware that in divorce cases either side can be the "abusive" one. But if a marriage is over, the Get should not be a blackmail tool. It should be granted. Then they can fight about whatever they need to fight about. But a woman should not be tied to a non-existent marriage.

16

 Feb 11, 2013 at 01:38 PM pinay Says:

Sounds like a get meusah to me.

17

 Feb 11, 2013 at 01:40 PM Anonymous Says:

I thought that the BDA claimed that there has never been an agunah with couples that had signed their prenups. That is what they always proudly proclaim. I guess it was not quite an accurate description of the facts.

18

 Feb 11, 2013 at 02:03 PM ZSNYC Says:

It is my understanding, that it will be overturned by appeal. it is a Religious document, and court has NO right, to rule on its validity or not. As to why the lower court felt it COULD, im not sure. Common logic says it will be overturned! So all Agunahs out there, don't count your chickens yet.

19

 Feb 11, 2013 at 02:14 PM Just the Facts Says:

Reply to #4  
morris Says:

FYI the Gemara in Bava basra 28A states that any ruling in regards to giving a GET that is issued by a secular court is invalid. Why doesnt this woman obtain a bais Din ruling that he must give a GET? Rashi there states that if he grants her a GET because of the pressure imposed on him from secular court, and then she remarries with such a GET, She will need now 2 GETS from both husbands. She should be advised to withdraw her superior court petition. However if the Superior court is enforcing a Bais Din ruling then its o.k.

Don't you just love the internet? You can just say what every you want and hopefully no one will call you on it.

Sorry, but there is no such Gemara on Daf 28A in Bava Basra nor do I believe is there such a Gemara anywhere in Bavli or Yerushalmi.

20

 Feb 11, 2013 at 02:20 PM Just the Facts Says:

Reply to #12  
Voice-of-Reason Says:

Isn't this a get under duress? I can't see how this would be valid.

No one is forcing him to give a Get. Not the Judge or anyone else. He signed an agreement with his wife that if she ever asks for a Get, for every day that he doesn't provide one, he owes her monetary damages. Who said he has to give her a Get?

21

 Feb 11, 2013 at 02:23 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #15  
Chuna Says:

C. The rabbi who directed it should have a copy. Sorry bub.
As for Morris, a beis din has very little real authority. They are viewed more as arbitrators, and someone who does not care to give the Get will likely not care to adhere to what Beis Din recommends he do.
I am aware that in divorce cases either side can be the "abusive" one. But if a marriage is over, the Get should not be a blackmail tool. It should be granted. Then they can fight about whatever they need to fight about. But a woman should not be tied to a non-existent marriage.

I am not advocating using the get as blackmail or a weapon as first choice. But what exactly is your solution to stop a women from taking away child rights from a man. Secular courts will almost always give the childern to the mother. Look at the case where the mother granted vistiation rights to her ex on friday nights at 6 pm when shabbos starts at 4. And she won in court. What stops her from doing such crazy stuff?

22

 Feb 11, 2013 at 02:47 PM thechief Says:

I can not believe that rational people do not understand,that if i commit to give you a 100.dollars if you go to shul tue.morning,and you went and i did not pay that breach of contract is not religious,just because it was about something religious.

23

 Feb 11, 2013 at 03:34 PM morris Says:

to #19 and all the rest of you, i apologize but I think its 48A not 28A. please takre a lok at the gemoro as well as Rashi there that states that she will need 2 NEW GETS. From a civil perspective you are right that shes entitled to enforce an agreement. However, I'm merely stating that if the man capitulated and issued her a GET because of the financial penalties levied against him by the Superior court, that Get would be invalid. You dont need to believe me but look at Rashi who states that if she remarries with such a GET she needs now 2 GETS. The outcome of this ruling is that in matters of Jewish Divorce we rule stringently and dont go lenient. So the BDA has embarked on a path that only adds confusion and halachic legal questions whether marrying such a woman with such a GET would constitute adultery. I surely wouldnt take that chance, thats why I date widows only.

24

 Feb 11, 2013 at 04:02 PM Anonymous Says:

I can't say I believe in withholding a get. However, after I once refused to speak to an old friend who I had heard was refusing to give a get, he told me that if I knew the facts, maybe I wouldn't be so adamant. He told me that even though he was married to her for less than a year, and they had no children, and he was already an ophthalmologist when she met him, she wanted half his earnings for the rest of his life as a divorce settlement. I'm not saying he was correct to withhold the get, but there can be extenuating circumstances.

25

 Feb 11, 2013 at 04:34 PM TruthBeTold Says:

Reply to #19  
Just the Facts Says:

Don't you just love the internet? You can just say what every you want and hopefully no one will call you on it.

Sorry, but there is no such Gemara on Daf 28A in Bava Basra nor do I believe is there such a Gemara anywhere in Bavli or Yerushalmi.

Check Bava Basra 48a. Its right there.

Financial coercion clearly pasuls a Get according to Orthodox Judaism.

Clearly Mrs. Light is on course for a completely pasul Get Meusa, and will remain married under halacha after the bogus "Get" is done. Unless she wants to rely on the "psak" of Feminist High Priestess Aranoff and the Reformadox Theologians in lieu of rabbis.

Modern Orthodox prenups = "halachically" sanctioned wife swapping on a massive scale.

26

 Feb 11, 2013 at 05:37 PM PchaFresser Says:

Why would someone withhold a get???????
If you don't want to be with her, give her the 'get' and get the hell out!

27

 Feb 11, 2013 at 05:42 PM qazxc Says:

Reply to #12  
Voice-of-Reason Says:

Isn't this a get under duress? I can't see how this would be valid.

You don't have to see how it is valid. You aren't a posaik or a mesader gittin or a mesader kiddushin so your inability to see anything in this matter is of no interest to anyone but you.

28

 Feb 11, 2013 at 05:43 PM qazxc Says:

Reply to #16  
pinay Says:

Sounds like a get meusah to me.

No one but you cares what it sounds like to you.

29

 Feb 11, 2013 at 05:46 PM qazxc Says:

Reply to #24  
Anonymous Says:

I can't say I believe in withholding a get. However, after I once refused to speak to an old friend who I had heard was refusing to give a get, he told me that if I knew the facts, maybe I wouldn't be so adamant. He told me that even though he was married to her for less than a year, and they had no children, and he was already an ophthalmologist when she met him, she wanted half his earnings for the rest of his life as a divorce settlement. I'm not saying he was correct to withhold the get, but there can be extenuating circumstances.

So your opinion changed 180 degrees after hearing one side of the story first hand but not the other?

30

 Feb 11, 2013 at 07:31 PM qazxc Says:

Reply to #25  
TruthBeTold Says:

Check Bava Basra 48a. Its right there.

Financial coercion clearly pasuls a Get according to Orthodox Judaism.

Clearly Mrs. Light is on course for a completely pasul Get Meusa, and will remain married under halacha after the bogus "Get" is done. Unless she wants to rely on the "psak" of Feminist High Priestess Aranoff and the Reformadox Theologians in lieu of rabbis.

Modern Orthodox prenups = "halachically" sanctioned wife swapping on a massive scale.

You couldn't be further from the truth no matter how hard you worked on it.

No one is coercing him to give a get. He signed a binding contract to pay a certain amount every day she remains married to him. The court is merely enforcing the contract.

Nice petty swipe at the modern orthodox though. Keep it up. I'm sure the sinas chinom you enjoy spreading will hasten the bias goel tzedek.

31

 Feb 11, 2013 at 07:49 PM Just the Facts Says:

Reply to #23  
morris Says:

to #19 and all the rest of you, i apologize but I think its 48A not 28A. please takre a lok at the gemoro as well as Rashi there that states that she will need 2 NEW GETS. From a civil perspective you are right that shes entitled to enforce an agreement. However, I'm merely stating that if the man capitulated and issued her a GET because of the financial penalties levied against him by the Superior court, that Get would be invalid. You dont need to believe me but look at Rashi who states that if she remarries with such a GET she needs now 2 GETS. The outcome of this ruling is that in matters of Jewish Divorce we rule stringently and dont go lenient. So the BDA has embarked on a path that only adds confusion and halachic legal questions whether marrying such a woman with such a GET would constitute adultery. I surely wouldnt take that chance, thats why I date widows only.

Thanks for the updated reference and my apologies for my comments.

1) Regardless if anyone believes if this is a Get Meuasah or not (see point 2), the court’s decision sets a precedent for the future.

2) I'm not a talmid chochom and if others disagree, with my interpretation of the Gemorah, please chime in. According to what I understood from the Gemorah, you are not allowed to go to a secular court to enforce a Get as a Takanas Chachomim, but Midoraisa it would be a kosher Get. But if Beth Din decided that it wanted to use a secular court to force a Get, and she was granted permission by a Beth Din to enforce the agreement, it would seem from the Gemorah that the Get is NOT a Get Meuasah.

32

 Feb 11, 2013 at 09:17 PM CTJEW Says:

Reply to #18  
ZSNYC Says:

It is my understanding, that it will be overturned by appeal. it is a Religious document, and court has NO right, to rule on its validity or not. As to why the lower court felt it COULD, im not sure. Common logic says it will be overturned! So all Agunahs out there, don't count your chickens yet.

Where did you get your crystal ball? This Connecticut attorney practices famnily law and the CT courts will enforce a business contract, such as this prenup even if the subject matter may be religious. The enforcement sought is for the dollar penalty, not a court order to force the giving of a get.
In my own divorce, my ex and I had agreed before getting to trial that I would give a get, and it was written into the civil divorce decree (common practice in CT). I had not agreed that I would pay the cost of obtaining the get. I told her if you want the get (she was in a hurry to remarry) then you pay for the bet din, sofer, etc. She took me to civil court to enforce my giving a get, and I told the judge, I'm not refusing, but the decree doesn't require me to pay for it, if she wants to pay, I'll go to the bet din and complete the process. the civil court (both trial level and appellate) agreed with me. She had to pay for the cost of my giving the get. Because divorce proceedings can be sealed in CT, this doesn't show in LexisNexis. the case above, is a contract case heard in family division of Superior Ct and is public record.

33

 Feb 11, 2013 at 09:38 PM pinay Says:

Reply to #27  
qazxc Says:

You don't have to see how it is valid. You aren't a posaik or a mesader gittin or a mesader kiddushin so your inability to see anything in this matter is of no interest to anyone but you.

it might be of interest to mamzerim born from a subsequent marriage

34

 Feb 11, 2013 at 10:15 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #4  
morris Says:

FYI the Gemara in Bava basra 28A states that any ruling in regards to giving a GET that is issued by a secular court is invalid. Why doesnt this woman obtain a bais Din ruling that he must give a GET? Rashi there states that if he grants her a GET because of the pressure imposed on him from secular court, and then she remarries with such a GET, She will need now 2 GETS from both husbands. She should be advised to withdraw her superior court petition. However if the Superior court is enforcing a Bais Din ruling then its o.k.

There is no way that a woman would need a get from 2 husbands. The second marriage would have been declared null and void.

35

 Feb 11, 2013 at 10:58 PM thechief Says:

when one is forced directly to give a get not under the sanction of a kosher bais din,that is a get meusah.when one is given an alternative choice that is not a get meusah.i.e.in israel the bais din will have the recalcitrant husband jailed,if he wants to leave jail his option is to give a get.again,he is not jailed to give a get,he is jailed for not giving the get.therefore he has multiple choice,sit in jail or if you want out give a get..Rav Elyashiv o.b.m. advised to set a high alimony in the same way.you have an option to reduce your payments by giving a get.this is not meusah.no direct force.

36

 Feb 11, 2013 at 11:18 PM Abe1101 Says:

Reply to #25  
TruthBeTold Says:

Check Bava Basra 48a. Its right there.

Financial coercion clearly pasuls a Get according to Orthodox Judaism.

Clearly Mrs. Light is on course for a completely pasul Get Meusa, and will remain married under halacha after the bogus "Get" is done. Unless she wants to rely on the "psak" of Feminist High Priestess Aranoff and the Reformadox Theologians in lieu of rabbis.

Modern Orthodox prenups = "halachically" sanctioned wife swapping on a massive scale.

#25 I know others have said this already, but clearly its not getting through to you, so I will say it again: The prenup is not coercion, rather it is a document that the husband voluntarily signed. If he does not want to sign it he need not do so. Furthermore, the prenup does not obligate the husband to give a Get; all it is is a monetary agreement the husband voluntarily signed agreeing to pay the wife certain sums under certain conditions, and allowing himself an out if he gives a Get. If the husband would like he is free to pay the amounts which he agreed to pay. If he would like to get out of those payments he may elect to give a Get. There are 2 possibilities as to why this needs to be repeated for your benefit: 1. you are a bit slow but with enough chazara you will finally understand. or 2. you do not want to understand, rather you want to slander divorced women, and talmidei chochomim ( the prenup was authored by R' M Willig, a posek and a bigger talmid chochom then any commentator on here -my guess is you are aware of that but have chosen to slander him and his beis din, as well as his talmidim, along with the women who have relied on this). Hashem yerachem.

37

 Feb 12, 2013 at 07:15 AM qazxc Says:

Reply to #33  
pinay Says:

it might be of interest to mamzerim born from a subsequent marriage

Trust me on this one. No one will be interested in your opinion even if a shailah of mamzairus ever comes up.

The RCA pre nuptial agreement was created by bigger people than you. They won't ever be calling for your two cents.

38

 Feb 12, 2013 at 07:55 AM TruthBeTold Says:

Reply to #36  
Abe1101 Says:

#25 I know others have said this already, but clearly its not getting through to you, so I will say it again: The prenup is not coercion, rather it is a document that the husband voluntarily signed. If he does not want to sign it he need not do so. Furthermore, the prenup does not obligate the husband to give a Get; all it is is a monetary agreement the husband voluntarily signed agreeing to pay the wife certain sums under certain conditions, and allowing himself an out if he gives a Get. If the husband would like he is free to pay the amounts which he agreed to pay. If he would like to get out of those payments he may elect to give a Get. There are 2 possibilities as to why this needs to be repeated for your benefit: 1. you are a bit slow but with enough chazara you will finally understand. or 2. you do not want to understand, rather you want to slander divorced women, and talmidei chochomim ( the prenup was authored by R' M Willig, a posek and a bigger talmid chochom then any commentator on here -my guess is you are aware of that but have chosen to slander him and his beis din, as well as his talmidim, along with the women who have relied on this). Hashem yerachem.

Abe1101, your comments are full of the YU-MO feminist deceptions used to promote the wife swapping prenup agreement.

"the husband voluntarily signed" - A fraudulent claim because the MO men are being put under enormous pressure to sign the wife swapping agreement. Refusal to sign may very well torpedo the marriage.

"the husband voluntarily signed agreeing to pay the wife certain sums under certain conditions" - Another fraudulent claim. The future husband has absolutely no idea of the conditions where he will be forced to make payments, which might well include loss of his children and home in non-Jewish courts. A normal man would never agree to this.

"If the husband would like he is free to pay the amounts which he agreed to pay." - Also a fraudulent claim because the payment amounts are set very high so that the husband most likely cannot maintain the payments, so he is thereby forced to give a pasul Get Meoso.

The language of the so-called prenup by its own admission does not represent Torah Judaism - "they accept now (through the Jewish law mechanism of kim li) whatever minority views determined by the Beth Din of America are needed to effectuate the obligations"

39

 Feb 12, 2013 at 08:44 AM TruthBeTold Says:

"Last July Rachel sued in Connecticut Superior Court"

The article above provides a link to the CT court where Mrs. Light obviously sued her husband in a non-Jewish court for "DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE".

A question to Abe1101 and his YU gadolim:

Where do any authentic Torah sources allow Jewish women to litigate in non-Jewish courts against their husbands?

Where do any authentic Torah sources require a Jewish husband to make any maintenance payments at all to his moredes wife who sued him in a non-Jewish court?

40

 Feb 12, 2013 at 09:02 AM qazxc Says:

Reply to #38  
TruthBeTold Says:

Abe1101, your comments are full of the YU-MO feminist deceptions used to promote the wife swapping prenup agreement.

"the husband voluntarily signed" - A fraudulent claim because the MO men are being put under enormous pressure to sign the wife swapping agreement. Refusal to sign may very well torpedo the marriage.

"the husband voluntarily signed agreeing to pay the wife certain sums under certain conditions" - Another fraudulent claim. The future husband has absolutely no idea of the conditions where he will be forced to make payments, which might well include loss of his children and home in non-Jewish courts. A normal man would never agree to this.

"If the husband would like he is free to pay the amounts which he agreed to pay." - Also a fraudulent claim because the payment amounts are set very high so that the husband most likely cannot maintain the payments, so he is thereby forced to give a pasul Get Meoso.

The language of the so-called prenup by its own admission does not represent Torah Judaism - "they accept now (through the Jewish law mechanism of kim li) whatever minority views determined by the Beth Din of America are needed to effectuate the obligations"

Looks like someone spends a bit too much time fantasising about wife swapping.

41

 Feb 12, 2013 at 12:36 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #26  
PchaFresser Says:

Why would someone withhold a get???????
If you don't want to be with her, give her the 'get' and get the hell out!

1) maybe she won't take the get unless you hand her a big payout and/or grant her full custody. Remember you can't force her to accept a get either. So she can make big demans and scream Aguna!
2)while a last resort sometimes you need it to stop her from manipulating / children , secular courts etc..
Bottom line I used to think like you till I had a few friends taken advantge of. Al Tuden es chevercha

42

 Feb 12, 2013 at 04:00 PM morris Says:

to #36
now lets see ,if the man agrees to pay the penalty and not give a GET are you so sure that she wont go to BDA or ORA and forcibly shame him in public? If she does so will the BDA require her to return those monies?????? Of course not! So therefore this prenup is bogus! its merely a one-sided tool that the RCA employs to punish the man if he doesnt give a GET. Should the man turn out to be wealthy and make those payments, they will then resort to plan B which is ORA and Seiruvim as we see happening. I therefore tell all husbands not to fall for this trap. Take a look again at that Gemoro bava Basra 48A where the chachomim forbade using the courts precisely because they foresaw women who wanted to exit the marriage just to be with another man, would nuse the services of non-jews to force him to give a GET. How ironic that the Tanaim forersaw what the women of the "disposable marriage" generation will do. BTW do your research and you will see that women represent 90%of the plaintiffs in Divorce actions!!!!

43

 Feb 12, 2013 at 08:01 PM qazxc Says:

Reply to #42  
morris Says:

to #36
now lets see ,if the man agrees to pay the penalty and not give a GET are you so sure that she wont go to BDA or ORA and forcibly shame him in public? If she does so will the BDA require her to return those monies?????? Of course not! So therefore this prenup is bogus! its merely a one-sided tool that the RCA employs to punish the man if he doesnt give a GET. Should the man turn out to be wealthy and make those payments, they will then resort to plan B which is ORA and Seiruvim as we see happening. I therefore tell all husbands not to fall for this trap. Take a look again at that Gemoro bava Basra 48A where the chachomim forbade using the courts precisely because they foresaw women who wanted to exit the marriage just to be with another man, would nuse the services of non-jews to force him to give a GET. How ironic that the Tanaim forersaw what the women of the "disposable marriage" generation will do. BTW do your research and you will see that women represent 90%of the plaintiffs in Divorce actions!!!!

Boo hoo. Waa waa. My heart bleeds borsht for all the wimpy little Mama's boys who should never have gotten married in the first place and now can't figure out how to deal honorably with the mess they created by pretending to be interested in women.

44

Sign-in to post a comment

Scroll Up
Advertisements:

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