honoring abusive parents, książki
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
Dr. Benzion Sorotzkin, Psy.D. - Honoring Abusive Parents
Honoring Parents Who Are Abusive
By Benzion Sorotzkin, Psy.D.
Reprinted (with minor modifications) from:
The International Network of Orthodox Mental Health Professionals -
NEFESH News
Part 1
*
As a clinical psychologist in the
frum
community I have frequently been asked by patients to address the question of
the obligation to honor abusive parents. As a result, I have researched the issue and have discussed it with some
prominent
Rabbonim
. I would like to share some of what I have learned with other clinicians and anyone else who
needs to address this issue.
It goes without saying that
kibbud av va'eim
is a very important and complex
mitzvah
. Any particular situation will
involve specific clinical and
halachic
issues that have to be evaluated by a knowledgeable
Rov
for specific guidance. It
does help, however, if the questioner is as knowledgeable as possible about the issues involved. It is for that reason that
I would like to share with the readers some interesting and not so well known dimensions of this issue.
Talmud Kiddushin
31a
A frequently quoted Talmudic passage regarding the extent to which one is obligated to honor even an abusive parent is
the story in
Kiddushin
(31a) where a Roman officer (Dommah Ben Nesinah) is praised for maintaining his composure
even after his mother tore his clothes off and spit in his face in public. Unfortunately, the comment of the
Tosafos
there
that, according to the
Midrash
, the mother in the story was
meturefes b'daata
(e.g., insane or suffering from
Alzheimer's disease) is usually not cited. This fact certainly puts the story in a very different light. Certainly, an
Alzheimer's patient cannot be held responsible for such behavior. (Yet, it was terribly embarrassing to the son and
therefore he is commended for remaining passive. Anyone who has cared for such a patient will testify as to how
difficult it is not to respond harshly). It is unfortunate that this
Gemara
is cited as evidence that a child is required to
passively submit to chronic abuse by a parent (who is not
meturefes b'daata
) in the name of
kibbud av va'eim
!
1
The well-known commentary on the Talmud, the
Yam Shel Shlomo
( R' Shlomo Luria, the
Maharshal
), cites the
Tosafos
and adds (free translation):
I agree that this mother must have been meturefes b'daata since this story is cited in
order to teach us the laws of kibbud av va'eim and if she wasn't meturefes b'daata the
son would be permitted to protest in order to prevent his mother from causing him
financial harm and certainly he can prevent her from causing him bodily harm. And
even if she had already harmed him he can sue for damages in bais din... So we must
say that she was meturefes b'daata and that's why he couldn't protest and that's why
he didn't rebuke ["go'ar"] her [the implication is that if she wasn't meturefes b'daata
the son would be permitted to protest and rebuke her in order to prevent her attack].
The
Yam Shel Shlomo
then comments on the
Tur
who also cites this
Gemara
(without the qualification that the parent
was
meturefes b'daata
):
This ruling of the Tur [that one should remain passive in response to such a parental
attack] must be referring to a situation where he is unable to protest because it is
already after the fact, and therefore he shouldn't insult [kelimah] or rebuke his parent.
1 of 9
6/8/2007 12:16 PM
Dr. Benzion Sorotzkin, Psy.D. - Honoring Abusive Parents
We see that this widely quoted event that supposedly mandates that children need to passively submit to chronic abuse,
is in fact limited to where the parent is insane or where it's after the fact.
2
The
sefer Kibbud Av Va'eim
(Rabbi Hillel Litwack, p. 32) asks how a child can permit his parent to violate a Torah law
by submitting to being hit and embarrassed in public by his parent. He also suggests that the child is not even
permitted to be
mochel
[to allow, to forgive] the parent since a person is not permitted to harm himself. Likewise it's
possible that one is not permitted to allow a parent to embarrass him in public since it is comparable to murder. He
also concludes that it must be after the fact. Rabbi Litwack also asks why the
Mechaber
doesn't discuss the issue if the
child is permitted to try to stop the parent before the fact as he does in a different case involving monetary loss. He cites
one authority who suggested that it may be too obvious to mention that the child is not obligated to allow the parent to
hit him for no good reason.
Wicked parents
The
Yam Shel Shlomo
, suggests that perhaps it would be a meritorious act (
midas chasiddus
- i.e., beyond the letter of
the law) not to protest even before the fact, providing the parent truly (albeit erroneously) believed that this was an
appropriate educational intervention,
3
for if the parent simply acted in a fit of anger then he is a
rosha
[wicked person].
In the
Chidushei Rabbeinu Yaakov me'Lublin ve'Rabbeinu Heshel me'Krakaw
(in the
Tur Hachodosh
) it states that if
the father is acting like a rosha then the son is permitted to insult him [
lehachlimo
]. While the
Rambam
and the
Mechaber
rule that there is an obligation to honor a wicked parent, the
Ramo
and the majority of poskim disagree. The
Oruch Hashulchan
rules like the
Ramo
. A very prominent
posaik
told me that the normative
Halacha
is like the
Ramo
.
The
Yam Shel Shlomo
then relates a dispute between the
Rambam
and
Ravad
regarding the obligation to personally
care for a parent who acts inappropriately. He distinguishes between such behavior when it is due to
tiruf ha'daas
(e.g.,
suffering from Alzheimer's disease) where according to the
Ravad
there is such an obligation, and where the parent is
acting out of
ro'ah lev
(a wicked heart) where there is no such obligation.
While we do not hesitate to describe acting out teens as having a
lev rah
(wicked heart),
4
we resist thinking of abusive
parents as acting out of
ro'ah lev
. However, the
Yam Shel Shlomo
and others recognize this possibility and make it clear
that there is no obligation for a child to honor such a parent. Where possible, it is best for the child to move away.
However when not possible, according to these
poskim
a child is permitted to take steps to protect himself from abuse
and can seek recourse in a
beis din
after the fact. It is very unfortunate that some teachers may (inadvertently) imply to
children that the Torah obligates children to passively tolerate chronic abuse by parents when this is not the case.
The
petur
of
choleh
Harav Dovid Cohen shlit"a has stated [see addendum] that if interacting with an abusive parent makes a person
emotionally ill then the child is exempt from this obligation. Since one is not required to spend more than a fifth of his
assets for a
mitzvas aseh
then certainly one is not required to make himself sick. Obligating abused children to
unconditionally honor their abusing parents will almost certainly exacerbate their emotional distress and/or disability
and they are therefore, not obliged to do this.
When presenting a particular "abusive parent" question to a
Rov
it is imperative to be completely open regarding the
extent of the abuse and the degree to which the abuse is causing the child emotional distress and disability. Often
children find it very difficult to be fully open even with themselves in this regard and it then becomes the clinician's
duty to help the patient to formulate his/her question fully and accurately.
Defending oneself
Many children feel that defending themselves from false parental accusations is a violation of
kibbud av va'eim
. This is
not so. In the
Sefer Ben Yechabed Av
(p. 91) he states that a child is permitted to respectfully state that the accusation is
false.
2 of 9
6/8/2007 12:16 PM
Dr. Benzion Sorotzkin, Psy.D. - Honoring Abusive Parents
The obligation to admonish [
tochocha
]
Rabbi Litwack (sefer Kibbud Av Va'eim, p. 34, and p. 47 in the name of the
sefer Chadrei Daiah
) suggests that since
children are obligated to admonish their parents if they are violating a
halacha
therefore, if parents speak to their
children abusively - clearly a violation of
halacha
- the children are obligated to rebuke their parents [as respectfully as
possible under the circumstance].
5
Clinical consideration
I have elsewhere discussed at length the clinical challenges of treating Orthodox adolescents with abusive parents.
6
One
area of conflict is the
kibbud av va'eim
obligation. I explain why children are so resistant to acknowledging the abusive
nature of their parent's behavior (even when it is blatant) and why it is important to help the child to overcome this
resistance. I also elaborate on why it is imperative that abused youngsters be told clearly that what their parents are
doing is abusive, against the Torah and inexcusable. Likewise, they need to be told that the parental abuse does
mitigate their
kibbud av va'eim
obligations (the degree and nature of mitigation needs to be determined by a
knowledgeable
Rov
).
The
Maharik
on the limits of the
kibbud av va'eim
obligation
The popular perception (often reinforced by self-serving parents) is that the
mitzvah
of
kibbud av va'eim
is
all-encompassing and without limits or qualifications. It is important to realize that there are clear parameters to this
obligation. For example, the
Maharik
states that a father does not have the authority to forbid his son to marry the
women he desires and the
Ramo
rules like the
Maharik
.
The
Maharik
gives three reasons for his ruling and I believe these reasons are clearly applicable to a child contending
with an abusive parent.
1.
The
halacha
is that the parent has to bear the financial burden of the son's fulfillment of the
mitzvah
of
kibbud
av va'eim
("
meshel av
," e.g., the son has to prepare and serve the food for his father but the father pays for the
food). If the child is not required to undergo a financial loss then he certainly does not have to endure personal
suffering by not marrying the women of his choice.
2.
We see in many places in the Talmud that the
chachomim
are concerned that a wife should find favor in her
husband's eyes so that they have a good marriage. By trying to force his son to forgo his choice in a wife it is as if
the father is ordering his son to go against the Torah since he is not likely to have a good relationship with a
choice forced upon him. [One can perhaps likewise argue that abused children frequently rebel against their
parents' religious beliefs, or develop serious emotional disorders, neither of which is desired by our
chachomim
].
3.
The
Maharik
rules [and this is the normative
halacha
] that the obligation to honor parents applies only when
the parent asks for something that benefits the parent directly, e.g., bringing him food. The obligation does not
require obeying commands that do not directly benefit the parents, for example, whom the child marries.
7
Defending the strong at the expense of the weak
It is sad that, as a community, our religious sensitivities causes us to be more concerned with the obligation of abused
children to honor their parents than with the serious violations of
halacha
being committed by abusive parents! We are
very comfortable saying to an abused boy, "Sure, it's unfortunate that your father is abusive, but that's how he is and he
isn't going to change. You are obligated by the Torah to honor him so just get over it." Abused children are often told
that they are obligated to forgive their abusive parents even when their parents never acknowledged the abuse and have
certainly never apologized for it and are still continuing to abuse them currently. What's more, they are often compelled
to apologize for getting angry over the abuse!
In contrast, we seem to be too intimidated to say to the abusive father, "It's unfortunate that you are having difficulties
with your boy, but every time you speak to him abusively you are committing numerous
aveiros
(e.g.,
V'ahavta
3 of 9
6/8/2007 12:16 PM
Dr. Benzion Sorotzkin, Psy.D. - Honoring Abusive Parents
l'rayacha komocha
), and these violations are especially egregious because your victim is a family member.
8
As Harav Dovid Cohen relates [see addendum], when a prominent person is arrested for molesting children there is
often more concern in the community for the fate of the molester than for the wellbeing of the child victims.
The abused become abusers
A substantial body of research has shown that, while far from inevitable, children who are emotionally abused tend to
develop a variety of emotional and behavioral problems including drug abuse and other addictions. They also are more
likely to be emotionally abusive of their own children later in life as compared to children who are not abused.
Research by Briggs
9
and others on sexually abused children has found that those victims who minimized the depravity
and negative consequences of their abuser's actions were substantially more likely to become abusers themselves in
adulthood. It is as if they say to themselves, "If what was done to me wasn't such a terrible act, then it won't be so
terrible if I do it to someone else."
Children have a natural tendency to deny and/or minimize the harmful nature of parental abuse. It would seem likely
that compelling children to honor their abusive parents would reinforce this tendency by indicating that abusing
children does not diminish a person's honor. This would likely increase the likelihood of perpetuating this type of
behavior.
When the community starts putting more pressure on parents not to be abusive rather than pressuring children to
honor abusive parents, we may then begin to make a dent in the ever increasing tide of youngsters with serious
emotional and behavioral disorders.
Addendum
Excerpts from a speech by Harav Dovid Cohen, shlit"a.
"Counseling the contemporary Orthodox Jewish family."
Young Israel Council of Rabbis Annual Conference, February, 2000.
...It has happened in our community [that] the person who was [sexually] abused was made to suffer by the
community. [They were not so concerned] about the person that was being abused, [rather they were] worrying about
the abuser that he not chas v'shalom go to jail.....
To address some of the questions [presented by] Dr. Sorotzkin [
regarding the obligation of
kibbud av va'eim
] in
a case where children were abused by their parents
... Now I maintain there is a difference as far as the type of
abuse concerned.
kibbud av va'eim
comes with
nisyonos
, as the
Gemara
in
Kidushin
tells us, ad heychan
kibbud av
va'eim
the
Gemara
tells us where the mother of the Roman officer came and took off this
chashuva beged
and spat at
him, so the
Tosfos
brings that she was a
meturefes
, she was insane. So, of course, that has a lot to say why the son... did
not really feel that his mother was embarrassing him, maybe he felt a tinge of embarrassment, but everyone understood
because they saw she was a
meturefes
. But, in a situation where a child was [sexually] abused by a parent.... we know it
is worse than being a
choleh
[ill person]. A child who has to deal with a parent, who sexually abused that child, it's
almost to say that that child will never become
meshuchrar
[freed], it's very difficult to get the damage out, and if the
person has to deal with the parent, there are very few people that can possibly do so. So certainly when it comes to
sexual abuse, I feel that it is not worse that a
mitzvah
where most poskim will tell you that a choleh is potur [exempt],
we are talking about mitzvas aseh now, just as there is a
shiur
of
mitzvos
ad
chomesh
[one is only obligated to spend
one fifth of his assets for a positive commandment].., so the
Poskim
say when it is a question of being a
choleh
that it is
the same thing, that being a
choleh
is like ad
chomesh
, so that there is really no
chiyuv
[to make one's self ill for the
sake of
kibbud av
]....
4 of 9
6/8/2007 12:16 PM
Dr. Benzion Sorotzkin, Psy.D. - Honoring Abusive Parents
There is another
snif
to be
matir
[reason for leniency], because when a parent is a
rosha
[wicked person], in sexual
abuse the parent has a
din
of a
rosha
.... So in the case of a
rosha
, even though there are two
daos
[opinions] in the
Shulchan Aruch
, which is a little strange, because
rov rishonim
disagree with the
Rambam
, and they hold like the
pashtus
of the
Gemora
, that there is no chiyuv kibud av by eino oseh maaseh amcha [i.e., a rosha]. The Rambam says
there is a chiyuv. But there are many, and the
Bach
is clear on this that the
Rambam
only meant this that it is a
d'Rabanon
. So again we have an extra
kula
[leniency], we have a
machlokes Rishonim
[most
Rishonim
rule that there
is no obligation of
kibbud av
by a wicked parent] , and we also have the
kula
that it is only
m'Darabonin
, so we can be
meikil
, as far as that is concerned.
[Regarding the question presented by Dr. Sorotzkin if it is permissible for a child to speak negatively about his or her
parents in therapy]. In a situation of speaking to a therapist concerning these things, I'm not speaking [only] of sexual
abuse necessarily, but all [issues] where the therapist feels that by discussing these things they can turn the patient
around, [for example] where the patient could acquire affection from the parent, even though the patient has various
tainus
[complaints] on the parent, I believe the
mekor
[source to permit this] is the
Gemora
in
Sanhedrin
(84b), where
the
Gemora
speaks about a child taking a splinter from a parent, where it can cause a
chabura
[wound] and the
Gemora
says a very interesting
heter
[reason for leniency] -
v'ahavta l'rayacha komocha
[love your neighbor like
yourself]. The way
Rashi
explains it to mean [that one is only prohibited to do to others that that he would not want
done to himself - this excludes being "wounded" in the process of having a splinter removed]. This to my mind [is
similar to when] the
poskim
speak about
lashon harah l'toeles
[for a helpful purpose], which is not limited to
loshan
harah
. Any [transgression of]
bein adam l'chaveiro
[when it is]
l'toeles
is
mutar
... Indeed, the heter of a parent to hit a
child is because it is
l'toeles
for the
hadracha
[guidance] of the child. Any [transgression of] bein adom l'chaveiro is
mutar [permissible] when it's l'toeles. That's why a parent [is only permitted] to hit a child [if it's]
l'shem shamayim
.
And from that
Gemora
you see - and it's a
sofek
- that
kibbud av va'em
has a
din
of
bein adom l'chaveiro
. There are
many other
sevaros
[reasons] to be
matir
[to be permissive], but I feel it is certainly
mutar be'chei hai gavna
[permissible in this type of situation].
Part 2
**
I recently came across an article by Rabbi Yitzchok Zilberstein, the
Rov
of Ramat Elchonon, Bnei Brak (and the
son-in-law of Harav Y. S. Elyashev shlit"a) in the Torah journal,
Kol Torah
(Nissan 5763). The article contains four
teshuvos
on the permissibility of offending the honor of parents for therapeutic purposes. I would like to focus on the
fourth
teshuvah
, as it reinforces the point that a patient's psychological state and/or emotional needs can sometimes
diminish his or her
kibbud av va'eim
obligations.
Rabbi Zilberstein was asked the following by a mental health professional (free translation):
Much of children's (and adults) emotional pathologies result from unhealthy and
inappropriate parental behaviors and attitudes.. [During therapy] there is a focus on
the pathological family relationships that contributed to the patient's emotional
difficulties (e.g., double messages, parentified children, unrealistic parental
expectations and demands, inappropriate parental behaviors, etc.). In the course of
treatment therapists bring to the consciousness of their patients, directly or indirectly,
the role of their parents in their difficulties and encourage them to externalize and
direct their anger to the appropriate people rather than to repress the anger, since
repression causes excessive guilt feelings, self punishment and other psychological
symptoms.. The question is: Does this type of therapeutic intervention, where the
therapists encourages the awareness and expression of angry feelings toward parents,
possibly causing patients to not properly respect their parents, conflict with halacha?
5 of 9
6/8/2007 12:16 PM
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]