In all streams, steps are taken to address rabbis' sexual abuse

In all streams, steps are taken to address rabbis' sexual abuse
By Joe Berkofsky
Chicago Jewish News - June 18, 2004
www.chicagojewishnews.com


The Jewish religious streams increasingly are cracking down on rabbinic sexual abuse.

New get-tough policies are emerging in the wake of pledges by the various denominations to respond to cases of sex abuse by rabbis and others in the past decade.

The Orthodox Union, for example, has established a detailed policy for its youth group to deal with harassment of all kinds. According to the policy posted on the Web site of the group, the National Conference of Synagogue Youth, the union has appointed ombudsmen to handle such complaints.

Rabbi Tzvi Hersh Weinreb, the O.U.'s executive vice president, said the position includes two independent professionals trained in harassment issues. Officials will not say how many complaints of abuse they field each year, but, Weinreb said, "The system has been tested and we've found it effective."

Weinreb hopes to get ethics guidelines in place for O.U. member synagogues as well.

Meanwhile, at its recent annual convention, the Rabbinical Council of America, the largest association of Orthodox rabbis in North America, approved new protocols for dealing with rabbinic abuse.

The guidelines include appointing an independent assessor to determine whether complaints are substantive.

Violations include "any form of sexual activity or sexualize contact with any person to whom the rabbi is not married or with any minor; lewd behavior; the exploitation of the rabbinic position for the purpose of gaining sexual gratification or sexual favors," and abusive physical contact or manipulation, the policy states.

Rabbis found guilty of violations could be expelled from the rabbinic association or reprimanded and ordered to undergo counseling. Penalties depend on the severity of the offense, whether it was part of a pattern of behavior or a first offense, and whether other measures are taken to prevent future abuse.

In the Orthodox and Jewish world generally, "there has been a recognition that there needs to be a formal protocol rather than an ad-hoc response to allegations," said Rabbi Basil Herring, the Rabbinical Council of America's executive vice president.

The Conservative movement's congregational arm, the United Synagogue, earlier this year instituted guidelines dealing with sexual harassment in congregations.

The policy bans "leering, catcalls or touching" of a sexual nature, "insulting or obscene comments or gestures," the display of "sexually suggestive pictures" or the telling of sexual jokes or insulting comments.

The movement's Rabbinic Assembly, meanwhile, refers any "serious" complaints of harassment or abuse to an ethics committee, which investigates by interviewing the parties and others involved, said Rabbi Joel Meyers, the Rabbinic Assembly's executive vice president.

Rabbis guilty of harassment or abuse can be expelled from the movement, barred or suspended from the pulpit and ordered to undergo therapy, he said.

More minor ethics infractions, such as breaking rules of confidentiality, might incur a "dressing down" in the form of a reprimand and mandatory apology, he said.

Unlike its Reform counterpart, the Central Conference of American Rabbis, the Rabbinical Assembly does not yet have a formal ethics code in place, though the ethics panel does follow guidelines that the group's board approved, which will be published online soon, Meyers said.

The Rabbinic Assembly, which typically receives up to three abuse or harassment complaints a year, is in the midst of drafting a policy dealing with rabbinic behavior, but not ethics, Meyers said.

"It seems odd to tell a rabbi something he ought to know-namely, not to harm another person," he said.

The Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association was among the first, along with the Reform movement, to adapt rabbinic ethics guidelines in 1995.

Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association President Rabbi Amy Small said the movement has seen "a few cases" of abuse in the past several years, but she said she could not provide exact figures.

The association would not make its policy public, she added, but she said it parallels the Reform and Conservative ethics guidelines.

Any time a charge is leveled against a rabbi, Small said, rabbis in all the movements take note. In part, that's out of compassion, but "on another level, people see it as a statement about the rabbinate" itself, she said.

In All Streams, Steps Are Taken to Address Rabbis’ Sexual Abuse

In All Streams, Steps Are Taken to Address Rabbis’ Sexual Abuse

JTA - June 16, 2004

The Jewish religious streams increasingly are cracking down on rabbinic sexual abuse. New get-tough policies are emerging in the wake of pledges by the various denominations to respond to cases of sex abuse by rabbis and others in the past decade.

The Orthodox Union, for example, has established a detailed policy for its youth group to deal with harassment of all kinds. According to the policy posted on the Web site of the group, the National Conference of Synagogue Youth, the union has appointed ombudsmen to handle such complaints.

Rabbi Tzvi Hersh Weinreb, the O.U.’s executive vice president, said the position includes two independent professionals trained in harassment issues. Officials will not say how many complaints of abuse they field each year, but, Weinreb said, “The system has been tested and we’ve found it effective.”

Weinreb hopes to get ethics guidelines in place for O.U. member synagogues as well.

Meanwhile, a! t its recent annual convention, the Rabbinical Council of America, the largest association of Orthodox rabbis in North America, approved new protocols for dealing with rabbinic abuse.

The guidelines include appointing an independent assessor to determine whether complaints are substantive.

Violations include “any form of sexual activity or sexualized contact with any person to whom the rabbi is not married or with any minor; lewd behavior; the exploitation of the rabbinic position for the purpose of gaining sexual gratification or sexual favors,” and abusive physical contact or manipulation, the policy states.

Rabbis found guilty of violations could be expelled from the rabbinic association or reprimanded and ordered to undergo counseling. Penalties depend on the severity of the offense, whether it was part of a pattern of behavior or a first offense, and whether other measures are taken to prevent future abuse.

In the Orthodox and Jewish world generally, “there! has been a recognition that there needs to be a formal protocol rathe r than an ad-hoc response to allegations,” said Rabbi Basil Herring, the Rabbinical Council of America’s executive vice president.

The Conservative movement’s congregational arm, the United Synagogue, earlier this year instituted guidelines dealing with sexual harassment in congregations.

The policy bans “leering, catcalls or touching” of a sexual nature, “insulting or obscene comments or gestures,” the display of “sexually suggestive pictures” or the telling of sexual jokes or insulting comments.

The movement’s Rabbinic Assembly, meanwhile, refers any “serious” complaints of harassment or abuse to an ethics committee, which investigates by interviewing the parties and others involved, said Rabbi Joel Meyers, the Rabbinic Assembly’s executive vice president.

Rabbis guilty of harassment or abuse can be expelled from the movement, barred or suspended from the pulpit and ordered to undergo therapy, he said.

More minor ethics infractions, such as breaking rules ! of confidentiality, might incur a “dressing down” in the form of a reprimand and mandatory apology, he said.

Unlike its Reform counterpart, the Central Conference of American Rabbis, the Rabbinical Assembly does not yet have a formal ethics code in place, though the ethics panel does follow guidelines that the group’s board approved, which will be published online soon, Meyers said.

The Rabbinic Assembly, which typically receives up to three abuse or harassment complaints a year, is in the midst of drafting a policy dealing with rabbinic behavior, but not ethics, Meyers said.

“It seems odd to tell a rabbi something he ought to know — namely, not to harm another person,” he said.

The Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association was among the first, along with the Reform movement, to adapt rabbinic ethics guidelines in 1995.

Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association President Rabbi Amy Small said the movement has seen “a few cases” of abuse in the past several yea! rs, but she said she could not provide exact figures.

The associati on would not make its policy public, she added, but she said it parallels the Reform and Conservative ethics guidelines.

Any time a charge is leveled against a rabbi, Small said, rabbis in all the movements take note. In part, that’s out of compassion, but “on another level, people see it as a statement about the rabbinate” itself, she said.

The Orthodox Caucus - Plenum Members

The Orthodox Caucus - Plenum Members

August 15, 2003

http://www.orthodoxcaucus.org/plenummember.html

Plenum Members

1. Mr. Steven Adelsberg
2. Rabbi Yosef Adler
3. Rabbi Marc Angel
4. Rabbi Kenneth Auman
5. Mr. Shael Bellows
6. Mr. Jack Bendheim
7. Dr. Giti Bendheim
8. Dr. David Berger
9. Dr. Elena Berkowitz
10. Rabbi Ari Berman
11. Rabbi Saul Berman
12. Rabbi Heshie Billet
13. Mr. David Birnaum
14. Ms. Evelyn Blachor
15. Rabbi Yosef Blau
16. Mr. Ludwig Bravmann
17. Rabbi Reuven Bulka
18. Mr. David Butler
19. Rabbi Zevulum Charlop
20. Chief Rabbi Shear Yashuv Cohen
21. Mr. Nathan Diament
22. Rabbi Mark Dratch
23. Rabbi Steven Dworken
24. Ms. Betty Ehrenberg
25. Mr. Fred Ehrman
26. Mr. Allen Fagin
27. Mrs. Judith Fagin
28. Mrs. Judith Feder
29. Mrs. Rella Feldman
30. Mrs. Sondra Fisch
31. Mr. Mandell Ganchrow
32. Rabbi Gershon Gewirtz
33. Mrs. Lili Goldberg
34. Mr. William Goldberg
35. Rabbi Shmuel Goldin
36. Mrs. Shulamith Goldstein
37. Mr. Mark Goldstein
38. Mr. Sidney Gottesman
39. Rabbi Raphael Grossman
40. Mr. Andrew Groveman
41. Rabbi Joseph Grunblatt
42. Mr. Charles Guttman
43. Rabbi Kenneth Hain
44. Rabbi Naftali Harkstark
45. Rabbi Nathaniel Helfogt
46. Rabbi Robert Hirt
47. Mrs. Norma Holzer
48. Mr. Mark Honigsfeld
49. Rabbi David Israel
50. Rabbi Howard Jachter
51. Rabbi David Jacobowitz
52. Mr. Kenneth Jacobson
53. Mrs. Michael Jessleson
54. Dr. Dov Kahane
55. Mr. Henry Katz
56. Mr. Ilan Kaufthal
57. Mrs. Ilana Kelman
58. Rabbi Jay Kelman
59. Dr. Jerry Kesenbaum
60. Mr. Lawrence A. Kobrin
61. Dr. Eugene Korn
62. Mr. Saul Koschitzky
63. Dr. Marion Getzler Kramer
64. Ms. Fran Kritz
65. Dr. Norman Lamm
66. Mr. Moron Landowne
67. Mr. Reuben Leibowitz
68. Mr. Nathan Lewin
69. Rabbi Aharon Lictenstein
70. Mr. Marcel Lindenbaum
71. Mr. Nathan Linden baum
72. Rabbi Haskel Loostein
73. Rabbi Chaim Marder
74. Mr. Matthew Maryles
75. Mr. Aaron Menche
76. Mr. Ezra Merkin
77. Rabbi Michael Miller
78. Rabbi Adam Mintz
79. Mrs. Sharon Mintz
80. Mr. Avery Neumark
81. Rabbi Joseph S. Ozrowski
82. Mr. Jeffrey Parker
83. Rabbi Dale Polakoff
84. Mr. Jay Pmrenze
85. Dr. Heschel Raskas
86. Dr. Rosalie Reich
87. Mr. Joel Rich
88. Rabbi Shlomo Riskin
89. Mr. Philip Rosen
90. Rabbi Jonathan I. Rosenblatt
91. Mr. Gary Rosenblatt
92. Rabbi Michael Rosenweig
93. Rabbi Sol Roth 
94. Mrs. Gold Rothman
95. Mr. Daniel Rothner
96. Mr. Kurt Rothschild
97. Rabbi Jacob Rubenstein
98. RabbiEliezer Rubin
99. Mr. Sheldon Rudoff
100. Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks
101. Mr. Steven Savitsky
102. Rabbi Jacob J. Schacter
103. Dr. Alvin Schiff
104. Mr. Ed Schlussel
105. Dr. Sylvia Schonfeld
106. Mrs. Jordana Schoor
107. Mr Robert Schwalbe
108. Mr. Carmi Schwartz
109. Rabbi Gedalia Schwartz
110. Rabbi Allen Schwartz
111. Ms. marilyn Selber
112. Mr. Joseph Septimus
113. Dr. David Shatz
114. Rabbi Michael Shmidman
115. Rabbi Moshe Shulman
116. Professor Daniel Sperber
117. Mr. Steve Spira
118. Dr. Helene Stark
119. Mr. Peter Steinlauf
120. Rabbi Chaim Steinmetz
121. Professor Richard Stone
122. Mr. Moshael Straus
123. Mrs. Malka Susswein
124. Rabbi Solomon Trau
125. Mrs. Ina Tropper
126. Dr. Daniel Tropper
127. Dr. Chaim Waxman
128. Mr. Marcel Weber
129. Rabbi Steven Wel
130. Dr. Lina Weiner
131. Rabbi Tzvi H. Weinreb
132. Mr. Morry Weiss
133. Mr. Jerry Williams
134. Rabbi Mordechai Willig
135. Mr. Michael Wimpfheimer
136. Rabbi Jeffrey Woolf
137. Rabbi Walter Wurzburger

_________________________________________________________________________

Orthodox Caucus to be Hosted by Yeshiva University's Center for the Jewish Future

YU News - August 1, 2005

Aug 1, 2005 — The Orthodox Caucus, a leadership group whose mission is to address challenges facing the Orthodox community and the Jewish community at large, will relocate to Yeshiva University’s Wilf Campus and be hosted by the Center for the Jewish Future (CJF) of Yeshiva University (YU).

The Orthodox Caucus brings together prominent rabbis, roshei yeshiva (professors of Talmud), educators, and lay leaders in common cause. “Bringing the Orthodox Caucus into the YU sphere of influence will allow top-tier Jewish leaders to draw upon the intellectual, spiritual, and educational resources of YU and strengthen their contribution to the Jewish community,” President Richard M. Joel said.

The Orthodox Caucus offers programs in approximately 10 communities in the New York metropolitan area and beyond, as well as initiatives that serve the community at large.

Fred Ehrman, chairman of the Orthodox Caucus, viewed the move to YU as an important opportunity for the organization and the Jewish community. “Our goal is to catalyze the Jewish community and its organizations in practical and meaningful ways,” he said. “Over the past 13 years, we have succeeded in spurring communities to action by raising awareness and finding creative solutions to sensitive and pressing issues. By partnering with YU, we hope to broaden the scope of our efforts to strengthen Jewish life.”

The issues the Caucus has focused on include assisting parents with developmentally disabled children; formulating policies for schools regarding substance abuse; development of prenuptial agreements in cooperation with the Beth Din of America and the Rabbinical Council of America easing the plight of agunot (chained women); educating communities about issues concerning the singles phenomenon; and guiding parents and students in selecting yeshivot and seminaries in Israel for post-high school studies.

The Orthodox Caucus has always challenged the Jewish community to improve itself; creating initiatives that have helped strengthen our moral constitution and commitment to the values articulated in our mesorah (tradition),” said Rabbi Kenneth Brander, inaugural dean of the Center for the Jewish Future (CJF). “The synergy created between the Caucus and YU through CJF will enable us to deliver a more effective message of leadership to our student community and at the same time enhance the Center’s ability to serve the Jewish people.”

_______________________________________________________________________________

Orthodox Caucus

Ethical and Religious Guidelines for Orthodoxy Task Force

Just Tzedakah

http://www.just-tzedakah.org/Taskforce.html

Rabbi Saul Berman Mr. Fred Ehrman Rabbi Daniel Feldman Rabbi Kenneth Hain Rabbi Robert Hirt Dr. Ira Kaminow Mr. Lawrence Kobrin Dr. Norman Lamm Mr. Morton Landowne

Mr. Marcel Lindenbaum                 Mr. Matthew Maryles                 Mr. Sheldon Rudoff                 Mr. Bruce Shoulson                 Mr. William Spier                 Professor Suzanne Last Stone                 Mr. Moshael Straus                 Rabbi Tzvi Hirsch Weinreb                 Rabbi Walter Wurzburger

_______________________________________________________________________________

When silence is not a virtue

Op Ed

When silence is not a virtue 

By Dr. Stephen Glicksman

Jewish Standard - February 7, 2003

On Sunday night, Feb. 2, I went to hear Rabbi Mordechai Willig give a talk on Jewish parenting at Cong. Beth Abraham in Bergenfield. In truth, I did not attend the talk to learn Rabbi Willig's views on child rearing; rather, I went to hear Rabbi Willig discuss his role in the 1989 beis din of Rabbi Baruch Lanner, formerly a regional director of the National Conference of Synagogue Youth, currently a convicted child abuser. I must say, I left the talk disappointed. Here's why:

In 1989, a group of people I respected, my friends, my rebbeim, my NCSY advisers, even my high-school guidance counselor, went into a room at Yeshiva University either to accuse one of my heroes of, or defend him against, the crime of sexually, physically, and emotionally abusing children. At the time, I did not know which side was telling the truth. I had never been abused by Baruch. Indeed, Baruch was an important influence in my becoming observant. The fact that he threw in a joke about sanitary napkins during an NCSY skit or touched people in a way that my other rebbeim told me was inappropriate only served to make Baruch "cooler." And, back in 1989, when my friends put their reputations on the line to testify against Baruch at the beis din and told stories of how Baruch hit them, how he touched them, how he threatened them, I, as a teenager, defended these actions as I heard others defend them: as unconventional, but highly effective, kiruv (outreach) techniques.

After the beis din had seemingly found Baruch safe to work with children and demanded a public apology from his accusers, however, something strange happened. One of my rebbeim in Israel told me, " we had done what we were talking about doing in the '70s when I was involved in NCSY, none of this would be happening now." Other rebbeim told me that while they would never engage in that type of behavior themselves, Baruch can be excused because of all the good he had done. When I asked one of his defenders at the beis din if he had mentioned to the court that Baruch had kicked him in the groin, he told me, "They didn't ask me about that.” People seemed to understand the conclusion of the beis din to be either, "Baruch Lanner was found innocent of all charges", or "Nobody else should act like Baruch Lanner, but it's okay if he acts that way himself."

Ten years later, Rabbi Yosef Blau, one of the three rabbis on the 1989 beis din, approached me and said that he, like many others, had realized that the original beis din had made a mistake in its handling of the Lanner case. He was now gathering new testimonies regarding Baruch's abusive behavior and asked if I knew anyone who could help. By this time, of course, I knew the truth: Baruch was an abuser. It's not okay to kick boys in the groin or grope teenage girls, even for a rabbi. And, less than a year later, the world would know with the publication of an expose about Baruch's abuses in the Jewish Week. The rest, as they say, is history.

Much has changed since the publication of the article. NCSY has adopted a series of standards designed to prevent the abuses of the Lanner era from reoccurring. The OU itself investigated the accusations against Baruch, and found them to be true. The leader of the OU commission, far from being ostracized by the community as the witnesses who testified at the original beis din were, was recently named the new president of Yeshiva University.  Baruch has been convicted in a New Jersey courtroom of endangering children. But one question remains unanswered. How is it that the original beis din came to such a dangerously wrong conclusion? The answer, it seems, is this: The beis din was not fooled by Lanner; in fact, as Rabbi Willig clearly stated during his Jewish parenting talk and in statements recently released to the press, the beis din found that "Lanner was guilty of a number of charges." This statement (which, based on my conversations with other audience members following the talk seems to have been missed by many present) is, in truth, nothing new. In their public summary of findings, the NCSY Special Commission that looked into the Lanner affair following the Jewish Week article noted that the 1989 beis din "found some troubling allegations to be true" and blamed the OU for misrepresenting the ruling of

the beis din. The fault of the beis din was not in its psak, but in its silence.

One need not know the details of the case to understand the gravity to the Jewish community of Rabbi Willig's comments regarding Lanner's guilt. The 1989 beis din was charged with investigating the inappropriate and abusive behaviors of Baruch Lanner. Regardless of "how abusive" the behaviors were, we now know that Rabbi Willig and his colleagues on the beis din found Baruch Lanner guilty. Despite this fact, Rabbi Willig and the other members of the beis din chose not to publicize their verdict. While the community mistakenly believed that the beis din had found Lanner innocent of all charges, Rabbi Willig and his colleagues allowed shuls, schools, and parents to remain ignorant of a known threat to our community. They kept silent about their findings while Lanner continued to attend NCSY shabbatonim. They kept silent about their findings while Lanner continued his employment as a high school principal. 

They kept silent about their findings while other rabbis, shuls, and organizations, including the Orthodox Union, used (or, more appropriately, misused) the findings of the beis din itself as "proof" that Lanner is safe to work with children. They kept silent as mothers sent their sons to learn from Lanner at the NCSY Summer Kollel. They kept silent as Lanner lied to his followers, stating that the beis din had found him

innocent. They kept silent as rabbis in Bergen County spoke from their pulpits, berating Lanner's accusers for maligning such an "upstanding Torah Jew." They kept silent as Lanner continued abusing children for another 10 years.

While it is true that eventually (and, perhaps, heroically) Rabbi Blau did attempt to undo some of the damage that the decision to keep the guilty verdict secret had caused, and while it is true that during his Jewish parenting talk Rabbi Willig did apologize to the extent he seems capable to at least one of Lanner's accusers, the rabbis of the 1989 beis din clearly have not done enough. To this day, there are dozens, perhaps hundreds of rabbis and educators trained by Baruch Lanner all over the country and world who continue to believe that Lanner was found innocent by the 1989 beis din and, by extension, that his abusive methods of educating our children are appropriate.

Regardless of which "side" you were on, everyone lost something from the Lanner affair. Many people lost their friends. Still more lost their inherent trust of rabbis. Some lost their faith in Judaism. Some lost their faith in God. Some lost their childhood. Some lost their innocence. Some lost their jobs. I lost my heroes, because in the end, when I envision that room at Yeshiva University in 1989, I see a group of children on one side telling Rabbi Willig and the beis din the truth, and I see my former heroes, the people I looked up to, my teachers, my NCSY advisers, my rabbis, saying that Lanner is one of them and could not possibly have done what he was accused of doing. Maybe the people who defended Lanner at the beis din didn't know what he was capable of. Maybe they thought they were telling the truth. Or, maybe, the feeling in that room was that protecting Lanner and upholding the truth were unrelated to each other. After all, in the end, the beis din believed that the children were telling the truth but, in their silence, protected Lanner anyway.

I believe the time has come for Rabbi Willig and the other members of the 1989 beis din to speak the truth. It is time for the rabbis of the 1989 beis din to state publicly, clearly, and emphatically that their conclusion was and is that Baruch Lanner is guilty of abusing the children he was trusted to educate. It is time for the rabbis of the 1989 beis din to publicly apologize for their silence to all of the witnesses who testified against Lanner in 1989, as well as to all of Lanner's victims since the time of the beis din. It is time for the rabbis of the 1989 beis din to explain why they felt it appropriate to force a public apology from Lanner's accusers but felt it inappropriate to make public their own recognition of Lanner's abusive behaviors. It is time Rabbi Willig and the other rabbis of the 1989 beis din to take personal responsibility for the further victimization of those who testified before them in 1989 and for the mistakes made prior to, during, and after the proceedings. It is time for the rabbis of the 1989 beis din to announce forcefully and clearly, with no room for misunderstanding, that anyone using their names or their psak as evidence of Lanner's innocence is dreadfully and dangerously mistaken.

On Sunday night, Rabbi Willig concluded his comments regarding the 1989 beis din of Baruch Lanner by stating, on behalf of the beis din, saying, "We do not think it is appropriate to comment publicly at this time." When the mother of a son who was physically abused by Baruch after 1989 asked Rabbi Willig if he was willing to take responsibility for the pain his silence regarding Lanner's abuses had caused to her and her child, Rabbi Willig again withdrew into silence and simply repeated his statement: "We do not think it is appropriate to comment publicly at this time." This statement may have been the most truthful that Rabbi Willig made the entire evening.  Indeed, the "appropriate time to comment publicly" was over 10 years ago.

Still, I suppose, better late than never.

I'm still waiting.

The OU, Revisited

The OU, Revisited

By Gary Rosenblatt

The Jewish Week - Jan 3, 2003

Gary Rosenblatt is the editor and Publisher of the New York Jewish Week.

I was more than a little apprehensive about attending the biennial national convention of the Orthodox Union at the Rye Town Hilton this past weekend. I told friends maybe I should have first gone through the witness protection program.

After all, the last time the group met, in the midst of the Baruch Lanner scandal, I was persona non grata at the OU conference, booed by many in attendance for, in their eyes, damaging the reputation of a vital organization by exposing the longtime youth leader’s three-decade history of abusing teens in his charge.

In the last two years, though, much has happened. Rabbi Lanner has been convicted of sexual abuse and sentenced to jail, though he is out on appeal.

And the OU has gone about the business of trying to restore its good name. A year ago it hired a new chief executive, Rabbi Tzvi Hersh Weinreb, who is given high marks for his integrity, outlook and tireless travels around the country to drum up support for the OU. And the organization has followed some of the key recommendations of the blue-ribbon commission it created when the Lanner episode broke, namely establishing new guidelines, standards and procedures to train youth advisers working with teens and calling for more parental supervision of its National Conference of Synagogue Youth (NCSY) events.

Clearly, the OU has the potential to play a critical role in the changing Orthodoxy of the 21st century, highlighted by ongoing tensions between the religious left and right and the ascendancy of Richard Joel as president of Yeshiva University. Will the OU, the largest movement of its kind, serving 1,000 synagogues in North America, regain its role as the voice of mainstream Orthodoxy? Or will it continue to look over its right shoulder at the vigorous growth of the haredi community, led by the Agudath Israel of America, and cede religious authority to this more fundamentalist group?

Personal concerns aside, I felt it was important to see and hear what was on the OU’s agenda. And after more than three days of attending sessions, talking to delegates and interviewing the leadership, I came away hopeful that convention chairman Elliott Gibber’s proclamation to the participants that “the OU has turned the corner” was more than wishful thinking.

It is true, as OU leaders admit, that serious internal issues remain to be resolved, including matters of bureaucratic structure, financing and staffing. There is still no chief financial officer in place. But there is a push to make the organization’s work more relevant and helpful to a broader constituency in terms of age, gender and geographical setting. More young blood is needed; the OU remains too New York-centric; and there are woefully too few women in positions of leadership. These points were addressed head-on in sessions that challenged the OU leadership, and which the leadership welcomed.

Most notably, a woman was invited to give the keynote address Saturday night, seen within the OU as a major symbolic step. Karen Bacon, dean of Yeshiva University’s Stern College for Women, in a respectful but forceful address, urged that “women’s voices” be “solicited and listened to on all levels” of the OU. She pointed out the vulnerability of the family unit in Jewish life and suggested that women have an important role to play in helping to achieve balance among career, family and spiritual needs.

Praising Bacon’s participation and her message, Rabbi Weinreb reminded the “Town Hall” audience Saturday night that “the theme of this convention is really about us listening to you.” He and OU president Harvey Blitz, who have been refreshingly open in articulating the group’s challenges and goals, emphasized their commitment to bring more women into positions of leadership.

It hasn’t happened yet, though. None of the top 70 OU officers elected this week are female. (Officials complained privately that a number of women who were asked to join the OU board declined, skeptical about how much clout they would have.) That suggests the OU will have to prove it not only means well but is prepared to carry through on its promises.

For good or for bad, the Lanner scandal was never mentioned publicly during the convention, though it continued to hang over the proceedings. (I should note, gratefully, that a number of people approached me to offer words of encouragement, though a few lay leaders steered clear.)

Some critics say the NCSY reforms have been too little, too late; they complain that the culture of the OU has not changed, that it continues to be driven by a handful of older men who still don’t “get it.” But some of the organization’s defenders say they are well past the Lanner chapter, that it has hurt them communally and financially, and it is time for the community to let the wounds heal and appreciate and support all the good work NCSY does in reaching out to teens and inspiring many of them to lead more observant lives.

The OU has an ambitious list of planned programs. It has played a pivotal role in providing moral support to Israel, involved in arranging dozens of synagogue and other missions in the past year, and has increased the activities of its Israel Action Center in Jerusalem to include work with youngsters traumatized by the violence. It hopes to respond to the pressing need of singles in the Orthodox community, from sponsoring programs to addressing the excesses of shidduch arrangements. It intends to expand

services to Jewish collegiates, create a young leadership training program for men and women in their 30s, and provide more education about kashrut, for which it is best known, and on and on.

It remains to be seen how successful the OU will be in these and other areas, but it is on the road toward progress. Now is the time for those would-be advocates and activists in the Orthodox community who have watched from the sidelines these last two years, with varying degrees of skepticism, to step forward. They should put the OU to the test by offering their participation. If they do, I will be very surprised if they are not embraced, and encouraged to share their ideas about how to restore and advance the OU and its mission.

Orthodox Rabbi Issues Warning on Sexual Abuse

Orthodox Rabbi Issues Warning on Sexual Abuse
Says Community Needs To Learn From Catholic Church Scandal
By AMI EDEN


FORWARD - December 7, 2002

The rabbi of a prominent Manhattan synagogue is using the occasion of the Catholic Church's sex scandal to warn that Orthodox institutions are often "dismissive" of abuse complaints.

Rabbi Ari Berman, the religious leader of the Jewish Center, a well-heeled Modern Orthodox congregation on the Upper West Side, issued the warning last weekend during a Saturday morning sermon. Berman said the Orthodox community needs to learn from the sex abuse scandal racking the Catholic Church. While asserting that sexual abuse cases are far more common in the Catholic community than in Orthodox circles, Berman criticized Orthodox institutions for dismissing many of the claims that do arise in their own backyard. 

"Perhaps in the outside world there might be an exaggerated tendency to launch a witch hunt, to fire people and prosecute immediately," said Berman, whose predecessors at the Jewish Center include Rabbi Norman Lamm, president of Yeshiva University, and Rabbi J.J. Schachter, dean of a Modern Orthodox think tank in Brookline, Mass. "But in the Orthodox world we have the opposite tendency: to circle the wagons and deny wrongdoing. The concern for the reputation of the teacher or school is given greater weight than the child's words."

Berman's sermon comes as American Jews are struggling to understand the ramifications of the church's sex scandal for their own religious institutions. It also comes as the most prominent Orthodox organization in America, the Orthodox Union, attempts to recover from its own sex scandal involving Rabbi Baruch Lanner, a popular leader of its youth group, the National Council of Synagogue Youth.

An independent commission set up by the O.U. determined that the organization had failed to act on complaints about Lanner, who allegedly abused dozens of students over 30 years. In his sermon, Berman said that allegations of sex abuse were not limited to Lanner and had not disappeared in the wake of the O.U. scandal.

"Just a short time ago, a much publicized case of abuse and negligence in the Modern Orthodox world raised this issue in the public consciousness," Berman said, in an apparent reference to the Lanner scandal. "I wish I could say that these were the only cases that I have heard in our community, but they are not. There are others, and some with tragic endings."  

To hammer home his point, Berman told the story of a pre-teen child who claimed he had been molested by a rabbi at summer camp. According to Berman, even though the rabbi had been the subject of previous complaints, the camp rejected the allegation, and a teacher at the child's school told the student "to stop making up stories, to forget about it and to move on." The family was ostracized, Berman said, and had trouble enrolling the child in another school.

Rabbi Steven Dworken

Rabbi Steven Dworken, executive vice president of the Modern Orthodox Rabbinical Council of America, argued that Orthodox sensitivity to sex abuse has greatly improved since the Lanner scandal became public almost two years ago. He cited one Orthodox school that, when faced with a credible complaint just a few months ago, immediately fired the teacher, contacted law enforcement authorities and supplied the student in question with psychological counseling.

"The Lanner incident really awoke and sensitized the community," said Dworken, whose group represents more than 1,000 Orthodox rabbis. "We are surely more sensitized now than five years ago. You don't think that the entire world is more sensitized since the Catholic Church scandal?

Unfortunately it takes such a scandal to sensitize people."

Rabbi Avi Shafran

Meanwhile, Rabbi Avi Shafran, spokesman for Agudath Israel of America, a leading ultra-Orthodox group, said leaders of his community have no tolerance for sex abuse, and that those who commit such acts are blackballed from holding educational positions.

Rabbi Yosef Blau

But Rabbi Yosef Blau, a religious adviser to students at Yeshiva University and harsh critic of the O.U.'s handling of the complaints against Lanner, argued that in both the Modern Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox worlds, organizations still do not adequately respond to sex abuse complaints. He acknowledged, however, that some progress has been made, with several prominent rabbis, including the O.U.'s new professional head, Rabbi Zvi Hersh Weinreb, instructing followers to bring sex abuse complaints to law enforcement agencies.

Many rabbis, especially older ones, simply find it hard to believe that any of their colleagues would sexually abuse children, said Blau, who sat on a three-person rabbinical court that decided not to take severe action against Lanner in 1989. But, Blau said, after hearing additional complaints and learning more about sexual abuse, he realized that he had made a mistake in not pushing for Lanner to be barred from working with young people. Blau said that even when rabbis are dismissed or leave their job under suspicion, they often manage to find educational work in another city. Blau said he is strongly in favor of Berman's call for the creation of a "national registry" for schools, camps and youth groups to check before hiring staffers.

Medics probe boundaries of doctor-patient relationship

Wouldn't a rabbi having sex with congregants fall under the same category as a doctor having sex with a patient?

________________________________________________________________

Medics probe boundaries of doctor-patient relationship
By Leslie Katz
Jewish Weekly Bulletin of San Francisco - October 8, 2002

It doesn't take a medical ethics board to conclude that a doctor having sex with a patient violates the trusted physician-patient relationship.

But what about other, less extreme behavior? Does seductive language constitute an ethical infraction? Can a physician treat the accountant who prepares his taxes? Can a doctor hug a patient at the end of a visit? Harvard psychiatrist Dr. Carol Nadelson explored boundaries in the doctor-patient relationship, and who might be most likely to cross them, at a session of the 10th annual International Conference on Jewish Medical Ethics last weekend. More than 400 attended the four-day conference, co-sponsored by the San Francisco Hebrew Academy.

Rabbi Dr. Tzvi Hersh Weinreb

Tzvi Hersh Weinreb, a congregational rabbi and psychotherapist in Baltimore, added a Jewish ethical perspective to the discussion at the Park Plaza Hotel in Burlingame.

The question "Who am I?" is paramount, the rabbi said. "Often the answer determines what is right. Out of the answer should come ethical guidelines."

He asked those attending the conference session to answer the question "Who am I?" 10 times in writing. People jotted down answers ranging from personality traits to nouns such as "father" and "daughter." "If one of the answers was `physician,' that means you have a higher standard, a different standard than other people," Weinreb said. "I stand in a tradition of physicians going back to Hippocrates, to Maimonides." Nadelson's overview made it clear that a discussion of doctor-patient boundaries comprises a broad rubric. "We have a spectrum that requires judgment and careful thinking," she said.

"An essential component of professional conduct is respect for the patient's dignity," she added. "This includes the physician's language."

Violations can be major or minor, she pointed out, ranging from the most extreme cases of sexual assault to the giving or accepting of certain kinds of gifts.

Even "calling a patient by their first name without asking for permission can be a problem."

In cases involving sexual contact, doctors are often clinically depressed or addicted to alcohol or drugs, said Nadelson, a professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. Less often, they suffer from character pathologies, such as narcissism or paranoia.

As for the patients involved, "there is no one profile," she said.  "Regardless of any patient provocation, it's always the doctor's responsibility." However, patients are likely to share common aftershocks: a sense of betrayal, abandonment, shame and guilt.

In assessing possible boundary violations, Nadelson stressed the importance of context. While taking a routine medical history, a doctor may ask a question perceived by a patient as offensive or irrelevant.  For that reason, she said, "it's terribly important" that physicians explain why they're asking a given question. Similarly, a friendly or comforting hug may be uncomfortable for certain
patients. "Those with histories of sexual abuse may experience a hug or a kiss as an assault, a repeat of early boundary violations," she said. Like Nadelson, Weinreb considered the question of boundary violations in a broad context.

"I have seen sexual transgressions, but there are others for sure," he said. Among them is the failure to respect cultural diversity.

For example, Weinreb has been asked to serve as an expert witness in a case against a prominent psychotherapist in his area. Several patients were outraged when, speaking of spiritual aridity in their lives, the doctor suggested spiritual paths, including Jews for Jesus.

Surprisingly, however, Weinreb pegged arrogance as "the worst boundary violation of all.

"A passage in the Talmud says, `I can't live in the same world as an arrogant person,'" he said. "A humble person knows full well who he is. On the heels of humility comes true piety, true devotion."

______________________________

Note from The Awareness

Rabbi Tzvi Hersh Weinreb, the the former Executive Vice President of the Orthodox Union and  formally was  the rabbi of Congregation Shomrei Emunah in Baltimore. 

 

Rabbi Weinreb, who earned a Ph.D. in Psychology from the University of Maryland, was a member of the Executive Committee of the Rabbinical Council of America and Vice President of the Rabbinical Council of Greater Baltimore. In addition, he is a member of the Ethics Committee of the Veterans Administration Hospital. A licensed psychotherapist, Rabbi Weinreb is also Rabbinic Liaison for NEFESH: North American Network of Orthodox Mental Health Professionals. Rabbi Weinreb is married to the former Chavi Taub. They have three children and nine grandchildren.