My new car is ruined — I need the Beth Din - The Jewish Chronicle

Every time the Beth Din is mentioned I cringe a bit. When I was first courting my wife and gave her the hard sell on Judaism and converting — date two, standard — she was open to the idea. Things could then subsequently progress to date three, whereupon I was informed actually no, a non-Jewish friend had told her how Jewish women weren’t allowed to divorce, and Judaism didn’t sound like something she wanted to be part of.

The rest is a story for another column, but what unnerves me most, apart from my wife’s constant concern with her ability to divorce, is that 20 years later the controversy surrounding gets is somehow still ongoing.

Not only hasn’t this issue been resolved, but recent news of how the Federation Beth Din seems to be actively undermining proposed efforts for secular courts to help those unable to obtain religious divorces exacerbates the problem. Apart from the unfairness, abuse, inhumanity and in some cases extortion that women are being subject to, don’t the dayanim also realise how bad this is making the rest of us look? If the moral implications aren’t sufficient enough for definitive action, what about the fodder this is providing to antisemites, handing them another stick with which to attack Jews of all denominations.

My understanding of Judaism, indeed the strength of it, has been its historical ability to change and adapt, as the world around us changes and adapts. As Baroness Deech stressed in this paper: “If the rabbis, over the centuries, have managed to get rid of poly-gamy, to invent the eruv, you would have thought they could find a way to ensure the human rights of a handful of women trapped every year.”

Exactly. And then, when they’ve finally done that, I have another suggestion for the Orthodox rabbinical courts, if I may be so bold. A little PR exercise to update their image, whilst proving how Judaism can be fit for purpose in today’s world, and as a bonus, educating Jews on halachah? How about a Jewish version of Judge Judy. Actually, as Judge Judy Sheindlin’s already Jewish, she could pop on as a guest representing secular law, but the bulk of the programme would be the Beth Din debating and ruling on specifically modern day conundrums.

And, as it so happens, I have the perfect case for the first episode. Last week the Howies got a new car. And after my middle child had a birthday sleepover, one of the first journeys in this brand new car was to drop off a friend’s child at football camp. At approx 9.53am, with no prior warning, said friend’s child proceeded to vomit all over the inside of said new car. My petition to the court; should the child’s parents buy me a new car?

Admittedly I’m not that familiar with the concepts of Jewish justice beyond the Judgement of Solomon, but surely getting a new car is preferable to my initial desire of wanting to cut the child in half. I was actually very good in the immediate aftermath, soothing said child not to worry and that it was OK, even though it wasn’t, and that the most important thing was how he was feeling, even though it wasn’t. If it had been my own child I could’ve at least flipped out and had some catharsis, but suppressing all that emotion is surely going to have a negative impact on my health long term.

There are a few other mitigating factors I’d like the court to consider. First, the two hours on my knees cleaning was far more traumatic because it was non-biologically connected sick. Second, we’ve never owned a new car before, just a succession of very old nearly dead cars. If this had been our old car, I would’ve been happy for said child to just vomit away, hell, I’d have joined in. Finally, said child made absolutely no effort to contain said puke, it was like a scene from The Exorcist. If not for said child also being Jewish I would’ve called in some Catholic priests.

Now the defence are going to try to implicate me by saying we gave said child too many sweets during the sleepover, worst apology ever, and bring Exodus 22.5 “He that kindled the fire shall make restitution” into it, but I got my own Rabbi/lawyer Salamon on the case and his research of Nezikin (Damages) highlights the mishna concerning the Goring Ox that states “the owner has the duty to prevent the damage.” So ha! And if the Beth Din don’t rule my way I shall invoke my own brand of eye for an eye justice. Said child’s parents have just got a new sofa. Time to load up my son and send him off for a playdate.

To get more from community, click here to sign up for our free community newsletter.