baby drinking from bottle 521.
(photo credit: Reuters)
The Supreme Rabbinical Court for Appeals in Jerusalem has upheld a ruling
demanding that a mother pay NIS 500 every day until she agrees to have her son
Back in October, a regional rabbinical court ruled that the
father of the child was permitted to have the boy circumcised despite the
The child is now one year old and was not given a
circumcision eight days after being born, in accordance with Jewish law, due to
The couple subsequently decided to divorce and the
dispute over circumcising the boy developed following that decision.
panel of three rabbinical judges of the Supreme Rabbinical Court said in their
decision on Monday that the mother was objecting to the procedure as a way of
gaining better terms in the divorce settlement and dismissed her
They also stated that they believed the mother was refusing to
have the boy circumcised as a tactic in her desire to reconcile with her
husband, and the judges declared that such an objection would not assist her in
“It seems that the will of the woman in preventing the
circumcision is connected to trying to force [her] husband to [agree to] her
claim for reconciliation,” the rabbinical judges wrote, saying however that this
“will certainly distance the husband from wanting reconciliation.”
mother said, however, that after looking into the matter she decided she did not
want the boy to be circumcised on ethical grounds.
“I don’t have the
right to cut his genitals and wound him, and the rabbinical court does not have
the right to force me to,” she told Channel 2 news.
She added that she
would not pay the fine and did not have the means to do so either.
rabbinical judges said that if she was concerned about medical issues, they
would order the circumcision to be done in the presence of medical
“The general public which does not observe Jewish law does not
even think about fighting on this issue,” the judges wrote in their
“The Jewish people have always and will always see in the brit
mila [circumcision] the completion of the act of creation,” they
In addition, they pointed out that it would be socially
disadvantageous for the child not to be circumcised and also noted that the
mother’s position could complicate Jewish divorce procedures even
“Until now, the rabbinical courts have not experienced an
objection in principle to the performance of circumcision as part of a divorce
battle, and if an opening is made here and the mother is given the opportunity
to prevent the circumcision or to use her objection as a way to obtain things in
the divorce settlement, we will likely find ourselves facing an outbreak of such
cases, and then another dimension will be added to the [already] frightening
divorce process. This trend must be stopped immediately, since the common
good outweighs that of the individual,” the rabbis wrote.
intends to appeal the case to the High Court of Justice.