Jewish Women Chained in Marriage
In mainstream society, many see marriage as a partnership of equals, consecrated by the law. In the many instances when a marriage doesn’t work out, that partnership can legally be dissolved at the request of either partner, with each party given equal say and treatment in the divorce proceeding. Yet in today’s egalitarian-minded society, Judaism struggles to give women in a heterosexual marriage equal footing in and control of divorce when they want one.
Traditionally, the Jewish law of divorce is biblically grounded in Deuteronomy 24:1, which states, “When a man takes a wife and it happens that she does not find favor in his eyes because he discovers in her an unseemly matter, he writes for her a bill of divorce, places it into her hand, and sends her away from his house.” A Jewish bill of divorce is referred to as a get. This biblical verse suggests and has indeed been traditionally understood to require that a get is unilaterally provided by a husband, whereas a wife cannot initiate or protest a Jewish divorce. Stated another way, Jewish halakha provides that a woman who wants a Jewish divorce can get that divorce only if her husband provides her with a get. Even though the biblical law made a get depend only on the husband’s will, a rabbinical ordinance promulgated in the Middle Ages prohibited a man to issue a valid get unless his wife consented, a rule that is traditionally accepted to this day.
As society has become more egalitarian and divorce has become more common, Jewish law has been actively grappling with how to address the situation of a Jewish wife wanting a religious divorce (in addition to or instead of a civil divorce) from her husband when her husband will not willingly issue her a get. A woman in this situation is referred to as an agunah, meaning a chained woman. Historically, an agunah was typically a woman whose husband disappeared in battle or at sea. Because no one definitively knew whether her husband was dead or alive, she was chained to the marriage and could not remarry without either knowledge that he was dead or receiving a get from him. In the contemporary situation, a woman is just as trapped in her marriage despite wanting to be released from it even if she receives a civil divorce because she cannot remarry within halakhic Judaism without a get.
It goes without saying that a situation in which a woman wants a religious divorce but cannot get a get is catastrophic both for the woman’s life and her dignity. This is particularly true if Judaism aims to treat women with respect. Yet many women have been left chained to their unwanted husbands. Over 2,400 women each year become agunot, with some waiting more than 20 years for their husband to issue a get.
While recognizing the severity of being an agunah, traditional Judaism has resisted releasing a woman religiously from her marriage when her husband refuses to issue a get. Because the rabbis have long understood the biblical law of divorce to require that a man grant a get of his free will, traditional Judaism will not recognize a get granted through coercion and will therefore not force a man to give one. In an early precursor to today’s cancel culture, one frequently invoked tactic over the past few decades has been to excommunicate a recalcitrant husband by excluding him in many ways from participating in the Jewish community.
Others, frustrated with the immense suffering of these chained women, have broken with traditional halakha and have softened their approach to unchain these women. Since 1968, Conservative Judaism, for example, has relied on Talmudic principles to annul marriages when a man is unwilling to grant a get.
Within more traditional Judaism, the most clever legal minds have tried to find ways to require a husband to issue his wife a get with him simultaneously providing the get of his own free will: a canonical Talmudic puzzle. One category of solutions involves prenuptial agreements, such as those that impose sufficient financial pressure on a husband reluctant to issue a get when his wife wants one, which tend to result in the husband’s issuance of a get. Another perhaps more radical approach has been civil litigation against recalcitrant husbands, which recently succeeded in the United Kingdom on the grounds that the husband infringed a law prohibiting “controlling or coercive behavior” in family relationships and resulted in the wife being issued a get.
It is admirable that all sectors of Judaism are seeking to ensure that women are not treated as second-class citizens in their marriages and can make the choice to divorce. Yet the most traditional forms of Judaism still can create an uphill battle for a woman to choose to divorce as freely as she chooses to marry and as freely as a man can choose to divorce.
