Subscribe to The Jewish Standard free weekly newsletter

 
font size: +
 

Bill aims to maintain adoptee’s religion

Law would require that children be raised in birth family’s faith

 
|| Tell-a-Friend || Print
 
 

An Orthodox Jewish member of the New Jersey State Assembly introduced a bill that would require adoptees to be placed in homes that would “maintain a child’s religious upbringing.”

Assemblyman Gary Schaer (D-Dist. 36), who represents portions of Bergen and Passaic counties, said he introduced the bill out of concern that an adoptee or foster child could be “put in a home where the parents practiced a religion other than that of the child.”

Within a day of the bill’s introduction, Schaer said, it has already received support from David Mandel, the chief executive officer of the Orthodox Ohel Children’s Home and Family Services in Brooklyn and from Aref Assaf, president of the American Arab Forum and an advisory board member of the New Jersey Council on American Islamic Relations.

“Not only Jews and Muslims, but many smaller Protestant sects, and even some people in the Catholic community” are supporting the measure, Schaer said.

In addition, a spokesperson for the Orthodox Union (OU) is praising it as “a great bill. It is important that children remain with the same culture they had with the family they were born into,” said Teaneck resident Rabbi Josh Pruzansky, the OU’s New Jersey regional director for public policy.

The bill would require state and private adoption agencies “to maintain a child’s religious upbringing when placing a child with a guardian, into foster care, or into an adoptive home.”

Agencies and courts would be able to place a child in a setting of a different religion only with a written statement from the child’s birth parent or legal guardian, if feasible.

The bill also bars discriminating against prospective parents on the basis of age, sex, race, national origin, religion, or marital status.

“Certainly we want to make the adoption and foster care process as easy as humanly possible,” Schaer said in an interview, “but we need a fit that matches, and it matches best when religious beliefs of adoptive and foster parents meet those of the child.”

The granting of veto power to birth parents over a child’s religious upbringing, however, is a matter of concern to Marc Stern, associate general counsel for legal advocacy at the American Jewish Committee.

“When you take a kid out of the house because the parents have been drug abusers or are abusing the children, why let them and only them decide what the religious upbringing of the child should be?” asked Stern, saying he was speaking as an individual and not as an AJCommittee representative. “You don’t give parents you are taking kids away from access over anything else. Why this? I am not clear why you would give them any veto.”

However, Stern does see some merits in the bill, especially in cases where the state’s Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS) is forced to remove abused children from their biological parents.

“It is traumatic enough to pull kids out of a home, and if you have kids who are Sabbath-observant and eat kosher food, and you put them in with the family who is up next on the DYFS list, you are adding to the trauma,” he said.

While the bill would ostensibly maintain the Jewish identity of a child born Jewish, it could also limit the number of non-Jewish children available for adoption by Jewish families.

“The number of children born Jewish who are available for adoption is very small — much smaller than the demand within the Jewish community,” said Saul Berman, an attorney and Orthodox rabbi who is a professor of Jewish law at Stern College and Columbia University in New York.

In fact, because of the complexity of determining a child’s Jewish status under halachah, or Jewish law, some Jewish parents actually prefer that an adopted child be from a non-Jewish family.

“It is often simpler to adopt a child who is of non-Jewish parentage and then perform a conversion without the need for further information,” said Berman.

The bill also requires that, in cases where a child is placed with a family of a different religious faith, provisions be made so that the child could attend services conducted in his or her own religious faith.

That clause would pose problems for observant Jewish families, said Berman. “I don’t think any committed Jewish family would want to put themselves into a situation where the adopted child practiced a religion other than Judaism,” he said.

In his former position as director of Agudath Israel of New Jersey, the OU’s Pruzansky handled two cases in which children were removed from observant Jewish households and placed in non-Jewish foster homes.

Such a situation “simply can’t be tolerated,” he said. “It is something that is detrimental to the child.”

Pruzansky said it “took a lot of work behind the scenes” to have the children removed from their non-Jewish environments and placed with Orthodox foster parents. “Up until now, there hasn’t been any regulation on the state level to protect an adopted or foster child’s religious identity,” he said.

At this point, Schaer has no cosponsors. He anticipates none until after the state legislature opens its new session in January.

New Jersey Jewish News

 
|| Tell-a-Friend || Print
 
 

Stay tuned for the return of comments

Robert Allan Hafetz posted 17 Dec 2011 at 05:07 PM

As an adoptee, raised Jewish in an orthodox family, and as a marriage and family counselor that works with adoptive families, I oppose this bill. Adoption must be focused on whats best for the child not whats best for a specific religious sect. This bill places the need to maintain the number of Orthodox Jews above the needs of the child. The most important quality of an adoptive family is their insight and education on how to raise an adopted or foster child. Requiring a child to be kept within the birth parents religion will make it harder to adopt and delay the adoption process which will have a severe adverse effect on the childs ability to build a secure attachment with the new family. It also creates a situation where a child will experience multiple placements while the adoption process drags on.  Adoption must be crafted in the best interests of the child and this bill takes the process in the opposite direction. I will actively oppose this bad idea.
Robert Allan Hafetz MS MFT
Adoption Education & Family Counseling LLC
Education Director

William J. Grove posted 19 Feb 2012 at 11:36 PM

As a child protection worker, I have always worked to place children in the placement which best meets their needs.  When a child has been immersed in their family’s faith, I have sought out placements which match.  Consistency in care is very important and religious affiliation is one of the more important markers for identity.
What we must be mindful of is the access between child and perpetrator.  For example, if a child has been abused within a particular religious group (ie: sex cult) then of course we must remove the child from the religious community.  If the only place of worship is at the perpetrator’s place of worship, we must look at alternatives. 
We can consider placement options such as kinship and community placements to accomodate children.  Some cultures have their own support dynamics built in. 

I agree that the best interests of the child are paramount.  However, we need to consider whehter the best interests are to maintain as much of the child’s identity as possible.

 

Not just blah-blah-blah and pizza

Mahwah shul develops programming for pre- and post-b’nai mitzvah kids

So now there’s a how-to-write-a-blessing class. “The parents are really appreciative,” Rabbi Mosbacher said.

“I used to meet with b’nai mitzvah kids and their families twice,” he added. “Now we meet seven times in the course of a year. The last one is right before the bar mitzvah. Now I’m thinking the last one should be after the bar mitzvah. It’s a lot of time on my part, but it’s time well spent in developing a relationship with the kids and with the families.”

While these efforts are designed to connect children and their families to the congregation before the bar or bat mitzvah, the synagogue also has changed its post-b’nai mitzvah connections to the children.

 

Reworded interdating rules sow confusion, controversy

United Synagogue Youth convention may have eased standard … or not

What’s in a name — or a word?

As it turns out, quite a lot. Take the word “refrain,” for example.

At its annual international convention in Atlanta this week, some 750 members of United Synagogue Youth voted to change some of the wording in the organization’s standards for international and regional leaders.

Most of the changes are clear, easily understood, and warmly welcomed. For example, the group added provisions relating to bullying and lashon hara — gossiping. Leaders should have “zero tolerance” for such behavior, the standards say.

 

French Jews face uncertain future

A look at some stories from a local leader

In the wake of the terror attacks at the Charlie Hebdo magazine office and the Hyper Cacher grocery store — a kosher market — I participated in a Jewish Agency mission to Paris.

Our delegation of Americans and Israelis arrived last week to show solidarity with the French Jewish community. We also sought to better understand the threat of heightened anti-Semitism in France (and, indirectly, elsewhere in Europe). We met with more than 40 French Jewish community leaders and activists, all of them open to sharing their concerns.

On January 7, Islamist terrorists murdered a dozen Charlie Hebdo staffers as retribution for the magazine’s cartoon depictions of the prophet Mohammed. Two days later, another terrorist held a bunch of Jewish grocery shoppers hostage, killing four, which French President Francois Hollande acknowledged as an “appalling anti-Semitic act.”

 

RECENTLYADDED

A school grows in Englewood

Moriah, first local Jewish day school, celebrates turning fifty

It was 1971, and Dr. Norman Sohn was finishing his training in Boston. He and his wife, Judith, were faced with a decision. Where would they go next? Where would they settle down?

As a newly fledged surgeon, the world was open to him. He could get a job almost anywhere. He was originally from Manhattan, and his wife was from New Rochelle, so the New York metropolitan area made sense to them.

They knew they wanted a yeshiva education for their children — Dr. Sohn had gone to the Rabbi Jacob Joseph School on Henry Street in Manhattan’s Lower East Side, a school that combined religious and secular studies in a way that was progressive for its time — and they also wanted the luxury of choice. They didn’t want a one-school city, as Hartford and even Boston were at the time. “What really attracted me was the multiplicity of neighborhoods that were hospitable to Orthodox people,” Dr. Sohn said. “But here there were so many that if one didn’t work out, there was another.”

 

Sounds of joy

Children’s choir ranked number one by congregation

Perhaps if Tzipporei Shalom’s music were to be reviewed by a professional critic, the word “wow” might not find its way into the finished product. But to the congregants of Congregation Beth Sholom in Teaneck — home to the children’s choir — the word seems just about right.

“It was the top-rated program in two synagogue surveys,” said Ronit Hanan, the shul’s musical director, who co-founded and co-directs the group with congregant Adina Avery-Grossman.

The a capella singing group has appeared with Safam, recorded a selection on a CD with the noted chazzan Netanel Hershtik, sung with Neil Sedaka, and joined with the synagogue’s adult choir, Tavim, on special occasions, most recently at CBS’s recent Shabbaton. They also participate in an annual community-wide junior choir festival together with choirs from local Reform congregations.

 

Affordable BRCA screening available for all Ashkenazi Jews

A new program at Yeshiva University’s Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Health System in the Bronx is offering affordable genetic testing for the Ashkenazi Jewish BRCA cancer mutations.

Anyone who is of Ashkenazi Jewish descent, with at least one Ashkenazi Jewish grandparent, is eligible for the testing for a modest fee of $100.

For many years the recommendations to test for the gene were based on family or personal history of breast or ovarian cancer. But a research study recently revealed that in the Ashkenazi Jewish population, the risk of harboring BRCA cancer genes is high whether or not there is a family history of breast and ovarian cancer.

One in forty Ashkenazi Jews carry genetic glitches in their BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes that elevate the risk of breast and ovarian cancer to as high as 80 percent by the time they are 80 years old. In fact, the landmark study of randomly selected Ashkenazi Jewish men in Israel found that “51 percent of families…harboring BRCA1 or BRCA1 mutations had little or no history of relevant cancer.”

 
 
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31