Parshat Zachor panel with Yael Hersham

“For Life, Not for Suffering”: A Call to End Gett Abuse

On International Agunah Day, marked on Ta’anit Esther, we are called not only to acknowledge suffering, but to confront it — and to act.

This year, we dedicate this reflection to the work and courage of Dayan Ulman of Sydney, who has endured profound personal loss in the wake of the Bondi tragedy. Despite this, he has remained one of the most steadfast allies in the fight for the freedom of agunot.

Through halakhic creativity, integrity, and deep compassion, Dayan Ulman has helped free countless women and men from igun, while safeguarding future generations from the devastating consequences of unresolved Jewish divorce. Widely respected among rabbinic authorities worldwide, he took a decisive step in establishing the Va’ad L’Inyanei Igun — an international rabbinic body addressing the most complex and heart-rending cases. Through this work, many who had lost hope have found their freedom.

Together with Unchain My Heart, this initiative forms part of the Cheirut International Agunah Coalition, united in the mission to end gett abuse and restore dignity to those still waiting to be unchained.

Not Enough Has Been Done

In an address delivered to a group of agunot in the United States, Dayan Ulman spoke with striking honesty:

“Whatever is being done to resolve this crisis is not enough. As long as even one woman remains an agunah, we have not fulfilled our obligation.”

This is the uncomfortable truth at the centre of our communal reality.

The very definition of an agunah has shifted over time. In classical halachah, it referred to a woman whose husband had disappeared, often due to war or travel, leaving her unable to remarry without proof of his death. Today, the term is more commonly understood as a woman whose husband refuses to grant her a gett — effectively holding her hostage emotionally, spiritually, and socially.

While there are cases in which men are similarly affected, the imbalance is clear. There are significantly more pathways to resolution for men. The same cannot be said for women who remain chained for years, even decades.

A Form of Family Violence

Gett refusal is not merely a technical or procedural issue.

It is, in many cases, the final stage of coercion and control within a relationship. It is a continuation of abuse, expressed through religious mechanisms.

Family violence and igun are not separate problems.
They are two expressions of the same injustice.

For those experiencing it, the impact extends far beyond the inability to remarry. It is the erosion of autonomy, the loss of dignity, and the deep isolation that comes from being trapped in a state of prolonged uncertainty.

Many agunot speak not only of waiting, but of hopelessness.

Addressing this issue requires more than legal solutions. It demands a broader commitment to restoring agency, dignity, and emotional safety.

Halachah Must Not Be Weaponised

As the Tashbetz taught: Lechayim nitnah v’lo l’tza’ar — the Torah was given for life, not for suffering.

This principle must guide both our thinking and our action.

Halachah is not the problem. When applied with integrity and responsibility, it is part of the solution. The great poskim demonstrated that compassion and fidelity to halachah are not in tension — they are intertwined.

The challenge lies in how halachah is applied, and whether it is used to protect or to control.

Dayan Ulman has argued that if every rabbi, dayan, and community leader approached an agunah as they would their own daughter or sister, outcomes would be very different.

This perspective demands a shift in communal standards.

There must be zero tolerance not only for those who refuse to give a gett, but also for those who enable such refusal through silence, minimisation, or misplaced sympathy.

The Power of Community Accountability

In one case recounted by Dayan Ulman, a couple arrived in Australia following the breakdown of their marriage. The husband, well-connected and outwardly cooperative, repeatedly delayed granting a gett, insisting on linking it to civil divorce proceedings.

After ongoing refusals, a seruv — a formal declaration of contempt — was issued and communicated widely throughout the community.

The response was clear and unified. He was excluded from communal life: not called to the Torah, not invited into homes, not included in communal settings.

Within two weeks, the gett was granted.

This outcome was not inevitable. It was the result of collective action and moral clarity.

However, not all cases benefit from this level of communal accountability. Where individuals are disconnected from community structures, traditional mechanisms lose their force, and civil legal avenues may become necessary.

Prevention Is Essential

Alongside response, prevention must be prioritised.

Dayan Ulman has been a strong advocate for the use of halachic prenuptial agreements. As he has said:

“I told my own son — not yet married — that when the time comes, he will sign such an agreement. Not because I doubt his future marriage, but because by signing, he helps others.”

Just as the ketubah formalises responsibilities within marriage, a halachic prenup can establish expectations should the marriage break down.

In the Australian context, these agreements have not yet been tested in civil courts, and their legal enforceability remains uncertain. However, their value extends beyond legal standing. They promote mutual respect, clarify expectations, and create an opportunity for important conversations between couples, families, and rabbinic leaders.

Normalising their use is a critical step toward reducing future cases of gett refusal.

Lessons from Esther

Ta’anit Esther invites reflection on a different model of courage.

Esther is often described as constrained — taken into a marriage without consent, operating within a system that limits her freedom. Yet her response is not passive.

Her strength lies in strategy, timing, and careful advocacy. She builds relationships, chooses her moment, and acts with intention.

The experiences of agunot today echo this complexity. Their circumstances are rarely simple. Their choices are often constrained.

And like the story of the Megillah itself, these situations extend beyond individuals. They implicate families, communities, and systems.

A Collective Responsibility

The question facing us is not whether the problem exists.

It is whether we are prepared to respond.

Ending gett abuse requires more than awareness. It requires leadership, accountability, and a willingness to act — even when action is uncomfortable.

In the face of gett refusal, we must ask ourselves:

Will we step forward?
Or will we remain silent?