II: Things I do not know about sheva nekiim and femininity

'The daughters of Israel have undertaken to be so strict with themselves that if they see a drop of blood no bigger than a mustard seed they wait seven [clean] days after it' (Ber. 31a). [hattip MOB]

There practice of counting an additional 7 clean days before mikvah is without a doubt inconvenient and unpleasant for all. It turns out that the righteous daughters of Israel chose to be extremely stringent in this area in order to avoid coming close to any sin. I fully understand the concept of building a ‘fence’ around a prohibition, but I have a hard time accepting that the women of yore voluntarily turned the most uncomfortable, inconvenient chumra into halakha and enforced it on all following generations. Jewish women are usually so practical; the chumra of sheva nekiim is not.

It’s been said (somewhere in the blogsphere, but can’t remember where—links appreciated here) that giving credit to the women for establishing the practice was done as a rhetorical device. I doubt that because it’s rare to see and therefore begs an explanation. The feminine voice was so rarely heard in halakhic ruling; why did they choose to speak up specifically here?

I’ve also heard it said that perhaps the sheva nikiim were designed as an indirect, acceptable form of practicing birth control. But apparently this is would be a cruel and also unreliable method as it only affects about 1/3^rd of women who practice family purity. Also, the majority of orthodox women want to have many babies—so again the logic fails.

What then could possibly motivate the righteous women to accept and enforce this tedious practice? Did Chava not do enough damage to femininity through similar overextension of a chumra into absolute issur?

See part I: Things you may not knkow about sheva nekiim and infertility.

I: Things you may not know about sheva nekiim and infertility

The topic of sheva nekiim is up for discussion, following an an orthodox obstetrician's suggestion to abolish the practice of counting 7 clean days before mikvah, since it is largely responsible for many cases of infertility and is founded on a chumra rather than halakha. I suspect that because the topic is treated with such modesty and privacy, there is a lot of confusion and ignorance. I would like to clarify a few things. [My opinion is based on experience as a married woman in the medical sciences. I cannot comment on the halakhic aspect of the issue.] But first, read the Haaretz article that sums up the original debate, and My Obiter Dicta’s review and excellent commentary (via Mentalblog).

First of all, missing ovulation because of niddah is more common than expected. So common , in fact, that most NY ob-gyns are familiar with niddah laws (as I imagine all physicians who treat orthodox women are) and refer to this particular situation as Orthodox Infertility. They say it laugh though, because technically this does not constitute medical infertility and is easily fixed for most couples. The typical medical treatment involves lengthening the women’s menstrual cycle via hormone therapy so that she ovulates later in the month, namely after mikvah.

There are many couples who elect not to see a physician but rather a Rabbi for their taharas hamishpacha issues. I am aware that Rabbanim deal with each question on an individual basis, but this common issue is usually treated by shortening the women’s period via herbal treatment, so that she can immerse in the mikvah before ovulation.

For most couples, one or the other treatments works. Very few couples remain unable to become pregnant because of bad timing alone. Treatments are relatively simple and mostly painless. I choose my words carefully because on one side there are people saying that hormone treatments are life threatening while the other party insists that they are no trouble at all. In this case, I feel both sides are being dishonest. Here is a more practical overview of treatment effects.

A typical rabbinic endorsed herbal cocktail includes high doses of herbs that are known to stop bleeding and cause uterine contractions, i.e. nettle, thistle, cohosh, roots of certain teas, etc… They may also recommend a Bioflavonoid to maintain small blood vessels in tissue lining (which may be the cause of excessive bleeding) and bathing in chamomile (I don’t know what this can do but it sounds relaxing).

Many people are under the misconception that because herbs are natural, they are completely safe. In fact, herbs are very potent and can have powerful effect on the body. (Many prescription medications are made from herbs or their derivatives.) In short, taking herbs for medical purposes without medical supervision seems to me like a dangerous practice. The same holds true for those ‘magic pills’ that kallah instructors give out so the bride’s will be guaranteed not to menstruate around the time of the wedding. These birth-control type pills are secretly imported because they are not FDA approved, and not surprisingly many brides have problems after taking these pills, such as sudden bleeding before the wedding or not menstruating for many months after the wedding. Also, because herbs are readily available, people who don’t know better will rely on unprofessional advice and possibly hurt themselves. I once heard a newlywed complaining about spotting during pregnancy; her also newlywed friend recommended several herbs that her Rav had given her to end her spotting. Anyone who takes unknown substances while pregnant is incredibly irresponsible and stupid. Case in point—one of these particular herbs had been used for generations by Native Americans to induce abortion! Had the pregnant woman taken the herb that “the Rav recommends for spotting”, she could have caused a spontaneous abortion (miscarriage). I am not suggesting in any way that Rabbanim are harming people by disseminating dangerous herbs, but the risks are apparent and people should use their heads.

The risks involved in hormone treatment, i.e. cancer or stroke, are much more frightening but are also much less likely (by a great magnitude) to occur. Oral estrogen is associated with certain female cancers, but so is chlorine bleach and possibly trans fat. The risks may be there, but they are not substantial or direct enough to render a short treatment plan unsafe. The immediate side effects that result from taking hormones include weight gain, nausea, possible migraines, trouble sleeping, mood swings etc. I would label these side effects relatively mild, compared with other infertility treatments that are far more invasive, expensive, and painful.

The problem of missing ovulation due to niddah is not entirely solved. While the medical cause can be easily repaired (to read research articles, type in "orthodox infertility" into search bar), there are many people who don’t know the cause of their infertility and for one reason or another do not seek medical or rabbinic help. The woman in the Haaretz article who thought she was infertile until her late 40’s, only to find out she had always been missing her ovulation, is cited as a victim of sheva nekiim. She should sooner be cited as a victim of her own ignorance and neglect! Why hadn’t she seen a doctor or discussed her condition with anyone who could direct her to help? Blaming the practice for her condition is unjustified, but claiming that the condition is independent of the practice is also untrue.

Orthodox Single is another way of saying Forever Infertile... and that's unfair.

I recently shared a shabbos lunch with three single women. They were around 50 years old. One was divorced with a teenage child; the other two had never been married. These women were accomplished professionals—funny, intelligent and all around good company. I wouldn’t presume to guess why they never married, but I caught myself wondering if they still considered themselves on the make. Did they still think that their life was incomplete without a spouse? Were they deeply unsatisfied or had they come to terms with living a single, but vibrant and meaningful life?

It then occurred to me that their marital status was really not the issue at all. What intrigued me was that two of these women never had their own children and most likely never will. Sometime during the meal we were discussing property taxes and estate planning and the topic of children who fight over their parents’ estate came up. One woman leaned over to the other and mumbled, “I’m lucky I’ll never have that problem.” She laughed at the irony, but I saw it as nothing less than tragic.

I suppose that by today’s progressive standard a woman can be complete without having experienced childbirth or motherhood, but I feel that would only hold true when considered in the context of choice. A woman who does not wish to be a mother is better off staying single and/or childless. But these women at my table, who are orthodox and theoretically family oriented, are forced into childlessness not by choice, but by circumstance.

Outside of the orthodox world, it’s becoming the norm for single women to be having children. Even in the most liberal crowd, there’s a stigma that goes with artificial insemination, but I think this last resort for a single woman running out of time is considered more or less reasonable. The Jewish Week ran an article some time ago about women who became pregnant without a partner and concluded that they are higher up on the ladder of acceptability than unmarried women who are naturally impregnated, by accident or not. Mind you, these considerations are not based on religious or halakhic standards. Now consider the orthodox woman who is in a totally different playing field, where the standards of acceptability are the most stringent. With so many who remain unmarried these days, so much so that the term ‘old maid’ has become quaint and irrelevant, their issues must be addressed. I don’t care to judge them or call them picky or too ambitious and career driven; the reality is that they are put in a terrible bind by virtue of their being orthodox.

So how do we treat single middle aged women: as lepers who should be punished for their inability to settle down, as unstable and incompetent people who can’t be trusted with parenting and should therefore not be allowed any viable alternative? Or how about treating them simply as infertile? Many women are infertile because of biological reasons; let these women be considered infertile based on sociological reasons.

Infertile couples have many options and untraditional ways to become parents, from adoption to in-vitro fertilization to surrogate pregnancy. Sperm donation is the most restrictive and complicated option, (if the child later marries a relative of the sperm donor, it would be incest/ if the donor is a cohen, his sons are cohanim and are restricted in who they may marry, etc…) but there have been ways to circumvent the problems, e.g. using non-anonymous donors. Despite the countless ethical and halakhic issues involved in each of these choices, the rabbanim have been making huge and commendable efforts to enable orthodox couples to use the latest technology and to adopt what’s available to halkaha (see infertility resources). The question is, who should qualify as infertile so that they can benefit from all these options.

Until now the window of opportunity has been tightly guarded by the powers that be, lest the argument be made that gays should also be given the opportunity to procreate using whatever means available. But while homosexuality is a halakhic issue, single motherhood is not. I’m not convinced that giving women who don't have the opportunity to have children in a traditional way a chance to do so outside of marriage would destroy the sanctity of the family.

As radical as my opinion sounds, I predict that should this become a reality, the first people to jump on it would be the frummest. Most older singles I know are modern orthodox. In many ways it’s easiest to be single in the modern world, because there’s more opportunity outside of family life for fulfillment (communal, professional, and in some circles even physical). But a highly observant single who passes a certain age without marrying is virtually doomed to remain lonely, separate and completely uninvolved in community life, because nobody can accommodate them. It’s the same reason infertile religious couples have such a hard time finding acceptance and support—because everyone married has children and there is simply no room for any deviation from that lifestyle. But why should being single be considered deviance?

I state my case especially for women, because a man never quite runs out of time (until he’s dead) or capacity for having children, whereas a woman has that ominous biological clock hanging over her head. This is very much my gut feeling and not an informed opinion—I know very little about the halakhic implications of fatherless conception—but even if it were unsolvable, the possibility of adoption remains. Everybody knows a frum single woman who would die to adopt children and raise them in the proper way, but doesn’t only because it’s just not done. Well, I don’t think ‘it’s just not done’ is a good enough reason to stop people from doing positive things that could be accommodated for in halakha.

It’s obvious that what used to work no longer does. Insisting on sanctimonious values and relative definitions of Jewish family hurts the growing number of people who don’t fall into traditional categories. (This isn’t even tradition so much as a recent and local definition because, for instance, before the cheirim d’Rabeinu Gershom one man could have been the father/husband to many families and his presence was unnecessary. When arranged within the bounds of halakha, a woman can raise her children alone and be recognized as a family unit.) If this puts me on the fringe, then so be it, but I feel that it’s only a matter of time before these supposedly scandalous alternatives will be uncovered as the reasonable and permissible options that I think they are.