Page 216 - 20818_park-B_efi

20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 7 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:02 | SR:-- | Black
20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 7 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:02 | SR:-- | Magenta
20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 7 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:02 | SR:-- | Cyan
#
#20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 7 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:02 | SR:-- | Yellow
7
and cause him great harm. Moreover, there have been situations where Likewise, there is a case in Responsa Mases Binyamin (#76), of a #
it became widely publicized that a patient had AIDS, and he took his man who divorced his wife. There were those who said that he was
own life as a result. Therefore, in this case, only the treating physician not, as assumed, on his deathbed at the time. In fact, they claimed,
himself is allowed to write a summary of the patient’s illness. only because he was given a potion that gave the impression that he
was dying, and the physician told him he was deathly ill, did he agree

The fact that in beis din the secretary is privy to the claims of the to give his wife a divorce. The Ein Yitzchak (Even Haezer, Part 2 #34)
claimant and we are not concerned about the prohibition of lashon also ruled on this case and said: “Although all conditions are nullified
hara can perhaps be explained by the ruling in Shulchan Aruch (Chos- at the time of the divorce, this refers only to future matters, but not
hen Mishpat 11:1): An agent of the beis din does not transgress the for mistakes in past matters. So certainly, the divorce is null and void,
prohibition of lashon hara. The source of this din is maseches Moed as they claim.”
Katan (16a): How do we know that if the litigant cursed the court
messenger, who then comes and reports it, it is not deemed lashon 1 SuMMaRy and Conclusions
hara? We learn it from the verse that says (Bamidbar 16:14): “Will
you put out the eyes of these men?” Rashi explains that if not for the If the husband relied on the words of the physician and we are certain
messengers who told Moshe, Moshe would not have known. It says that the divorce was given based only on the physician’s opinion, then
in Halachah Pesukah (Choshen Mishpat, there) that the novelty here the divorce is null and void. The physician is obligated to announce
is that it is permissible for an agent of a beis din to tell the judges all this to the woman and the beis din, so the woman not transgress the 20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 7 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:02 | SR:-- | Magenta #20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 7 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:02 | SR:-- | Yellow 20
the details of the defendant’s insolence, although for the punishment prohibition of eishes ish by remarrying, and so that she not bring
it would have been adequate to just say he was insolent. It also says in mamzerim into the world. Physicians must be careful lest their words
maseches Bava Kamma (112b) that “A court messenger is believed like cause problems for their patients.
two witnesses,” Rashi explains (s.v. mehemninan) that we presume
he will not lie in court, since, as the Shitah Mekubetzes explains, he
is in awe of the beis din. Thus he will not publicize a matter because
of his awe of the beis din. On the other hand, the secretary does not
have this level of awe towards the physician. Therefore, we have ruled
that the summary of the AIDS patient illness should be typed by the
physician himself.
In addition, it is explained in the Rama (Orach Chayim #54:3).
“….It has become widely accepted in many places to hear the claims
of a claimant in shul and to rule on the argument between Yishtabach
and Yotzer, because this is for a mitzvah.” This means that a person
can complain about his fellow who stole money from him or harmed
him, and he can make the claim publicly if he has no other way of
receiving his money back, and this is a mitzvah. Therefore, the court
does not need to refrain from revealing details of the claim to the

210 1 Medical-HalacHic Responsa of Rav ZilbeRstein Divorce due to erroneous medical information 2 195