Chapter One - Preparing For Children: Life Questions

A: Background

1. Introduction

We have chosen to address this subject because we are adopting a chronological approach to life-cycle, in which each section will focus on a particular section of Jewish life, working through progressively from birth to bereavement. In order to talk about birth issues, we will start from the question of having children, which predictably takes us forward into the married state, a subject that we will revisit in a later section. However, although our choice is dictated by chronology, it is fortuitous indeed - and fitting as well - to open with a subject that goes right to the heart of some of the biggest issues in the Jewish world-view.

In the introduction we said that life cycle moments and rituals usually contain the keys to some of the basic cultural ideas of the specific group: we will see this idea beautifully illustrated when we come to talk now of the issue of children. Children are one of the clearest expressions of life, and therefore it stands to reason that an examination of the relationship of a culture to the issues of children actually opens up the whole question of the culture's relationship to the value of life. Since, for Judaism, the idea of the sanctification of life stands right at the center of the value system, as soon as we start to talk about the idea of having children we find ourselves immediately in an examination of some of the most fundamental ideas of Judaism.

In addition, this subject will open up some other very central issues within Judaism, including Jewish survival, gender issues, memory and others.

At the end of this and each of the other sections we bring a number of possible educational activities for use in the classroom, the clubroom, or other educational settings. They are designed to reflect the text of this background section, following and exploring its various themes and ideas.

2. To have or not to have - The question of children

The image of Jews and children seems a natural one. One of the foremost images (and stereotypes) of Jews, both to Jews themselves and to outside society is the idea of the Jewish family, and a Jewish family is always seen as including kids. The idea of the lonely celibate appears to have no place within normative Judaism - even though more than a few of these can be traced in Jewish history. Jewish life has almost always been played out within the arena of a community, and a community as we shall see, is seen as being comprised of families. These families are seen as being made up, at the very least, of parents and children.

It is noteworthy that the foundation stories of the Jewish tradition are family stories. We tell our history from its outset as the story of a family, who are traced in the book of Bereishit (Genesis) through a number of generations before they become a tribe, which becomes a series of tribes, which in turn becomes a nation.

Most cultures don't start telling their stories in terms of a family saga. More often than not, they start their stories on the collective level, talking of a tribe or a group of warriors who come to a place and settle it. Other cultures start with supernatural stories of mythical heroes who encounter the dangers of the world.

The Jewish story, however, starts at the end of chapter eleven of Bereishit where we are introduced to an [extra]ordinary man whose story will now become the focus of the biblical narrative. Interestingly, after the genealogical introduction, which consists of a large number of names listed in terms of who begat whom, the very first thing that we hear about Abram (as he is then) himself is the following.

And Abram and Nahor [his brother] took them wives. The name of Abram's wife was Sarai… But Sarai was barren, she had no child.
Bereishit 11:29-30.

And just so we should not think wrongly that the Bible approves of this status, much of the next few chapters is spent explaining the problematics of this status of childlessness and suggesting ways to move the present family / future People forward. This, of course, culminates in the first generation with the miraculous birth of Isaac.

Let us consider the narrative for a moment. Here is the foundation story of the Jews as a collective which Jews see as a Divinely revealed story. In addition, Judaism has evolved as a culture where there is not only enormous respect for the written word but where, in addition, nothing is seen as incidental in the Divine text; each word is considered to hold enormous truths underneath the surface. It should be clear, after even brief consideration, that in these circumstances, the family model would have a very central role in Judaism.

3. Be fruitful - the first commandment

Indeed, a great deal is made in Judaism out of the fact that the first commandment that the Rabbis discern in the Torah is G-d's command to the first human (a bi-sexual Adam) to "be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth" (Bereishit Ch.1 v.28). The moment that this is seen as a precept (mitzvah), it clearly marks out Judaism as a culture that sees birth of children as part of the Divine plan for the world and therefore a fundamental value in the Jewish view of the world. (It is interesting that Christianity, inheritor of the same texts, developed a very different view of sexuality - viz.: only sanctified for one purpose - the imperative of childbearing.) In Judaism, this is a Divine imperative that the individual must follow. Anyone who does not follow this idea can be considered to be sabotaging G-d's world-plan.

This can be seen in the following set of opinions that we find in the Babylonian Talmud, the great storehouse that reflects the variety of opinion in the rabbinic world in the early centuries of the common era.

Rabbi Eliezer stated: He who does not engage in [the commandment to] "go forth and multiply" is as someone who sheds blood… Rabbi Jacob said, he is as someone who diminishes the Divine image… Ben Azzai said, he is as someone who sheds blood and diminishes the Divine image.
Talmud, Tractate Yebamot, 63b.

Another complementary idea that we find in rabbinic thought is that bearing children is something that does not lie exclusively within the realm of the personal autonomy of the parents. G-d is seen as a partner to the two parents in the creation of a child. In a sense, one can say that according to this perspective every Jewish child has three parents, one Divine and two mortal. All these ideas come to reinforce the view that it is an imperative within Judaism to have children.

4. Problems of parenthood - barrenness and difficult children in the Torah model

Countless proofs can be brought to show that having children is a great and positive value within Judaism. For example, it is notable that in the early patriarchal stories, there is a curse of barrenness that afflicts many of the central women protagonists. It is clearly seen as a most negative thing and all of the women try to overcome it. We have no models that glorify the state of barrenness or accept it easily. In fact, it is worth emphasizing that the ideal model for Jewish prayer is seen as the prayer of Hannah, the barren woman who longs for a son to the extent of extreme, seemingly drunken behavior at the shrine of Shiloh. Her prayer, according to the book of Samuel, results in the conception of the child Samuel. The model for heartfelt Jewish prayer is that of the barren woman longing for a child.

Interestingly, however, it has to be stated that Judaism is very realistic as far as what parents can expect from their children. Despite the fact that children are seen as Divinely ordained, there is no over-idealization of the result. This can once again be seen very clearly from the same family stories that fill the pages of Bereishit. In every generation of Abraham's family we encounter extreme forms of problematic behavior, sibling rivalry, jealousy, parental favoritism and plain juvenile manipulation of parents and siblings alike.

Later on in the Biblical books, and most especially in the David stories of Samuel and Kings, for example, we find reinforcement of the idea that children are a mixed blessing. David's children plot against their father to the point of rebellion (Avshalom in Second Samuel 15- 8), and exploit each other ruthlessly up to the point of sexual abuse and rape (Amnon and Tamar in Second Samuel 13). In addition, they plot against each other for succession to David's throne (Adonijah and Solomon in First Kings Ch.1). It is as if the model that is being drawn for the use of future generations is one that emphasizes the idea of having children but knows that there are many challenges and problems that may be encountered by the family that actually brings them up.

5. Strengthening the argument: survival issues

Over the centuries of Diaspora life, new emphases began to be added to the rationale for child-bearing. In a situation where the Jews were a minority and often an oppressed one, the need for physical survival of the collective became paramount. Under these circumstances, it became increasingly important to ensure this survival by emphasizing the need to bring children into the world.

There were areas and periods where, for example, Jewish existence was constantly threatened and all Jews knew that there was a chance of widespread violence threatening the physical destruction of their families and communities. The communities of the medieval German lands (Ashkenaz to the Jews) were classic examples of this consciousness. A strong wave of violence erupted somewhere in those lands at least once every generation from the late eleventh century onwards, causing the death of countless tens of thousands of Jews. In those situations, the natural human response was perhaps to despair and to see no point in the bringing forth of children who would have a large chance of encountering suffering and bloodshed in their own lives. But we find no signs of such despair in this period. In fact only rarely in Jewish history do our surviving sources show Jews despairing of their lot to the point of questioning the wisdom of bringing forth a new generation. One such rare example of such sentiments comes in the aftermath of the destruction of the Second Temple. In a work that goes by the name of the Apocalypse of Baruch, we find the following lament.

Blessed is the one who has not been born,
Or who having been born, has died,
But as for those of us who are alive,
We ache because we see the afflictions of Zion and Jerusalem's fate…
Women, pray for barrenness,
For barren women will be the happiest, those without sons will be glad,
And those with sons will grieve.
Why should a woman bear children in pain, only to bury them in grief?
Why should we have sons?
Why should we give names to our seed,
When the mother Jerusalem is desolate and her sons are captive.
The Apocalypse of Baruch; from the Pseudepigrapha.

Desperate as it is, such sentiments are rare in the sources that have come down to us, although they must at some times have been entertained by many. Nevertheless, the dominant idea was always to continue to bring forth children, even when objective circumstances were extremely adverse. Such an approach can perhaps be seen as a response to the command to sanctify the name of G-d at all times.

We normally think of the command to sanctify G-d's name in adversity (Kiddush HaShem) as indicating a preparedness to take one's own life rather than convert to another religion under force, but it is clear that this is only one side of the whole picture. Those who brought forth children at desperate times were also performing a sanctification of G-d's name and many, unquestionably, saw it as such.

This is apparent in our own time, when we look at the terrible events surrounding the Shoah. The tenacity of so many survivors in insisting on the need to marry and start families immediately after their liberation is quite incredible. As an act of faith in a world that had totally failed them, such a response is extraordinary. This response, we suggest, is part of an age-old reaction to the threat of destruction that was felt by many generations of Jews in different times and places. It is a response to bring forth children as an act of defiance to a cruel world and a sign of faith in G-d. This response built on the original commandment to provide one of the characteristics of Jews throughout time, a People with families and with children: the Jewish family.

6. What of individual choice? The question of personal autonomy

When viewed in the modern context, this perspective is not entirely unproblematic. One of the features that most characterizes us as people brought up in a modern western setting is the belief in the importance of personal autonomy. We are children of a society that has been moving steadily away from the idea of external commandment, towards the idea of the need for the individual to make their own decisions for themselves. It is possible to suggest that much of the ridicule which the Jewish mother figure has suffered at the hands of western Jewish writers and popular culture as a whole, over the last few generations, is indeed the result of a clash between these two values of Jewish family and personal autonomy.

7. Discomfort with the Jewish family model

In terms of the question of having or not having children, the pressures of the tradition certainly make many young Jews today uncomfortable. While one of the major expressions of the traditional Judaism's belief in the importance of children was to seek an early marriage for one's children and to start the career of childbearing at a very young age, the tendency that we find among most modern Jews is precisely the opposite. The question of arranged marriage has fallen by the wayside for almost all except those who live in, or on the edge of, ultra-orthodox communities, in favour of romantic love. Marriage itself is often sought at an age which, in past times, for all Jews would have been seen as scandalously late, entailing a waste of many good childbearing years. The framework of the traditional two-parent family is by no means viewed as the unquestioned ideal; and even among those who continue to see it as an ideal, there is far greater preparedness than ever before to break up the framework when it does not work for at least one of the partners.

Moreover, within marriage, children are no longer taken for granted as the foundation stone of married life. There are those who are willing to talk of their personal disinclination to have children. It is no longer accepted, for example, that children necessarily define a woman's role or meaning in life. In addition, over the last forty years we have heard the articulation of a philosophy that sees that the world as it exists today is not a place for children. Individuals or couples have espoused the view that it is an immoral act to bring children into the "nuclear" world that exists around us. And, of course, more recently we are witnesses to the phenomenon of many who say that having children needs to be deferred or dismissed, either for financial reasons, or because of the demands of the two-career family. Indeed, the whole question of the professionalization and change in horizons for Jewish women and men has modified greatly the traditional attitudes to children.

8. The clash with tradition

The result of all these factors is clear. There is a clash for many young Jews between the traditional, child-centered values of family that have developed over thousands of years of Jewish tradition, and their own conscious beliefs and needs. This conflict becomes an extremely complex issue, among other reasons, because the potential for guilt is so great. In a culture that has lost so many millions in recent generations through destruction and Holocaust, moreover, one that is experiencing constant problems in replenishing its own numbers, creating major question marks over the issue of future survival, it is no easy thing to come forward and say "I don't want marriage and I don't want children".

The pressures, direct and indirect, on people who adopt this position are likely to be immense and very uncomfortable. It may even lead to alienation. Those pressures exist, perhaps, for very good and understandable reasons, but they are pressures nevertheless and they may be considered unfair. This is especially true when the standpoint is one that affirms personal autonomy - the right of the individual to make his or her own choices. The result of all these pressures, it can be suggested, can be resentment on the behalf of the "non-conforming" individuals towards the Jewish tradition and the community that upholds that tradition. At the very least, it can provoke confusion.

A perfect example of the complexities and confusions of the situation of the Jewish individual (specifically, a woman for whom the questions are characteristically harder in most cases) who wrestles with the question of bringing forth a child is found in a short story written in 1980. The story in question, "The Phantom Child" (see bibliography), a presumably autobiographical account by Aviva Cantor, tells of the inner struggle of a modern Jewish woman who finds that she is pregnant and tries to decide whether or not to have the child. The narrator, an identified liberal Jew, brings in all the various considerations that go through her mind as she struggles with the decision. Among the factors that push her towards the decision to have the child are questions of Jewish continuity, the Holocaust, Jewish tradition, and her responsibilities towards those of her own family who were unable to have children. Her ultimate decision is not to have the child but as one reads the story, the immense pressures on the woman who "defies" the tradition and the norms of the community are made very clear. At times, the narrator almost seems to be nearing breakdown among the conflicting pressures, which are basically all in her own mind, in the sense that other people are not playing an active part in her decision. This is the conflict that exists today in the minds and the lives of many contemporary Jews, torn between the demands and expectations of their tradition and their sense of their own personal needs.

9. A minyan of kids? The question of family size

Another interesting question that relates to the attitude of the tradition towards birth, albeit one that does not create the same degree of personal conflict in the minds of modern Jews, is the issue of the desirable number of children.

• Is there a minimum obligation of prospective parents regarding family size?
• When has the mitzvah of having children according to the idea of "be fruitful and multiply" been fulfilled?
• Does such a consideration exist and how does it relate to the question of children of different gender?

According to Judaism these questions do have answers. The primary text for this is found in the Mishnah in Seder Yebamot where we hear of the following disagreement between the two schools of Rabbinic thought, the House of Hillel and the House of Shammai.

No man may abstain from keeping the law "be fruitful and multiply" unless he already has children; according to the School of Shammai, two sons; according to the School of Hillel, a son and a daughter since it is written (Bereishit 5:2) "male and female He created them." (Yebamot 6:6)

As is usual in Jewish law, where there are disputes between the two schools, the Halacha goes with the House of Hillel. However, as in so many other cases, it is not deemed generally satisfactory to have merely filled the minimum requirements.

The traditional understanding is that large numbers of children are desirable and that a woman should continue to have children until her child-bearing years are over, as long as her health is not impaired. Traditional families today tend to be larger than ever, due to the improvements in medical technology that prevent the high rate of infant mortality prevalent throughout all but recent history. It is not rare to find families of ten or more children in the most orthodox sections of the Jewish world. The rationale for this comes out of a combination of the "be fruitful and multiply" commandment with the complementary Jewish idea of what is called "Bitachon baShem", namely trusting in G-d to provide for all his creatures. This leads to a perspective which sees taking steps to limit family size as a lack of belief in G-d's providence.

10. Reinforcing the family model - the shoah and the Jewish state

The importance of having large families seems to have been reinforced over the last fifty years in many circles by the influence of outside circumstances, and most specifically the Shoah, on the consciousness of contemporary religious Jews. There is no question that the enormous blow to the Jewish population following the Holocaust has caused an increase in consciousness among many to the effect that there is a sense of urgency to try and replenish the lost numbers.

In this regard it is interesting to note that family size in general - not specifically among the religious population - tends to be much larger among Jews in Israel than among Jews anywhere else in the world. This appears to be so for a number of reasons. Among other causes is the fact that Israel has a large number of orthodox or traditional Jews, and the additional fact that the Jewish population in Israel is drawn from many different places where the tradition of large family size was prevalent until the group's arrival in Israel. One can, however, suggest that there are additional factors at work here: the consciousness of living in a Jewish state which claims responsibility for the continuation of the Jewish nation can be suggested as a factor. In addition, the idea of a state "under siege" that needs as many hands as possible can be offered as a factor in influencing family size for some. Israel tends to be a more child- conscious and child-oriented society than most, and this unquestionably affects the situation. The pressures to have children here, as well as the inherent attraction of bringing children into a child-oriented society, are greater than on Jews in many other places.

11. Pro-active limits? On birth control and abortion

This brings us to the question of birth control. How does the Jewish tradition view birth control? It might be assumed that a culture that sees the bearing of children as so central would be rigidly opposed to birth control, but the truth is a little more complex. In strict Halachic terms the tradition understands that the commandment to have children was incumbent on the man rather than the woman. This idea is incidentally found in precisely the same piece of the Mishnah that was quoted earlier regarding minimum family size. The result of this is that, although the man is forbidden to take active steps to prevent birth through birth control, there is a lot more freedom for the woman.

Certain kinds of birth control by the woman are permitted by most halachic authorities as long as circumstances justify it. The means accepted by those authorities who allow birth control tend to be restricted to the use of diaphragms and anti-spermicidal cream and, even more frequently, the use of the pill. However, these means are allowed, when they are allowed, on an individual basis, if there is perceived to be an objective justification. This mean that in traditional, Halachic circles, the norm is to consult a rabbi in order to obtain permission to use one of the methods of birth control. The factors that rabbis will take into account when assessing the issue vary from individual to individual but in general terms they revolve around the issue of the health - mental or physical - and the well-being - psychological or economic - of the woman and the family as a whole.

Let us briefly deal with the related issue of abortion. The Halachic position on abortion is in fact more complex than the general "pro-life" attitude of Judaism might lead us to believe. There are a number of different strands to the debate and authorities differ in position according to their interpretation of the central texts that are seen to be relevant. However, the general attitude can be summed up by saying that Judaism does allow abortion in very specific cases, but in no way does it subscribe to the liberal western position of abortion on demand. Abortion is allowed in Judaism only when it is felt that there is an objective necessity connected to the mother's health and wellbeing. Most authorities will interpret these criteria in relatively narrow terms, thereby forbidding all but a small number of terminations of pregnancies. But it is important to understand that the Jewish position is really remarkably flexible given the view of birth as a sacred act. This becomes clear when Jewish practice is compared with the attitudes prevalent in other religious traditions.

12. Thank G-D I'm a man? The question of gender preference

Returning to the question of birth, the above-mentioned dispute between the houses of Hillel and Shammai raises a question that is worth examining, even briefly. If Shammai sees two boys as the minimum fulfillment of the commandment of procreation, as opposed to Hillel who sees that the commandment can be satisfied by the birth of a boy and a girl, the question must be asked: does Judaism prefer boys?

This is one of the most difficult of all questions to ask in the realm of family relations and life-cycle issues. The very raising of the question itself arouses strong emotions; the subject itself is rather a taboo issue. In the last thirty years, especially since the rise of the Jewish feminist movement which has often attacked the traditional culture of Judaism as being sexist and unjust, dozens of books and articles have been written about the role of women in Judaism. Many of these are apologetic in tone, seeking the justice of the tradition. The approach of this school of thought is broadly speaking that women are "separate but equal" in the Jewish tradition; that men and women are relegated to different realms of activity within Jewish life, and that within the separate realms the man is a king and the woman a queen. In other words, difference does not mean that one group is preferred over the other. Rather, it is stated, both genders reflect the work of G-d, who intended different spheres of activity and complementary roles for them both. Reference is often made to the Creation account in Bereishit 1.

So G-d created the man in his own image. In the image of G-d He created him. Male and female He created them.
Bereishit 1:27

Since G-d is a just G-d, it is impossible to create that He would favour one gender over the other when he created them at the same instant in His own image. Thus in a nutshell, the traditionalist point of view is one of "separate but equal."

13. Critiquing the traditional position

However, the religious critique of this position is, it seems, based less on an argument with G-d and more on what men, as the primary interpreters of G-d's word, have done with the instruction book that they were given, namely the Torah. Critics point out that in the division of roles according to gender, almost all the prestigious ones have been assigned to men. Men are the almost exclusive stars of Jewish history in the public arena; all public functions within Judaism and the Jewish community have traditionally been seen as the exclusive preserve of the male sex. Moreover, the scholarly arena that has been the center of prestige and respect within the Jewish community since at least the destruction of the second Temple, has once again been assigned exclusively to the realm of the man. Men are responsible for the development of the liturgy where, for example, they are required to recite every day the blessing to G-d, "who has not made me a woman." The problem, according to this perspective, is largely sociological rather than theological.

Less traditional critics of the tradition have brought G-d into the argument, seeing the Divine texts as man-made and arguing that the very concept of G-d and G-d's deeds that has developed within Judaism is a result of male dominance and male construction of the sacred texts. As opposed to the account in Bereishit 1, these critics bring the additional, more detailed account of Bereishit 2, that sees Adam, a man, being created first and Eve, a woman, created out of a superfluous part of the man, as an afterthought in order to answer a male problem of cosmic loneliness (vv.7-25). All the inequalities that have developed within the Jewish tradition, according to this approach, must be seen as the responsibilities of the men who both wrote and interpreted the traditional texts.

We will not explore the argument any further here. Suffice it to say that those who see themselves as the official transmitters of the Jewish heritage and therefore responsible for explaining the Jewish texts, resolutely deny that there is a preference between the sexes in Judaism. The aforementioned blessing, thanking G-d for not making a man a woman, is explained as an appreciation of the fact that there are more positive commandments that are incumbent on a man and that therefore he has a greater (if more demanding) opportunity to serve his Creator every day. Officially, there is no admission at all that one sex of child is preferred over the other. Critics will continue to question this.

14. Filling a gap: part one - issues of infertility

One reason that it has been traditionally unacceptable to express a preference for one kind of child, rather than another, lies in the idea that the child is a child of G-d and is given as a gift to the parents. From that point of view it would be both arrogant and a sign of ingratitude to G-d to question G-d's decision regarding the sex of the child. G-d's decisions are seen as final and benevolent. However, this raises the question of childlessness and barrenness. In a tradition that is so pro-birth and so child-centered, how is the question of the infertile childless couple seen? Are parents who are suffering from fertility problems allowed to take steps to correct the situation, or are they simply meant to be passive and accept their fate as Divinely ordained?

As mentioned earlier, the Tanach is particularly rich in stories of infertility. In line with prevailing conceptions in the ancient world, the problem is inevitably seen as that of the woman, and correspondingly it is the woman who is in the center of the biblical stories that deal with the problem. Most famous among these stories are those of the Abrahamic family which the book of Bereishit follows in detail through its first four generations. Primary among these stories is, predictably, the story of the childlessness of Sarah, that childlessness which is alleviated suddenly and miraculously in old age with the birth of Isaac. But Sarah is not alone in her situation of barrenness. Rebecca and Rachel also have problems in this respect. In the late books we encounter the stories of Hannah, the mother of Samuel and the unnamed mother of Samson, who are both depicted as barren.

It is clear that in many of these cases there is enormous suffering attendant on the situation, especially on the part of the woman. After various degrees of suffering however, all five cases are answered by G-d in one way or other. In the case of Sarah (Bereishit 18, 21), and the mother of Samson (Judges 13), it is after a visit for Divine messengers. In the case of Rebecca (Bereishit 25) and most graphically, Hannah (1 Samuel 1), it is following personal prayer that G-d rewards them. In the case of Rachel, (Bereishit 30) we are told merely that G-d remembered her.

The text in all these cases is unequivocal: issues of fertility and barrenness are in the hands of G-d. One can pray, one can weep and one can beg, but the decision is that of G-d alone. This has remained the traditional attitude towards the issue of childlessness, but in the last decades the situation has changed in terms of the opportunities that medical science offers for reversing the situation. The question that needs to be asked is how Judaism relates to medical procedures that are aimed at enabling barren couples to have children.

The short answer is that Judaism tends to approve most procedures for women, as long as they do not unduly affect the health of the woman in question. The Halacha is a little more circumspect, however, with relation to procedures involving male infertility. Artificial donor insemination (by a man other than the husband) is generally viewed as unacceptable and surrogate motherhood is also extremely controversial. However, the normal approach is to see most accepted medical procedures as ways of helping the Divine process of birth through a medical helping hand. As such, they are generally accepted and indeed encouraged. We suggest sources for a more detailed examination of these issues in the bibliography.

15. Filing the gap: part two - adoption

Let us now pass to another rather different question in the Jewish attitude towards birth, connected, however, to the previous issue of couples who have problems conceiving children. So far we have talked exclusively of natural births of children. But there is also the issue of adoption that needs to be examined in this context.

What is the Jewish attitude towards adoption? De facto adoption exists and is recognized by Judaism, albeit in a slightly different way to the prevalent mode in western society. The difference is a result of the Jewish idea that the natural ties that exist between biological parents and a child can never be annulled, even though the child can be legally transferred to the guardianship of other adults in whom are vested all the rights and responsibilities of full parenthood. One implication of this is clear: because there are a number of prohibitions in Judaism regarding who is entitled to marry whom among blood relations, the original identity of the adopted individual is extremely important.

Throughout Jewish history, the most common cases of adoption have traditionally been in the case of orphans. G-d is regarded as the father of orphans and since the imitation of G-d is one of the basic concepts in Judaism, it follows that the adoption of orphans has been seen as a particular act of merit. It is reasonable to assume that in most Jewish communities throughout history, living a largely insular life with only limited contact with the outside non-Jewish community, most adoption was of Jewish children who, for one reason or another, were not capable of caring for themselves.

However in the modern world, this tends not to be the case. Jews are, in almost all communities, living a more open life with greater involvement in the surrounding society than previously. The idea of adopting children who are not Jewish from birth is much more widely accepted. This is the side of "demand". On the side of "supply", there is a shortage of Jewish candidates for adoption. Birth control and greater practical opportunities for abortion on the one hand, and increased tolerance towards the idea of single mothers, on the other, have created a situation whereby most families who are interested in adoption are likely to have to go beyond the Jewish world in order to find a child.

This raises the extra complication of conversion. Through a complicated legal process, based essentially on a legal fiction, the conversion of a minor into Judaism as part of the adoptive process is allowed and possible. This involves a conversion ceremony (immersion in water and circumcision for a boy). However, a legal obligation exists for a minor to confirm his or her willingness to remain within Judaism on attaining majority status. Some authorities permit a negative understanding of this rule, permitting the continuation of the Jewish status, as long as the young adult does not deny it. There is a prevalent legal opinion that, in order for the child to be able to accept her or his own status as a Jew, it is necessary that adoptees be informed of their real parents.

If adopting parents have the normal parental obligations towards the child, adopted children have similar obligations towards their adoptive parents. It is interesting to note in this context that in Eastern Europe a child that was adopted by a childless couple would often refer to the child as their "Kaddish," meaning that that child would be the one who would carry on the memory of the adopting parents by reciting the Kaddish memorial prayer after their death.

This issue of carrying on the memory of the family, and of people within the family, brings us to the threshold of the birth itself. One of the major ways that Jews relate to the issue of the maintenance of family memory is through the names that are given to the children. It is with this issue that we will begin the next chapter, in which we will start to talk of life - Jewish life - after birth.