Surrogacy for gay male Israeli couples

Israeli laws concerning rights of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community are far more progressive than the laws which punish homosexuality in certain neighboring Middle Eastern countries.  The Israeli outlook on LGBT rights, from a legal perspective, at least, is also somewhat more progressive than the U.S.  For example, here in the United States, the Senate has just adjourned its two-day hearings on the possible repeal of the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell law.  Meanwhile, Israel has had members of the LGBT community serving openly in the military since 1993.  In this short documentary, Israel: Gay Oasis, there is a segment at 2:05 of an openly gay IDF soldier discussing his positive experience in the Israeli military.



Recently, a new legal question regarding LGBT rights has arisen in Israel, this one specifically concerning gay men.  The issue is the legality of surrogate parenthood for same-sex male couples.  According to this article from Forward: The Jewish Daily, Israeli women have been eligible for state-funded fertility treatments since the early 1990s.  Additionally, a 1996 law concerning surrogacy specifies that the Israeli Health Ministry is only to approve the procedure when it involves a couple consisting of a man and a woman.  Because of these circumstances, it is relatively easy for Israeli lesbian couples to have children as compared to gay Israeli men.

A gay couple from Tel Aviv is hoping that the law can be changed.  Last year, Etai Pinkas and Yoav Arad asked the Health Ministry to allow them the option of surrogacy, but were denied due to the 1996 law.  The couple hired Dori Spivak (the same lawyer who, in 2002, argued successfully for the right of gay partners to inherent the one’s property in the event of the other’s death based on the idea that the social norms upon which the 1964 inheritance law were based no longer applied) to take their petition to the high court.  Spivak believes that the intent of the wording of the 1996 law (i.e. the clause specifying eligibility for surrogacy to “a man and a woman who are a couple”) did not intend to deprive gay men the right to the option of surrogacy.  If this argument does not alone convince the court, Spivak will argue that “the existing law clashes with the guarantees of equality in the 1992 Basic Law on Human Dignity and Liberty.”

Unfortunately for Pinkas, Arad, and the rest of Israel’s gay male population who would like to become parents via a surrogate, they will have to wait at least a year for a Health Ministry committee’s review of the current law.  Meanwhile, in an initial response to the court, the Israeli government sounds open to the idea of revising the law, but says the decision should come from the Knesset, not the court. 

Pinkas and Arad are currently trying another option, wherein the entire surrogacy process is carried out in another country.  This trend began about five years ago when some gay Israeli couples had children through American surrogates.  The process was expensive, however, costing up to $150,000.  One couple who went the American surrogate route was Doron Gidony and Doron Mamet.  Recognizing the fact that many gay couples in Israel might find themselves wanting children, but unable to afford the process he and Gidony went through, Mamet founded Tammuz which “outsources” the process to India.  A fertilized egg from an American donor is carried by an Indian surrogate, significantly reducing the cost of the process.  Pinkas and Arad are now in the process with Tammuz.

Dorion Gidony (left), his partner, Dorion Mamet, and their daughter

This “outsourcing” of surrogacy is a controversial matter, and is the subject of the HBO documentary Google Baby by Israeli director Zippi Frank.  In the synopsis of the film, Frank says, “The business aspects of the reproduction industry are intriguing, as well as frightening.  With no real existing legal barriers to overcome and lots of money to be made, the human reproduction industry is steaming ahead, and a cold and distant business is emerging, guided only by the principles of the free-market dealing.  Given the complexities and sensitive issues surrounding reproduction and birth, this could be dangerous.”

Trailer

Gidony and Mamet’s story, as well as the Tammuz business, are highlighted in the documentary.  It appears to be a critical documentary, but Mamet offers a rebuttal to critical elements of it on the Tammuz website, saying, “When I look at the impact of the movie I'm feeling ambivalence. On one end surrogacy and egg donation is a morally loaded topic - people are uncomfortable with it and more so when it happens in India. On the other end, there are thousands of couples in the world for whom this is the only way to make their parenting dream come true; and there are many women for whom surrogacy is the only way to get their family out of poverty. Morality cannot be inferred in a vacuum without considering all impacted sides; I for one believe that there is a big moral issue with those who seek to decide for me or to interfere with my chances to be father and with the chances of a surrogate to help her family (I urge anybody to think of their reaction if some social moral standards were denying them their parenting right).”

The source for the main article was Forward: The Jewish Daily, which, according to Wikipedia, is an American publication founded in 1897 by Yiddish socialist labor party members, and today “maintains a left of center editorial stance.”  This could have something to do with why the article discusses Mamet’s business, but leaves out the part about it being controversial.  The other sources were the Tammuz website and HBO’s webpage for Google Baby.  In these cases, either side has a major bias toward its own viewpoint on this “morally loaded” topic.  For Mamet, the work he does is a product of his own struggle to become a parent and his desire to help others in his situation do the same.  For Zippi Frank, the “reproduction industry” making it possible to order babies over the internet has frightening implications. 

I think both sides have a point. Ultimately, it seems like a good idea if the Knesset just changes the 1996 law so gay couples don't have to go outside of Israel to find a surrogate.

A bridge over troubled waters?

Could the Christian community of Israel act as a bridge between Muslims and Jews?  Michail Fanous-- executive director of Open House in Ramle-- thinks so, and he is not alone.

Open House is a “unique community-based coexistence center” which operates out of a little house in Ramle.  The house itself acts as a microcosm of the Arab-Israeli conflict.  It was built in 1936 by the Al-Khayri family.  They were Palestinian Arabs who were forced to flee their home as a result the 1948 War.  Dalia Eshkanazi Landau’s family were Bulgarian Jews who immigrated to Israel and moved into the house, which had been labeled “abandoned property” by the state.  In an open letter to Bashir Al-Khayri, Dalia explains what it was like to come to terms with her adopted country’s history, and describes the experience of coming face to face with the people who had built their lives in that house before they were forced to abandon it.

Bashir was arrested for his activities in the PFLP, which included allegations of involvement with a bomb that killed multiple civilians.  In his response to Dalia’s letter, he explains how what looks like an act of terrorism to one person, can be an expression of nationalistic self-determination to another.   He says, “we were exiled by force of arms. We were exiled but we left our souls, our hopes and our childhood in Palestine. We left our joys and sorrows. We left them in every corner, and on every grain of sand in Palestine.”  Bashir once tried to return to his homeland, this place which contained his very soul.  He boarded the Al-Awda in 1988, which was sunk in the Cypriot port.  

Dalia Eshkanazi Landau

This revelation shocked Dalia.  Even more shocking was the story Bashir told next.  In 1948, the six year old Bashir found a shiny metal object around his house and brought it inside to play with it.  It turned out to be an explosive which blew off most of his left hand.  Because of these incidents, Bashir had a very different perspective of Zionism than Dalia had.  Bashir had this response to Dalia’s descriptions of his actions as terrorism: “You cannot equate the struggle of the people for liberation and independence and self-determination.  You cannot equate that with aggression, expansionism and oppression of the other.”

As a result of this dialogue, Open House was born.  It runs a nursery school for Arab toddlers, both Christian and Muslim, as well as a Center for Jewish-Arab Coexistence and Reconciliation.  Its executive director is Michail Fanous, a Christian Arab and former educator, who became a prominent voice in Ramle educational policy when Mayor Yoel Lavi recognized an unacceptable gap between Jewish and Arab educational quality, and set out to find innovative ways of reconciling it.  

Fanous says he has often felt “like a bridge between Jews and Muslims.  Christians have always lived between the two worlds.  So, maybe we’re the ones who can connect them.” (Rosenthal, 305).  Perhaps occupying this position “between two worlds” gives the Christian Israelis a less-biased perspective of the conflict, in much the same way that children, innocent of the weight of history, see no reason to differentiate amongst playmates.  “‘Most of the time we reach parents through their kids,’ Michail reports, ‘As they learn about each other, they see that if you don’t talk, you can’t make peace.’” (Rosenthal, 322).  This video shows some Israeli teens from the Open House program aiming to do just that:  learn about each other, talk, and make peace.

Another Christian Israeli hoping to be a part of this bridge between Jews and Muslims is Maher Turjman, Regional Director for the Pontifical Mission for Palestine.  According to the Pittsburgh Post Gazette “the agency provides both emergency assistance and long-term education and development to the region, without distinction of the recipient's nationality or religion.”  In this audio clip, Turjman mentions his own hope that his organization can act as a bridge between Jews and Muslims.

Maher Turjman

The sources for this post appear reliable.  The idea to look further into the Open House program came from Donna Rosenthal’s book, and the information about the Pontifical Mission for Palestine comes off the Pittsburgh Post Gazette website, which is Pittsburgh’s largest daily paper.

From kollel to computer desk

Haredi Center for Technological Studies

Who would have thought that the tradition-bound Haredim (or “ultr-Orthodox” Jews) would look toward the high tech sector once cutbacks in government subsidies began to send more of their men onto the job market?  I personally might not have ever made the connection that intensive Torah study could prepare someone for learning computer programming languages, but when I think of the Haredim’s many daily hours spent decoding “pages filled with nonlinear, multiple conversations and different typefaces” it makes sense (Rosenthal, 190).  It obviously made sense to Dr. Abraham Fuss, who founded the Haredi Center for Technological Studies in 1996.  Dr. Fuss recognized “the need for a place where Haredim could be trained for professions without compromising their standards, enabling them to earn a decent livelihood to support their large families.”

Dr. Abraham Fuss

With the concern for strict haredi standards in mind, the institute
offers night classes so that Haredi men can continue their religious studies during the day.  The classes are male or female only, since the Haredim are prohibited from studying in universities where coed classes are offered.  Haredi women have generally already studied basic English and mathematics, and so are at an initial advantage over the men.  However, Haredi men reportedly quickly grasp these subjects after some introductory courses. 

A plaque at the entrance to the school contains a quote from Moses Maimonides, which reads “The highest degree of charity is to help a person earn a livelihood, so that he needn’t rely on others.”  Based on the Haredi Center’s website, its founder seems to have been committed to this motto.  A short bio on Fuss off the Center’s website concludes:   “The successes of the graduates as they went out into the workplace were his pride and joy. Every graduate who found profitable employment gave him “naches”, and he felt that each one was a Kiddush Hashem, making a good name for Haredim as reliable, intelligent, industrious and honest workers.” 

It seems this “making a good name” is increasingly important for the Haredim.  Based on Donna Rosenthal’s The Israelis, there is some degree of animosity toward the Haredim amongst the non-orthodox and secular Israeli community.  It makes sense:  the Haredim receive government subsidies and exemption from military duty; meanwhile, many ultra-Orthodox Jews vehemently oppose the state of Israel, seeing it as man interfering with the work of God.  I can see why some non-Orthodox Israelis would feel resentment toward the Haredim.  On the other hand, the Haredim both represent and actively preserve a key element of Jewishness:  the dedicated study of the Torah.  According to Rosenthal, “quite a few centuries-old observations written by rabbis who were psychologists of their day are still rich and relevant...” and one of the Haredim she interviewed declared that “‘the spiritual wealth of learning Talmud is worth more than any paycheck.’” (177). 

Be that as it may, various factors are driving increasing numbers of haredi men into the workforce, often resulting in unfamiliar experiences, both for themselves and their new colleagues.  Tzvia Ehrlich-Klein’s article “High-Tech Haredim” quotes an employee of a “major Jerusalem high-tech company” about his experience with a haredi coworker:  “I never worked with anyone before who wore a kapota... and I certainly never shared a bag of bisli with anyone like that.  Though we live in the same city, we live in two different worlds...But since Moshe and I started working together on this Internet project, we both discovered that we can like and respect each other without dressing the same way or having the same worldview.”  There is definitely some useful wisdom in that statement. 

So just how successful has the Haredi Center been?  According to the website, some 10,000 graduates have entered the workforce since the school opened, and they claim an 80% success rate.  It is difficult to gage the reliability of the Haredi Center website.  For one, accessing official data on how many employed Israelis are actually graduates of the Haredi Center would be nearly impossible.  Furthermore, the website clearly has an interest in making the school appear successful so as to attract students.  Ehrlich-Klein’s article is posted on Torah.org, a religious website, so there is also a suggestion of a bias there.

What we can say for sure, though, is that anyone who can pore over esoteric Hebrew texts for twelve hours and generally eschew the outside world world would probably feel right at home in the role of a programmer.   

Ethiopian Israeli Youth Culture

In his paper, “The Story of the Ethiopian Jews”, Ethiopian archaeologist, anthropologist, and historian Dr. Yohannes Zeleke suggests that Judaism may have existed in Ethiopia since “the time of Abraham”, and that-- based on archaeological evidence-- these “Hebraic people” in Ethiopia appear to have “practiced the earliest forms of Judaism, which existed in the pre-Judaic Culture of early Israelites and pre-Talmudic Judaism” (Zeleke, 1-2).  Zeleke then traces the history of Jews in Ethiopia, and concludes by saying that “Ethiopian Jewry is in a precarious situation”, namely that many synagogues, burial grounds, and sacred places are currently unprotected (Zeleke, 5).  Much of the Ethiopian Jewry’s cultural heritage stands to be lost if such sites remain abandoned.  Zeleke suggests the immediate establishment of Jewish community centers in Addis Ababa and Gonder.   I came across the article while looking over the Beta Israel of North America (BINA) website.  BINA is a cultural foundation based in New York whose mission includes “fostering the continuity of the Ethiopian Jewish (Beta Israel) cultural heritage”.

BINA is a nonprofit organization and Dr. Zeleke is an Ethiopian anthropologist, so the information is most likely reliable.  Of course, when an organization relies on donations and an anthropologist worries about the fate of his own culture, there is obviously some vested interest in getting the message across.  Nevertheless, it seems a legitimate message.

Based on some internet research and the “Out of Africa” chapter in The Israelis, by Donna Rosenthal, it appears that the Ethiopian Jewish culture is in much need of the efforts of BINA, and other like-minded people and organizations.   Jewish culture in Ethiopia was first threatened by seventh century Coptic Christians who forbade Ethiopian Jews from owning land and ostracized them from society, calling them falasha (strangers) and accusing them of having Satanic powers (Rosenthal, 154).  Strangely, this unique Jewish culture is now indirectly threatened by Israel itself, as thousands of Ethiopians have made aliyah to the Holy Land and, through assimilation, stand to lose much of what distinguishes them as a people.  On the whole, it seems like this assimilation is a good thing:  it has provided Ethiopian immigrants a more peaceful life and opportunity for advancement in a modern society.  However, the challenges they face are undeniable.  In Rosenthal’s words, “Few Jews have sacrificed so much to emigrate.  And no group has arrived with more handicaps:  blacks in a white society, preindustrial villagers in an urbanized, postindustrial country.  The Israeli government invests roughly four times more for each Ethiopian than for other immigrants.” (157).

Batia Eyob, a researcher of Ethiopian Jews and an Ethiopian Jew herself, is quoted in Rosenthal’s book saying “In Ethiopia we didn’t have a youth crisis.  Everyone knew his role.  The roles are not clearly defined here” (162).  One organization working with at-risk Ethiopian youth is Friends by Nature.  They are affiliated with the Ethiopian Israeli advocacy NGO, Tebeka  and work directly with communities in Israel to keep at-risk, mainly Ethiopian Israeli youth out of trouble and on-track with school.

Their model is setting up a community which encourages volunteerism and provides positive role models.  Organization members become actual members of the community.  They are involved in leading a variety of extracurricular activities as well as providing homework assistance.  The website claims great success with this model.  At the bottom of the page there are bios of some of the organizations founders, which include native Israelis, and Ethiopian immigrants.  The members are both religious and secular.  The organization hopes to address the challenges faced by young Ethiopians in Israel, as well as strengthen the Ethiopian Israeli identity.


Of course, not all of the Ethiopian Israeli youth are at-risk.  Some are flourishing quite well.  The Israel Association for Ethiopian Jews outlines some of the Ethiopian Israeli community’s many successes, including the establishment of a Fullbright Scholarship program for outstanding Ethiopian Israeli students who, following an all expenses paid graduate program in the United States, would return to Israel to work in their areas of expertise.

It appears that Ethiopian Israeli youth have the prospect of a bright future, though they clearly face some unique and daunting challenges.

Malca and Ayala Ingadeshet

While researching Ethiopian Israeli youth culture I discovered these talented sisters.  Their family immigrated from Ethiopia to Israel in 1980.  These days the girls are making some very good pop music largely inspired by Soul and R&B.  Samples of all the songs off Malca's first album are available here, and Ayala's site contains an interesting bio.

PLO's Demands According to Yasser Abed Rabbo

Netanyahu, Clinton, and Abbas

As discussed in the last posting on this blog, Netanyahu’s refusal to extend the freeze on Israeli settlements in the West Bank brought peace talks with the Palestinian Authority to a standstill.  The direct peace negotiations between Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas began September 2 with critical support from the U.S., Egypt, and Jordan.  When a freeze on Israeli settlement in the West Bank expired later that month, Abbas refused to consider further negotiations unless Netanyahu agreed to halt construction.  So far this has yet to happen, and, as has been the case for decades, there are currently diverse and complex positions on both sides of the issue.

The previous posting focused mainly on Israeli sources, so in this post I’d like to discuss some Palestinian ones.  This article from the Palestine News Network, though brief, does bring up some of the complexities inherent in Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations. 

The article starts by quoting PLO official Yasser Abed Rabbo as saying that the Palestinians would be willing to recognize Israel as the Jewish homeland provided that the borders of Israel be defined based on those in 1967 and do not include East Jerusalem.  Rabbo is then quoted as saying that, while Palestine has recognized Israel in the past, Israel has not done the same for Palestine.  According to U.S. spokesman Philip Crowley, this is just the kind of thing Palestinians and Israelis need to be discussing.  Secretary of State Hilary Clinton says she is “committed and hopeful” regarding the establishment of a just solution to the Israeli-Palestinian problem.

Yasser Abed Rabbo

Rabbo’s clear-cut statement and the optimism of the U.S. State Department belie the intricate complexity of the situation.  For one thing, as is mentioned in the Palestine News Network article, Abed Rabbo’s stance does not reflect that of all Palestinians.  Remarks from Amin Maqboul of the Fatah Revolutionary Council indicated that he and other like-minded Palestinians are not prepared to recognize Israel’s legitimacy.  Furthermore, even if all Palestinians were poised to cheerily accept the existence of Israel given the provisions outlined by Rabbo, there would still be major debates on the issue of borders.  It is fairly unlikely that Israelis would be prepared to relinquish East Jerusalem.  As seen in the last post, to ask anyone to leave a land they feel they have a claim on is a serious and controversial request, whether that land be a holy site or a rugged settlement.  This applies to both Israelis and Palestinians, and these issues come to the fore in the context of the currently stalled peace talks.

The article concludes with a brief summary of the peace talks and the expired settlement freeze.  It states that the international community considers the West Bank settlements illegal, and that their orientation separates the region into 64 disconnected areas making an establishment of a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders impossible. 

The article is fairly straightforward.  It does not provide a multitude of viewpoints, but it does show what appears to be the official stance of the PLO contrasted with a dissenting position from the Fatah Revolutionary Council.  The article does not address the Israeli position other than to say that the peace talks ended following the expiration of the settlement freeze.  The PNN is an independent news source operated by Palestinians, so it would make sense if it were heavily biased on the Palestinian side.  At least in this article, a major bias is not readily apparent.  If, however, it is contrasted with a similar article (such as this one from Arutz Sheva by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu), it could be argued that certain elements were left out of the story to make the Palestinian cause seem the more just one.  For example, the tone of the PNN article makes it sound like Palestinians have simple demands and are eager to recognize Israel following their fulfillment.  The Arutz Sheva article stresses the view that said demands are merely an attempt to “throw the diplomatic ball of wax back into... Netanyahu’s court,” and, furthermore, an advisor to President Abbas has been quoted as negating Rabbo’s statement, seemingly making the thrust of the PNN article irrelevant.  Israel's Minister of Regional Cooperation Silvan Shalom is quoted in the Arutz Sheva article as criticizing Rabbo’s demands as a way of getting all he can for Palestine without first sitting down to work out a compromise with the Israeli government. 

Both sides are understandably reluctant to make concessions.  The Palestinians are a people with no homeland, thousands of whom still live in refugee camps.  The Israelis have struggled for decades to establish and secure what they consider to be their own rightful homeland, and to do so by legitimate means.  The result of peace negotiations has the potential to greatly impact hundreds of thousands on both the Israeli and Palestinian sides.  There is certainly no easy answer, but the resumption of peace talks would at least be a step in the right direction.

Israeli Settlement Construction in the West Bank

A tense situation exists surrounding the 10 month freeze on Israeli settlement construction in the West Bank, which expired Sunday, September 26.  Despite calls from the Palestinian National Authority, the United States and others that the freeze be extended, so far it appears that the construction will carry on.  Haaretz reports that the planned construction of 2,000 new homes is scheduled to begin Tuesday across the West Bank in areas such as Shavei Shomron, Adam, Oranit, Sha'arei Tikva, Kedumim, and Karmei Tzur.

According to the Haaretz article,  "The number of housing units put up in the West Bank during the Netanyahu government is the lowest under any prime minister since the first Rabin government."  This move toward moderation, however, has not appeased either side of the debate, and the construction of Israeli settlements in the West Bank is a politically charged issue with local Israeli pressure from the right advocating increased settlements, while many leftist Israelis vehemently protest the renewed construction.   

 
This contemporary issue can be seen as an extension of the problem of Jewish dispersal and homeland rights dating back as far as the first diaspora.  It was certainly a series of complicated, multinational proceedings which resulted in the 1948 declaration of the state of Israel and the first Arab-Israeli war that established most of Israel's modern borders.  At that time, as now, both "The People of Israel" and Palestinian Arabs had equally compelling claims on the land.  Both then and now, there exist persuasive arguments on that topic amongst Jews and Arabs.

The Jewish settlers feel they have a right to the land and see Netanyahu's construction moratorium as a severe injustice.  This image (taken from the Boston Globe's website) of  "a settler's baby [sitting] in the ruins of a playground at the outpost of Maoz Ester after Israeli policemen demolished it for the 2nd time on June 3, 2009 in Maoz Ester, east of Ramallah" is an illustration of the plight of these Jewish settlers.  There are several images from the Globe's story which are worth taking a look at.

On the other side of the debate are the Palestinian National Authority (headed by President Mahmoud Abbas), the United States, and so-called "leftist" elements within Israel who call for a continued moratorium on settlement building (as well as an end to those West Bank settlements that are internationally recognized as illegal) in the interest of promoting peace between Palestinians and Israelis.  President Abbas had threatened to walk out of peace talks should the moratorium not be extended, but since the recent announcement that construction would resume, he now says he must consult with the Arab League before deciding how best to proceed.

The United States (via State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley) has announced its disappointment over Israel's allowing of the partial construction moratorium to expire.  Although no "direct negotiations" are scheduled, the U.S. Middle East envoy and his team are currently in touch with the Israeli and Palestinian authorities and realize that the situation presents a very real dilemma.  

 The situation is a complicated one involving many interests.  A degree of this complication is illustrated by this Arutz Sheva article outlining French President Nicolas Sarkozy's increased involvement in the international pressure on Israel to slow expansion into the West Bank.  The tone of this and other Arutz Sheva articles suggest that the 10 month moratorium was more than enough to appease Abbas (who demanded it in the first place and who, according to the articles, has since been uncooperative regarding peace talks), and furthermore that peace talks cannot proceed if Abbas refuses to recognize the existence of a Jewish state. 


The Arutz Sheva articles (written by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu and Hillel Fendel, respectively) appear to have a slightly more "pro-Israel" slant, as they seem to be portraying President Abbas as the main obstacle in the negotiation process.  Chaim Levinson and Barak Ravid's article for Haaretz is in my opinion more objective with its presentation.  


In light of these recent events, it is obvious that an effective and mutually acceptable solution will be exceedingly difficult to come by.  In Netanyahu's words, it will be "an historic peace" between Arabs and Israelis if indeed a compromise-- and with it a measure of peace-- is achieved.