188 lected Reform Responsa
procedures have been prescribed in greatest detail(Shulhan Arukh,
Even Ha-ezer 119ff). The various problem areas have been treated extensively by Rabbinic law; for example, the mental incapacity of the husband or wife, the disappearance of the husband, or his presumed death. In these instances and in ordinary divorce, Orthodox law has found itself in a difficult position, for only the man can actually grant a divorce, and if he is unwilling or unavailable there is little that can be done.
As divorce proceedings frequently involve a great deal of bitterness, the husband may be unwilling to provide a religious divorce(get) along with the civil divorce unless a large payment or some other concessions are made. Sometimes a religious divorce is stipulated as part of the arrangement in a secular divorce. The Conservative movement has sought to remove itself from this predicament by including a special statement in its marriage document. It provides for authority of a rabbinic court to grant a divorce in cases where the husband is unwilling to do so or if he becomes unavailable(Isaac Klein , A Guide to Jewish Religious Practice, pp. 98f). This kind of ante-nuptial agreement, as well as other possible solutions, have been suggested by various traditional scholars(Freiman, Seder Kiddushin Venisuin; Berkovits, Tenai Benisu-in Uveget), but they have met strong opposition among other Orthodox authorities.
The limitations of the Orthodox procedure for granting a divorce are, therefore, quite clear. In theory, divorce should be easy to obtain; in practice, the stipulation that only a male may initiate the proceedings, the lack of enforcing power of the Jew ish court and the many details necessary for the procedure make the get virtually unobtainable for many women.
The Reform Movement, since its inception, has concerned itself with the problems of both marriage and divorce. The matter was raised at the Paris Sanhedrin in 1806, when it was asked whether divorce was allowed and whether civil divorce would be recognized. It was clearly stated that a religious divorce would only be given if a valid civil divorce had preceded it(M.D. Tama[Kirwan tr.], Transactions of the Parisian Sanhedrin, 807, pp. 152ff). This statement weakened the status of religious divorce, although that was not the intent of the respondents.