The Rodef Leniency Endangers the Life of the Mother

This Shabbat begins the seven Haftorot of Consolation. These are special readings for the seven consecutive weeks between Tisha B' Av and Rosh Hashanah. During this time ,we will examine Jewish legal opinions regarding the status of unborn human life that have led to the destruction of too many innocent lives in the womb. 

Let’s start with the most often quoted and defended, the application of the rodef principle to the unborn child. Only the Almighty knows how many innocent children have been sacrificed on the altar of this legal opinion given to us by rabbinic authorities in the second century of the common era.

In Judaism, a rodef, or a pursuer, is a man or a woman who makes an intentional action to mortally harm someone else. The rodef leniency requires an abortion be performed when a pregnancy poses a threat to the mother's physical life.

The rodef is referenced in the Mishneh Torah, a highly regarded legal treatment of all 631 positive and negative Torah commandments. It was written by Rabbi Moses Maimonides between 1170 and 1180 CE. Number 293 of the negative commandments states to: not have pity on the pursuer. Rather, he should be killed before he kills or rapes the person he is pursuing, as Deuteronomy 25:12 states: “And you shall cut off her hand. Show no pity.” https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/901723/jewish/Negative-Commandments.htm#lt=primary

The context is seen in Deuteronomy 25:11. If two men are fighting, and the wife of one comes to rescue her husband from the one striking him, and she reaches out her hand and grabs his genitals, you are to cut off her hand. You must show her no pity.

Grabbing a man’s procreative organ was considered a mortal threat and so the woman's action was viewed as an imminent danger to the man’s life. It was legal to cut off her hand so she couldn’t attack him. Cutting off her hand and so saving her life was better than killing her outright. https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah,_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.1.7?lang=bi

The expansion of the rodef principle to a breech baby in the womb is attributed to ‘our sages.’ These rabbis were the legal authorities whose opinions comprise the Talmud, the basis of Jewish law. The directive to have no pity on the woman and to cut off her hand would pertain to having no pity for a breech baby and cutting off the baby’s limbs. In this case, the baby's life could not be saved by cutting off only a hand. https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah,_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.1.9?lang=bi

Keep in mind that unborn babies are invited into the womb and have no intention to harm anyone. Therefore, they should be exempt from liability and spared execution according to the rodef principle. Pity the law ignores this point.

Loyalists who venerate our sages may feel uncomfortable reevaluating this opinion. Out of habit or respect or convenience, they may be compelled to apply this legal opinion still today.

Since saving a life is the most important principle in Jewish tradition and culture, let’s be uncomfortable while we have a discussion that may help save some innocent lives and avoid a lot of heartache, too. Just for a few minutes please set aside any opinions of habit, a phrase coined by Maimonides in his book, Guide to the Perplexed.

While Maimonides repeated the opinions of our sages nearly 1500 years after their inception, he also cautioned against maintaining opinions of habit that keep us from finding truth. He endorsed updating Jewish legal opinion in the light of scientific discovery. As a doctor, he would have looked favorably upon medical improvements that save human lives. See Torah vs Science.

Maimonides can be compared to our founding fathers who abhorred slavery but who chose to not make the founding of our nation contingent upon emancipating slaves. That would have to come later and it did. Likewise, Maimonides condemns child sacrifice in negative commandment Number 7 in his Mishneh Torah. The time to protect unborn babies from dismemberment abortion would come after his time. 

Now is that time. Here are a few ideas to ponder.

1. The opinion to apply the rodef principle to a breech baby was a legal interpretation of a philosophical discussion. It had no practical application. In our sages' time, saving a woman’s life by dismembering her full term breech baby was totally unrealistic. Without sterile instruments, ultrasound guidance and antibiotics, success was highly improbable. Most certainly both mother and child died. See abortion procedures.

Even with these modern methods, dismemberment abortion, done in later terms of pregnancy, is very dangerous. Frequently, it sends women to the ER for perforated internal organs and uncontrolled hemorrhaging. Without this emergency care, many women would die. Nevertheless, sometimes the procedure kills them. Possible death, terrible injury and infertility due to internal organ damage are high prices to pay for exercising reproductive rights. See Operation Rescue.

When dismemberment abortion is done to treat a mother’s medical condition that becomes acute later in pregnancy, it actually poses an increased risk to the mother’s life. The preferred treatment is preterm delivery by c-section to minimize the danger to the mother and maximize the baby’s chances of survival. The truth is that it is never necessary to torture a baby to death in the womb to save a mother’s life. See The Pro-Life Reply to: Is Abortion Ever Medically Necessary?

2. Applying the rodef principle to a breech baby contravened many prohibitions in Torah against shedding innocent blood and child sacrifice. It violated other laws that clearly directed Jews to be kind to the fatherless. the orphan and the widow. The baby in the womb targeted for execution is an orphan, having no parental advocate. As we are reminded in Jeremiah 22:3, This is what Adonai says: “Do what is right and just; rescue the wronged from their oppressors; do nothing wrong or violent to the stranger, orphan or widow; don’t shed innocent blood in this place.

In Devarim 4:2, Moses warns against adding to the Torah text. He cautions about the terrible consequences of revising the law to suit circumstances or to satisfy personal preferences. It can be reasoned that the Almighty omitted dismemberment abortion for breech birth in Torah because He knew it would cause much misery and pain. He knew it would eventually be misused to destroy many lives. He knew that preterm delivery would humanely solve this problem. 

3. From its first narrow definition for a breech birth, danger to a mother’s life is now weaponized against unborn babies who pose absolutely no threat to the mom’s physical wellbeing. We are now told that the baby is expendable to save a career, to save a college education, to save a relationship, to save a family’s reputation, to save a woman from mental distress, to save the expense of parenting or of parenting a special needs child, to save a father from responsibility, to save a baby from life’s difficulties, to save a waistline, or a nonrefundable vacation downpayment, or whatever.

An abundance of pregnancy care support and adoption options now address the needs of pregnant mothers and fathers. There weren’t available in ancient times. This ‘dangerous’ nonsense continues because life has become a burden to avoid rather than a gift to embrace and an obligation to assume.

In the challenging cases of coerced rather than willful abortion, it’s easy to come to the wrongful conclusion that abortion saves lives. This is faulty reasoning made possible only by someone who has no spiritual sensitivity, who cannot perceive a loving, omnipotent Divine presence who cares for us. Moral, practical and spiritual support that saves both mother and baby from homelessness and abuse requires a greater commitment than merely funding an abortion that will cause other long term problems. As Jews, saving lives means sacrificing our time and resources, not an innocent child in the womb or a mother’s peace of mind or a father’s duty.

Negative Commandment Number 294 in the Mishneh Torah states, Not to punish a person forced to commit a sin, as Deuteronomy 22:26 states: “Do not do anything to the maiden.” This ought to console those pressured to destroy their own child. For Jewish women and men who suffer after abortion whatever the circumstances, we offer a Teshuvah based, confidential and non-judgmental healing program called Tikvat Rachel. 

Our future depends upon L'dor Vador, from generation to generation. Let’s do all we can to insure Jewish posterity. Let’s be open to the notion that old ideas need replaced with new ones. Let’s stop endangering and start protecting both mother and baby.

Please share this post on your social media to amplify our message in this troubled world. Thank you.

Cecily Routman 

May there be abundant peace from Heaven, and good life upon us and upon all Israel. Amen.

Cecily Routman is the founder and president of the Jewish Pro-Life Foundation. She opposes abortion homicide in general and among Jews in particular and laments secular policy making in Israel that results in loss of Jewish life and delays the messianic redemption. She envisions a Torah based holy Land of Israel and a world that respects the life of every human being from conception.