(Image source: Drew Angerer for Getty Images)
The Schools
Every morning, five days a week, hundreds of yellow buses transport thousands of boys, all wearing the pais (side curls) and tzitzit (knotted tassels) that mark them as ultra-Orthodox Jews, to schools around New York and New Jersey.
These boys are now at the center of a legal and philosophical battle. On one side are people who believe that every American child is entitled to a basic education sufficient to allow them to make their way in the world. On the other are those who believe that parents in a religious community have unlimited rights to decide what their children learn.
All ultra-Orthodox children attend religious schools, called yeshivas. But within the Hasidic world, a subset of the ultra-Orthodox population, many boys attend schools in which the languages of instruction are Yiddish and Hebrew and few if any secular subjects are taught. In New York City alone, there are over 100 Hasidic schools in which over 50,000 boys are receiving inadequate secular education. The typical boy gets only 90 minutes of secular instruction, in English, four days a week, between 3rd and 8th grade. The remainder of the school day, which can stretch to ten hours, is focused on the study of Torah and rabbinic commentary. At least one Brooklyn school proudly teaches no secular subjects at all.
When these boys graduate, many are functionally illiterate in English and cannot pass the GED. Some only learn to write their names in English when it comes time for them to sign their marriage certificates. One parent told a reporter that her child could barely read the side of a cereal box. Another parent’s ten-year-old boy was told by his teacher that the planets revolve around the Earth. A father of three boys lamented that they were unable to read English street signs and cautionary signs at the zoo. Should these boys or young men wish to leave the Hassidic world, they have grave difficulties finding jobs. (Because girls are not expected to spend their days studying Torah, and because they are often the breadwinners and the ones who engage with the outside world, their English and secular education is somewhat more adequate.)
Historically, this was not the case. In the “Golden Age” of Hasidism in Europe in the 18th and 19th centuries, Torah study was not a typical lifetime occupation. But by the second half of the 20th century, immigration, pogroms, and, finally, the Holocaust, eradicated the Hasidic communities in Eastern Europe, whose remnants took root and flourished in the United States and Israel. In both countries, social welfare safety nets such as food stamps and housing subsidies enabled lifelong Torah study to become more normative. Men can have large families and still devote most of their time to Torah study, relying on a mix of spousal income, family and community support, and social services to keep a roof over their heads and food on the table, however frugally. Many men do work within the community, for example as teachers.
Yeshiva education exists to support this way of life. Children of both sexes begin school early, at age three, in part to relieve parents of some of the burden of large families. For boys, instruction until the 4th grade is entirely in Yiddish, and no secular subjects are taught. Between the ages of eight and thirteen, boys get ninety minutes of secular study a day, mostly in math and English, with no science or history. At age thirteen, secular study ends.
As Shulem Deen describes in his memoir of life in the Hasidic town of New Square, New York, All Who Go Do Not Return, even those ninety minutes are of poor quality, because the rebbes, the religious teachers who run the school and teach the religious classes, deride secular study as a waste of time. Some of the boys routinely leave school at the start of the secular class block, claiming that their parents forbade them to study English. Boys are allowed to “blow off” their secular studies, eating and chatting with their backs to the secular teacher, in contrast to their strict obedience to religious teachers. “Bedlam and general lack of cooperation” characterized classes taught by “outside” teachers, according to Robert Kamen, in Growing Up Hasidic: Education and Socialization in the Bobover Hasidic Community.
(Image source: Andrew Lichtenstein/Corbis via Getty Images)
Unfortunately, lack of English makes employment difficult. As Deen watched a friend fail at a programming course because of his poor English, he wondered, “[W]as this to be my children’s fate, to be raised not only with rigidly defined roles but deprived of any ability to step out of them?”
The paucity of secular education for boys is compounded by the rigorous enforcement of cultural isolation. At the end of World War II, the tattered remnants of Hasidic communities faced a dilemma: where should they go to rebuild their lives? New York City was then home to the largest number of Jews in the non-communist world. Thus, to quote Kamen, it “offered the promise of regeneration to a confused and decimated culture.”
However, America also signified the dangers of assimilation. “Many of the new immigrants feared that what the death camps began, life in America would finish,” wrote Kamen. As he points out, the Hasidim are unique in their determination to resist integration into the prevailing culture, while settling down right in the middle of it. The Amish and Mennonites and other similar groups chose rural environments consonant with their largely agrarian lifestyle. Rejection of technology such as telephones and automobiles also served as a barrier to integration.
However, the average Hasidic individual resides in a bustling American city and utilizes the subway for daily commutes, a mobile phone for communication, and potentially relies on public assistance. In such urban settings, maintaining one’s metaphorical fences and upholding strict religious practices can be quite challenging. It becomes easier for young Hasidic individuals to venture into unfamiliar territories, such as sneaking into cinemas or trying forbidden foods. Education plays a crucial role in keeping the community cohesive.
The Legal Battle
Historically, underperforming yeshivas received little scrutiny until Naftuli Moster established Young Advocates for Fairness in Education (YAFFED) in 2012. The organization aims to ensure that Hasidic schools in New York provide a comprehensive education. Moster, a product of limited secular education in Hasidic schools, faced significant difficulties upon leaving the community. The legal struggle ensued to enforce New York Education Law Section 3204, which mandates non-public schools to offer an education equivalent to public schools. However, the lack of government enforcement due to political influences within Hasidic communities has been a major roadblock.
Challenges in Upholding Children’s Rights
The debate around the free exercise clause and parental rights versus children’s rights intensifies. The clash between preserving religious traditions and providing children with the tools for a successful future raises ethical questions. While religious communities advocate for autonomy in education, denying children fundamental knowledge for personal growth seems contradictory to American values. The tension between individual freedoms and communal norms poses a dilemma for a liberal society like the United States.
Ensuring Children’s Access to Education
The Hasidic community’s unique way of life in America highlights the balance between religious liberty and children’s rights. While parents have authority over their families, children deserve the opportunity to make informed choices as adults. Protecting children’s access to education is a fundamental obligation of the state, allowing them to shape their own destinies. Legal philosopher Joel Feinberg’s concept of a “child’s right to an open future” underscores the importance of providing children with the necessary tools to navigate their lives independently.
Children’s dependency rights stem from their reliance on others for necessities like food, shelter, and protection. Some rights, such as the right to marry or practice a religion, can only be exercised by adults. “Rights-in-trust,” as defined by Feinberg, are rights reserved for children until they reach adulthood. Adults can violate these rights by taking actions that prevent children from exercising them later in life. For example, child marriage limits a child’s ability to choose their own spouse as an adult. These rights, which encompass essential adult rights, must be safeguarded now to ensure they can be utilized in the future. Together, they form what Feinberg refers to as “the child’s right to an open future.”
Hasidic communities infringe upon their children’s right to an open future by failing to provide them with an education that prepares them for the outside world. While the communities prioritize instilling values like righteousness and family loyalty, they must also equip their children with the necessary skills to make independent choices. The state has a duty to ensure that children have access to these fundamental tools.
Dena S. Davis, J.D., PhD, is emerita Endowed Presidential Chair in Health and Professor of Religion Studies at Lehigh University. She currently resides in New York City.
