fbpx

GET HOME DELIVERY! CLICK HERE »

ADVERTISE
pick up locations
HOME DELIVERY
donate

Jewish Journal

Connect. Inform. Inspire.

April 13, 2010

Harriet Benjamin, Wellness Community Co-Founder, 85

Leave a Comment / Obituaries /

Harriet Benjamin, co-founder of The Wellness Community, a groundbreaking network of cancer support centers, died at her Marina del Rey home on April 7 of lung cancer. She was 85 years old.

Harriet and her husband, Harold, started The Wellness Community in 1982, bringing free psychosocial support to cancer patients and their families. The concept — to turn cancer “victims” into their own advocates, reduce despair and enhance the possibility of recovery — filled a void in the treatment world and became a model emulated around the world. In 2009, The Wellness Community joined forces with a similar organization, Gilda’s Club, to form Cancer Support Community, which now has 50 support centers around the country and the world.

She is survived by her daughters, Ann and Lauren; her grandson, Jordan Garett (Pearl); and great-grandchildren Ana and Benjamin.

Harriet Benjamin, Wellness Community Co-Founder, 85 Read More »

Nepotism? Producers Guild accuses Israeli producer Avi Lerner and partner of false attribution

Leave a Comment / Uncategorized /

Nikki Finke got some juicy scoop on Israeli producer Avi Lerner and his partner Danny Dimbort, whose company Millennium Films is being accused of false attribution by the Producers Guild of America.

According to a letter written by PGA executive director Vance Van Petten, Dimbort’s granddaughter is set to receive a producing credit on the film “Solitary Man” which is slated for release in May. The film features a number of stars, including Michael Douglas, Susan Sarandon, Danny DeVito, Mary Louise-Parker and Jesse Eisenberg.

According to the PGA letter, another of the film’s producers reported that Dimbort’s granddaughter—who is described as “teenaged”—didn’t do diddly squat for the film and doesn’t deserve a credit. Van Petten has no qualms insinuating that the situation sounds like a shameless case of nepotism: “According to this producer, Ms. [Dana] Golumb not only is credited as ‘Produced by’ despite performing no discernible producing functions on the film, but also is Mr. Dimbort’s teenaged granddaughter.”

So much for influence and power. Even in Hollywood, higher-ups can’t get away with everything.

Nepotism? Producers Guild accuses Israeli producer Avi Lerner and partner of false attribution Read More »

The “Out”-ing of Dennis Ros

Leave a Comment / Opinion, United States /

The United States’ Jewish community was roiled this week when the news blog POLITICO reported that a senior member of the Obama Administration had indicated that Middle East adviser Dennis Ross might have dual loyalties.  The official’s words, at least as reported by Politico, were that “he ( Ross)  seems to be far more sensitive to Netanyahu’s coalition politics than to U.S. interests and doesn’t seem to understand that this has become bigger than Jerusalem but is rather about the credibility of this administration.”

The report was immediately denied by NSC chief of staff Denis McDonough who defended Ross, underscoring “his commitment to this country and to our vital interests.”

Denial apart, the very serious allegation that a U.S. Jewish diplomat may be focused on things other than the interests of the United States, should ring some warning bells.  It was exactly the aspersion cast against Benjamin Disraeli when he became prime minister of Britain in 1868 and then again in 1874, despite the fact that he had been baptized at the age of 12 and had been an Anglican since that time.  Much of the criticism of his policies was actually couched in anti-Semitic terms.  He was depicted in various antisemitic political cartoons with a big nose and curly black hair, referred to as “Shylock” and “abominable Jew,” and portrayed in the act of ritually murdering the infant Britannia.

Disraeli, to his credit, never denounced Jews or shied away from the acknowledgment of his Jewish roots.  In fact he evinced pride in his heritage, famously responding to a parliamentary slanderer : “Yes,
I am a Jew, and when the ancestors of the Right Honourable Gentleman were brutal savages in an unknown island, mine were priests in the Temple of Solomon.”  Disraeli saw no conflict of interest in using British power to support Jewish interests and would have almost certainly been a firm and committed Zionist, having penned his novel Tancred as a proto- Zionist blueprint.

Similarly Herbert Samuel, appointed the first High Commissioner for the British Mandate of Palestine in 1921, was pilloried as unfit to be a High Commissioner because of his own Jewish extraction.  Like Disraeli , Samuel was not a practicing Jew but before his appointment he was an open Zionist and had strongly favored the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine.  This made him anathema to the Arabs and distasteful to British elites, who were certain that his biases would turn the Arab world against Britain.  But his four years in Palestine were, if anything, a great disappointment to the Zionists who felt he had bent over backwards to mollify Arab opinion at the expense of the rights of Palestine’s Jewish community.  His appointment of the villainous antisemite Hajj Amin al Husseini as Grand Mufti was to have dire consequences for the region and his decision to slow the rate of Jewish immigration only added to Jewish frustration.  He left his post in 1925 hated by his Jewish brethren and looked at askance by his own government.

The two models offered by Disraeli and Samuel suggest to the Jewish members of the Obama Administration some interesting contrasts.  Either they can willingly renounce their attachment to Israel – its welfare and security, in the interests of the administration’s “credibility”  – or they can hold fast to their own identities and make the evident case that there is no divergence in interests between the two nations and that Israel’s security is in fact America’s as well.

For his part, Dennis Ross should have no cause for worry that he will be castigated as a traitor.  Much like Samuel and Disraeli,  he is not a practicing Jew and has built his career demonstrating even handedness as a Middle East envoy.

Dennis Ross’s credentials as an American patriot can therefore not be impugned.  There are, in fact, much better reasons to repudiate him.  They revolve around his abysmal diplomatic track record and his alarming absence of good judgment.  Ross was one of the great boosters of the 1993 Oslo Accords and throughout the 90s remained a die hard Oslo loyalist even as Israeli citizens were being blown to smithereens by Palestinian suicide bombers.  He was a genuine believer in Arafat and the Palestine Authority as credible partners for peace, even as incontrovertible proof mounted that the P.A’s leadership had masterminded the Second Intifada, sending the peace process spiraling into desuetude.  He still holds firm to his understanding of the Arab-Israeli conflict as a struggle over territory, when he is certainly astute enough to recognize that it is really a contest over Israel’s right to exist.

But be that as it may, the fire purportedly extinguished this week by NSC Chief of Staff Dennis McDonough, still smolders as a reminder to Jews both inside and outside this administration that they are being watched.  How these individuals respond to such surveillance – either with the defiance of a Disraeli or the submissiveness of a Samuel, may define not just American- Israeli relations for the duration of the Obama administration, but relations between the U.S. Jewish community and broader community as well.

Avi Davis is the President of the American Freedom Alliance in Los Angeles.  His daily writings and blog entries can be found at The Intermediate Zone.

The “Out”-ing of Dennis Ros Read More »

Netanyahu and Nuclear Deterrance

Leave a Comment / Israel, Opinion /

These are not the easiest of days for Benjamin Netanyahu.  The Israeli prime-minister is faced with a growing nuclear threat from Iran, collapsing relations with neighboring Arab countries and the worst crisis in U.S.- Israeli relations since the 1956 Suez War.  And just when he thought things couldn’t get any worse, along comes demands for him to attend a Washington D.C. conference on nuclear security where, he is told, Israel’s supposed best friends in the region are going to demand that Israel sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Someone give this man an aspirin.

It is certainly not the first time the Israeli PM has come under unrelenting pressure from multiple directions.  In November, 1998 during his first prime-ministership, Bill Clinton, pressing the full weight of his presidential office on Netanyahu, instructed him to sign the Wye River Memorandum, which was an updated version of the Oslo Accords, detailing security arrangements, IDF redeployments and economic matters between Israel and the PA.  The Memorandum would never be implemented.  IDF withdrawals from contested areas were not met by the stipulated reciprocal responses from the Palestinians – particularly with regard to the collection of weapons and the cessation of incitement.  Two years later, the outbreak of the Second Intifada made it all but irrelevant.

Yet at that time, Netanyahu was seen largely by his own constituency on the Israeli right, as a dupe.  He had signed an agreement which had given gratuitous concessions to a reprobate Palestinian dictatorship and made Israel seem weak.  His coalition partners had still not forgiven him for surrendering 50% of Hebron to Palestinian control the previous year and within a few weeks, having lost the confidence of his Knesset majority, his government fell.

Netanyahu has spent ten years nursing the bruises received from those encounters and in the interim seems to have learned some important lessons.  The first of them is that his political survival in Israel is dependent on his country’s projection of strength.  When it comes to Israel’s security, he now seems to understand that he should insist on his country’s right to reject any proposal that compromises it. 

Second, he now appreciates that U.S. Presidents will place their own priorities before that of Israel’s welfare, in order to accelerate broader policy goals. ( Clinton, we might remember, pegged his chances of earning a coveted Nobel Prize to Middle East peace). Third, peace is not going to come to Israel and the Middle East through Israeli concessions but rather through a demonstration of Israeli power respected by Arab regimes – forcing them to concede that they have no other choice but to come to the table.

Although the summit is intended to focus on nuclear security, leaving other broad topics such as non-proliferation and disarmament to different fora,  there will be an inevitable drift of discussion to those issues.  Netanyahu is aware that demands will be made on Israel by erstwhile friends Egypt and Turkey (who have been given lately to describing Israel as ” the greatest threat to peace in the region”) to sign the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty.  He is also aware of the deep ambivalence of the Obama administration towards his government.  There could be little relish for the idea of being dressed down again by Hilary Clinton.

Netanyahu’s aversion to attending the conference is, however,  more than mere discomfort at the thought of being confronted by Israel’s antagonists.  Perhaps alone among world leaders, he recognizes that his country stands as a hedge against Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons – which he rightly regards as the greatest calamity to befall our civilization .  He sees no evidence that the world is seriously tackling this issue and is convinced the United States government is more at ease castigating Israel about building Jerusalem apartments than dealing effectively with the threat.  He recognizes that within a short while Israel will be forced to launch a preemptive strike on Iranian nuclear facilities or else expose Israel and the world to the destabilizing reality of a nuclear Iran.

So Netanyahu’s Israel may soon become the very kind of rogue state that the Nuclear Security Summit will be trying to identify and outlaw.  If and when Israeli planes strike Iran, no world leader will praise Netanyahu.  Instead, he will be excoriated from Whitehall to Foggy Bottom as a lawless provocateur, attempting to instigate World War III.  Secretly, however,  they will all concede that what he authorized had precisely averted such a catastrophe –  even if it takes memoirs written many years into the future to produce such an admission.

Having learned the lessons of Wye then, Benjamin Netanyahu seems to have matured into a world leader who knows how to handle international pressure.  His tacit understanding that Israel must be left to make decisions about its own security and that Middle East peace is illusory without a demonstration of Israeli power, vouchsafe his suspicion that his presence at the conference will only damage Israel’s image and encourage continuing international lassitude on the matter of Iran.

Benjamin Netanyahu is not winning many popularity contest anywhere in the world.  Except, perhaps, in Israel – where he is beginning to demonstrate the way a world leader, in a time of crisis, should act.

Avi Davis is the President of the American Freedom Alliance in Los Angeles.  His daily writings and blog entries can be found at The Intermediate Zone.

Netanyahu and Nuclear Deterrance Read More »

Milken Students Support NCJHS in Time of Grief

Leave a Comment / Community /

On March 26, a delegation of 10 Milken Community High School students and two faculty members took a trip to New Community Jewish High School (NCJHS). The purpose of Milken’s visit was to show support for NCJHS as the end of the 30-day period of mourning following a funeral for Adir Vered.  Vered, a NCJHS 11th-grader, died in a car accident in February.

The trip was the brainchild of Milken seniors Alexandra Shadrow and Sharon Winter.  The Milken delegation hoped to build a connection between the two schools and discuss ways to honor Adir’s memory.

“It’s sad that it had to take a tragedy to make us realize that Milken and New Community should be there for each other, because our schools have so much in common,” Shadrow said.

Milken students took a brief tour of the NCJHS campus before joining the entire NCJHS student body in its tefilah service.

After an introduction by NCJHS Dean of Academic Affairs Marc Linder, the Milken delegation met with a group of NCJHS juniors and seniors. In the discussion that followed, students from both schools brainstormed ways to get the schools more involved with each other in memory of Adir.

Among myriad tentative proposals were plans to raise money for an organization close to Adir and the Vered family through a basketball tournament — Adir loved basketball – that would bring the schools together in friendly competition.

As Winter said, “This loss wasn’t just his family’s loss or New Community’s loss; it was the Jewish community’s loss, and all of us at Milken are part of that.”

Milken Students Support NCJHS in Time of Grief Read More »

Sherman Leads Town Hall on U.S.-Israel Relations

Leave a Comment / Community /

“I know why you’re here, and I want to address it, but I think it’s a tempest in a teapot,” Brad Sherman, the Democratic Congressman from Sherman Oaks, said at a town hall at Temple Aliyah in Woodland Hills on April 7. The meeting was called to focus on U.S.-Israel relations.

About 500 people, mostly middle-age and senior-citizen Jews, attended the discussion arranged by resident Rabbi Stewart Vogel, a self-proclaimed personal friend of the Jewish congressman.  In his introduction, the rabbi said, “Tonight is not a political endorsement. He is here to speak to the people.”

Those who came expecting Sherman to emphatically denounce the president’s recent behavior with regard to the building of apartments in East Jerusalem, or to warn of Obama’s ill will toward the Jewish State, were likely disappointed. “It would be much better if we didn’t have this tiff,” Sherman said, stating nevertheless his belief in a unified Jewish Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and that the buildings were not “settlements.”

The congressman spent the first half hour of his talk focusing on Iran: “HaShem put the oil in all the wrong places. The real threat to America and Israel is the Iran nuclear program. I’ve served three presidents, and they all did a terrible job with this. I’ve been pushing for sanctions against Iran. This administration is proposing ‘smart sanctions’ that are dumb sanctions,” Sherman said.

He warned the audience about the potential results of an Israeli strike against Iran. These included the death of many Israelis at the hands of Iran-backed Palestinians. “If Israel bombs Iran, gas prices will be $8 per gallon on Ventura Boulevard. If you think it’s hard to convince Gentiles why to be pro-Israel now …,” he added.

Vogel asked Sherman a series of questions submitted in writing by audience members. One asked why the president seems more interested in chastising Israel than the Palestinians and why anyone should believe that Obama is on Israel’s side.

“It is regrettable that Israel is held to a much higher standard than appropriate,” Sherman responded.

He said the $2.8 billion America gives in aid annually to Israel is a reason to believe in the president. “There is no stronger statement, and the aid is not going to be reduced by any of this,” he assured the audience. When Vogel asked why the president has not visited Israel yet, the audience broke into applause. “I don’t know; he should,” Sherman said.

The question of whether more Jews will vote Republican in the next election received the loudest applause. Vogel asked for a show of hands of how many voted for Obama and how many against. The vote appeared to be split 50-50.

Sherman reminded the group that Israel is not the central issue on the minds of non-Jewish Americans. “If we had a town hall in Lincoln, Neb., what Obama said to Netanyahu would not come up. You’ve got to remember, this is not the whole country. Omaha, Neb., exists, and most of you don’t have relatives there,” Sherman said.

Toward the end of the evening, Vogel accused his friend of “skirting the issues.” Sherman responded that he was not doing so and encouraged repeat questions. At one point, when asked about the future, Sherman turned toward the rabbi and said, “I think this is in your realm. I think we need divine intervention.”

Sherman Leads Town Hall on U.S.-Israel Relations Read More »

Parashat Tazriah-Metzorah (Leviticus 12:1-15:33)

Leave a Comment / Torah /

Pulling the Tazriah-Metzorah card in the divrei Torah lottery is not considered a lucky draw, but I seem to get it every time. I am repeatedly assigned the task of commenting on this double parashah, which elaborates on skin eruptions, bodily secretions, contact with dead bodies and fungal growths. It establishes a period of confinement for women following childbirth and articulates the prohibitions connected with menses. (Do I hear Julie Andrews singing “My Favorite Things”?)

These parshiyot detail the role of the priest in diagnosing these conditions and facilitating rituals that will release those afflicted from quarantine and return them to participation in the community and its ritual life. The arcane rituals and the yuck factor make translation into our modern context difficult. Yet these words, addressing community participation of vulnerable people, are applicable to our concern with finding God/Holiness at times of illness and vulnerability.

Translation is at the heart of our difficulties with these texts. Common English renditions of some of the parshiyot’s most potent words obscure their profound meanings and relevance to our spiritual concerns. Encountering these words in their own context and then re-contextualizing them for ourselves yields insight into ancient Jewish communal life as well as some of the major existential questions we wrestle with to find a connection between our own struggles and Holiness/God.

Let’s first explore the placement of Tazriah-Metzorah in the Bible. It is found in the middle of the Torah at the heart of Leviticus, the biblical book that addresses the question of how we “draw near” to God.
Leviticus’ focus on the priestly role and the sacrificial rituals offends 21st century sensibilities. However, its specificities reveal the intention of spirituality. Translating the word korbon as “sacrifice” describes concisely the ancient world’s technology for “drawing near” (a more accurate translation) to God. Within that world, that translation makes sense. This process involved bringing something precious (maybe a lamb raised or fruits grown and harvested), giving it to the priest as a sacrifice and watching it go up in smoke from an altar. This process transmuted the sacrificed physical object to something ethereal. It became smoke, rising to connect with a God above. The priests then ate other bits of the sacrifice as part of a communal meal. Think of it as a potluck barbecue to which everyone but the rabbis and their staff bring their most prized dish. The evening’s menu is organized around the theme: What can I bring to the community that will align me with Holiness? Such a question is certainly relevant to our roles in our communities today.

The second context: the world of ancient medicine. The sources of illness were mysterious. It was speculated that sin caused disease. Specifically, improper use of language was believed to cause leprosy. Imagine a world with no understanding of germs or scientific remedies. Childbirth and infancy were likely to be fatal. The priests, the ancient medical professionals, determined who was fit to participate in Temple rituals. The key word here is tamai, usually translated as “impure,” which describes the profound experience of those standing at the uneasy juncture between life and death, a liminal time when one might feel abandoned by God. “Drawing near” may feel impossible. Tamai more appropriately means unable to participate in ritual activities due to a sense of alienation from The Holy. How does one with a challenged body or a tzerbrochene neshome (shattered soul) get past these to once more take part in communal life? Call the rabbi.

The final context for examining Tazriah-Metzorah is the time that we read it: the beginning of the month of Iyar, the only full month during the time of counting the Omer. Just as in Iyar, when we purify ourselves to prepare for Shavuot, Tazriah-Metzorah is concerned with purification in times of profound experiences — such as illness, childbirth or grief — to prepare people to re-enter the sacred precinct. Purification, taharah, is not about cleansing from impurity; it is rather about realigning with the sacred. It might be compared to the Chasidic concept of bitul hayesh (selflessness), in which we are cleansed of ego and distraction in order to be present to our roles in the holy community.

These parshiyot are concerned with the purification/realignment (taharah) needed for those whose challenges have set them aside from the community (tamai) so they can again find proximity to God (korbon). They address our need to find a way to “draw near” to God when we are suffering and afraid. Tazriah-Metzorah reminds us, in the words of Chasidic commentator Sefat Emet, “God’s divinity is not to be found only in closeness, but even the distancing God does ultimately brings us near” (3:141).

Tazriah-Metzorah is far from an unlucky draw. It provides a window into the Holy of Holies, revealing not only ancient understandings of the priesthood, illness and healing, but also a primary spiritual concern: How do we, even when we are broken, find a way to be close to Holiness?

Anne Brener is an L.A.-based psychotherapist and spiritual counselor. She is the author of “Mourning & Mitzvah: Walking the Mourner’s Path” (Jewish Lights, 1993 and 2001) and she teaches at the Academy for Jewish Religion, California. Rabbi Brener is a member of Temple Israel of Hollywood and can be reached at {encode=”mekamot@aol.com” title=”mekamot@aol.com”}.

Parashat Tazriah-Metzorah (Leviticus 12:1-15:33) Read More »

Obituaries April 16-22, 2010

Leave a Comment / Obituaries /

David Breverman died Jan.12 at 93. He is survived by his wife, Rhoda; son, Robert (Susie); four grandchildren; two great-grandchildren; brother, Abraham (Sharma); and many nieces and nephews. Hillside

Darin Childers died Jan. 13 at 43. He is survived by his wife, Lucretia; daughter, Charmaine; son, Zachary; parents, Walter and Miriam; brother, Dean; and two grandchildren. Malinow and Silverman

Lillian Dworsky died Jan. 7 at 90. She is survived by her son, David (Janet); four grandchildren; three great-grandchildren; and sister, Eva. Malinow and Silverman

Edward I. Finston died Jan. 19 at 91. He is survived by his wife, Poppy; daughter, Yael (Jacob); sons, Steven (Diane) and Robert (Sharon); nine grandchildren; and one great-grandchild. Mount Tamalpais Cemetary

Sonya Goldman died Jan. 23 at 88. She is survived by her son, Marl. Malinow and Silverman

Brenda Gottlieb died Jan. 11 at 69. She is survived by her daughters, Stephanie (Joe) Ingardia, Michelle (Michael) Collins and Lisa (Scott) Birch; son, Stephen (Lisa); and brother, Darryl (Susan) Fried. Malinow and Silverman

Coca Greenblatt died Jan. 7 at 79. She is survived by her daughter, Edith; son, Kim (Sharren); sister, Dolly (Richard) Wasserman; and two grandchildren. Malinow and Silverman

Erika Heller died Jan. 21 at 92. She is survived by her son, Larry. Malinow and Silverman

Gertrude Jacobs died Jan. 19 at 97. She is survived by her daughters, Marilyn (Arnold) Grant and Rita Strochak; son, Martin (Linda); seven grandchildren; and 12 great-grandchildren. Malinow and Silverman

David Javaheri died Jan. 7 at 71. He is survived by his wife, Guseppa; daughter, Shoshana (Kayvon) Yadidi; son, Dany; five grandchildren; sisters, Sarah, Nostrat and Aluma Tabon; and brothers, Hezghia, Yedidia and Rabenu. Malinow and Silverman

Mary Kantrowitz died Jan. 13 at 87. She is survived by her son, Frank. Malinow and Silverman

Barbara King died on Jan. 13 at 88. She is survived by her sons, Paul and Bruce; five grandchildren; and brother, Mark Lee. Malinow and Silverman

Robert Krieger died Jan. 22 at 96. He is survived by his daughter, Ellen Heller. Malinow and Silverman

Louis Kulkin died Jan. 22 at 93. He is survived by his wife, Jennie; daughter, Eileen (Gabriel) Wizman; sons, Norman and Ralph; two grandchildren; and two great-grandchildren. Mount Sinai

Victoria Levin died Jan. 16 at 96. She is survived by her daughter, Leah (Gerald) Granof; son, David (Carol); six grandchildren; and eight great-grandchildren. Malinow and Silverman

Benjamin Norton Jr. died Jan. 2 at 89. He is survived by his wife, Rose; and sons, Philip Savenick and Ben III. Malinow and Silverman

Betty Podgornik died Jan. 14 at 84. She is survived by her daughter, Lori Daniel. Malinow and Silverman

Marvin Polan died Jan. 5 at 75. He is survived by his wife, Dianne. Malinow and Silverman

Stephen Sandler died Jan. 5 at 60. He is survived by his wife, Susan; sons, Matt and Ian (Melissa); mother, Jean Candiotti; sisters, Nancy, Julie and Rachelle Candiotti; and brother, Alan (Robin). Malinow and Silverman

Stephanie Schiller died Jan. 12 at 60. She is survived by her sons, Anthony and Cameron; and brother, Andrew Wolf. Malinow and Silverman

Zinaida Sentivanyi died Jan. 23 at 87. She is survived by her niece, Yelena (Sergei Shramkovsky) Masenko. Mount Sinai

Jane Silverman died Jan. 7 at 57. She is survived by her sister, Norma. Malinow and Silverman

Bessie Simon died Jan. 5 at 99. She is survived by her daughter, Phyllis Kesner; son, Robert (Ilene); seven grandchildren; and 15 great-grandchildren. Malinow and Silverman

Sidney Stiller died Jan. 23 at 91. He is survived by his daughter, Judy Garodnick. Malinow and Silverman

Mollie Tratch died Jan. 20 at 95. She is survived by her daughter, Marilyn Gold; son, Martin (Marilyn) Gold; two grandchildren; and two great-grandchildren. Mount Sinai

Matthew Varon died Jan. 6 at 21. He is survived by his parents, Russ and Debbie; and sister, Morgan. Malinow and Silverman

Donald Wolff died Jan. 1 at 76. He is survived by his niece, Robin Cummings. Malinow and Silverman

Barbara Zolla died Jan. 6 at 69. She is survived by her husband, Marshall; daughter, Deborah Elizabeth; and sister, Jane. Malinow and Silverman

Obituaries April 16-22, 2010 Read More »

Business Owners View Greenhouse Gas Reduction as Cultural Imperative

Leave a Comment / Green Living /

In September 2006, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed into law Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the Global Warming Solutions Act, regulating greenhouse gas emissions throughout the state. This year, the California Air Resources Board will adopt mechanisms to reduce those emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 — a 25 percent reduction — and 80 percent below that by 2050. Such landmark legislation puts California ahead of the country in combating climate change, but critics question whether it will be too expensive to a state already under economic stress.

A campaign to suspend implementation of AB 32, the California Jobs Initiative, is currently collecting signatures to qualify a measure for the November ballot that would suspend the law until the state reaches an unemployment level of 5.5 percent. The group, led principally by Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, has close to $1 million, 70 percent from Texas-based oil companies like Valero Energy Corp. and Tesoro Corp., to qualify a ballot initiative. Californians for Clean Energy Jobs, a group supporting implementation, says AB 32 will create jobs and that suspension would effectively kill the law along with California’s thriving green jobs sector, one of the state’s few economic bright spots. Recent polls show that anywhere from 58 to 66 percent of Californians support the law’s implementation.

So do a number of Jewish business owners who see a connection between environmental protection and Jewish ideology. Michael Tanenbaum of The Oomph! Company, a strategic branding firm, explained that “as religious Jews, we say a blessing before and after we eat. Remember why we’re saying it; we’re borrowing something from this planet and we have to give something back. Everything is on loan to us.”

One of the main arguments against AB 32 is its economic impact, but studies citing high costs and job losses have been sharply criticized. The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) went in search of an energy-intensive small business willing to open its books for UCS economists to conduct a study of the impacts of AB 32 on California’s more than 3 million small businesses. The Border Grill Restaurant in Santa Monica, owned by Susan Feniger and Mary Sue Milliken, was happy to volunteer. Feniger says they saw participating in the study as an opportunity to learn what changes they might make to increase their restaurants’ sustainability.

Inspired by their participation in an event at Monterey Bay Aquarium six years ago, Feniger and Milken have already been making changes, including switching to organic rice and beans, getting their customers off of bottled water, implementing recycling and composting programs, using biodegradable cleaning products, LED lights, Energy Star-rated appliances, putting in a water-saving vegetable cleaning system and using Forest Stewardship Council-certified materials in the construction of their most recent restaurant, Street.

The results of the UCS study showed that the impacts of the legislation on businesses like Border Grill, which uses more energy than most, will be negligible: an increase of .03 cent per every $20 a diner spends, assuming the restaurant does nothing more to become energy efficient. Feniger says it’s a minuscule amount, adding that AB 32 is worth implementing even if it were to cost more.

“This is what we need to be doing in order to move forward to save the environment and, in the long run, we’re going to save money. There’s almost no cost, and to not do this doesn’t make sense.”

Talking about Republican gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman’s vow to suspend AB 32 on her first day in office, Feniger is unequivocal: “That would be a big step backward for the business community.”

Feniger says her interest in sustainability is tied to her identity. “I grew up with a Midwest Jewish father who was a great business man and taught us from the time we were young kids about the importance of giving back,” Feniger explained.

“Even though it isn’t costing us more, the bigger picture is what’s important: taking care of people, the environment and our lives,” she said. “Obviously in there is making money, but in there is also responsibility to people and the world … being Jewish, being a woman, being a lesbian make me feel it’s critical that we stand up for the things that are important in our lives.”

Rabbi David Saperstein of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism also sees links between Judaism and environmentalism. “Jewish tradition teaches that we all have the responsibility, as individuals, to do our part to confront the injustices we see in the world around us. None of us can solve this global problem alone, but all of us must be part of the solution.”

Susan Frank, executive vice president of Better World Group and coordinator for the California Business Alliance for a Green Economy, says that those companies on board with supporting AB 32 have a great opportunity to benefit, whether as innovators or by cost savings through increased efficiency. She recommends that small businesses embrace the legislation and start by researching and taking advantage of the energy efficiency incentives listed in the Cool California Small Business Tool Kit (coolcalifornia.org).

Frank also believes there are Jewish cultural ties to environmental stewardship. “I can suggest that in Judaism we don’t believe in heaven or hell. This is it. This is the life you lead. The notion that this is it, our only time on Earth, our only planet — somehow, that is part of our makeup. And if this is it, then we have to do what we can in the time we’re here to have an impact on these issues. It’s our cultural imperative,” she said.

Business Owners View Greenhouse Gas Reduction as Cultural Imperative Read More »

Baby, How Times Have Changed: A Look at Childbirth Through the Ages

Leave a Comment / Health /

Humans have been mystified by pregnancy and the birth process since Cain first peeped his head out of Eve’s womb. In our desire to perfect the way in which the next generation is brought into the world, we’ve scrutinized both childbirth and the women going through it.

In her new book, “Get Me Out: A History of Childbirth From the Garden of Eden to the Sperm Bank,” Dr. Randi Hutter Epstein, a medical journalist, explores the myths, medical advancements and intrusions of everyone from family members to male midwives in the birthing process. Delving deep into the annals of history, she writes about the practical and not-so-practical ways that women have attempted to have healthy babies — everything from eating rabbit’s testicles (the secret to having a boy in the Middle Ages) to the insistence of feminists that women be placed under twilight sedation during labor at the turn of the last century.

Epstein offers a practical history of birth and the ways in which societal norms have shaped the process over the years.

Jewish Journal: What gave you the idea for the book?

Randi Hutter Epstein: As a doctor, journalist and mother of four, I’ve always had this interest in childbirth. When I started to investigate, I saw that the history was just fascinating. I’ve also always had this interest in what I call the great dawn of medicine. What doctors tell you to do is often based on hunches and common sense, but what’s common sense today wasn’t common sense years ago. I focused on childbirth for another reason — the patients are healthy and it sets up more tension between doctors and patients. Lastly, I’m just fascinated by the science of sperm and egg.

JJ:There’s still so much that we don’t understand. Did you learn anything new about what causes pregnancy to actually happen in the first place?

RHE: We figure that the sperm that is the fastest and swims the straightest has to be the one that gets to the egg first. I spoke to a scientist who does sperm research, and he said that some of these loser-looking sperm that are swimming around crooked or slower or going around in circles might be the winners, because they might be the ones sniffing out where the egg is.

JJ: What was the most interesting thing you learned about childbirth or the history of childbirth?

RHE: When I started doing the book, I thought things are so different today. Those of us who [have gone] through pregnancy in the last 10 to 20 years [were] just bombarded with advice, and a lot of times [it was] conflicting advice. But I was surprised at all the pregnancy advice books that were written way back when. Women have always been bombarded with advice, and we’ve always tried to figure out which advice we should listen to, which we shouldn’t — whether it was: Do we have a midwife or a man? Do we use forceps or not? And of course today, all these questions about which tests we need.

JJ: In the book, you discuss the way that the man-midwife became popular several hundred years ago. Yet men considered it akin to adultery, and it sounds like it was no picnic for women [the vagina was required to be covered by a sheet for decorum, so the physician could not see what he was doing]. How and why did the man-midwife take off?

RHE: From my research, when forceps came about, that was considered high-tech. Men were doctors and male midwives had the forceps, and there was a feeling that, gosh, maybe we should go that high-tech route. That, combined with the fact that in the late 1800s, obstetrics as a specialty in medicine started to professionalize and [they] wanted to increase their status.
I think that also male midwives felt smarter than [female] midwives. Even though they might never have seen a baby born, the feeling was: Why would you want to be delivered by this grandmother in your village, even if the grandmother had tons of experience?

JJ: In discussing feminism’s influence on childbirth over the years, one of the things you said was that a push for twilight sleep [at the turn of the 20th century] was ironic coming from feminists. Do you think that there is a feminist way to give birth in the modern day?

RHE: I think that the feminist way to give birth today is to be very informed, which of course is more difficult now because there are so many tests and so much to know. I would say that the feminist way to give birth is to inform yourself and be able to have an educated conversation with your doctor.
We are also so judgmental about the way other women give birth that there are women who feel badly if they choose to go for the epidural. Know what’s going on, and then once you’re informed, if you feel that you want the epidural, fine. And if you feel you want to go natural childbirth, that’s fine.

JJ: With documentaries like ‘The Business of Being Born,’ do you think that the arguments about C-sections are just another way of rebelling against the authority of doctors?

RHE: I think that these are repeats of what we’ve done in the ’70s. ‘The Business of Being Born’ was very pro-natural childbirth, and I think it’s so easy in anything where there is a gray area — whether it’s medicine or politics or whatever — to take one side of view. Natural childbirth is not for everyone. And not everyone needs a C-section.

JJ: What is the future of childbirth?

RHE: It’s so hard to predict. I think that [with] everything that comes along, we’re all shocked. IVF was shocking. Doctors come up with these ideas and we think they’re obscene, and then everyone does them. But I think people are going to laugh at what we’re doing now. People will say: That’s the way you chose embryos, that’s the way you choose sperm? Women were smoking in the ’50s, until that was considered unhealthy. Who knows what we’re doing now?

Baby, How Times Have Changed: A Look at Childbirth Through the Ages Read More »