16,374
edits
A Woman who Gave Birth: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
→Onset of Niddah before Birth
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
==Onset of Niddah before Birth== | ==Onset of Niddah before Birth== | ||
# Even if the doctor checks and sees that the cervix is 2 centimeters or more open in the 8th or 9th month the woman is still tahor if there wasn't any birth pangs yet.<ref>Shevet Halevi 4:106 writes that even though it is often the case that a woman's cervix opens up already in the sixth or seventh month, especially if it is her fourth baby or more, she is nonetheless tahora. Based on the Nodeh Beyehuda 116 he writes that since nothing came out when the cervix opened the woman remains tahora. This fits with the Chavot Daat 194:1. Taharat Habayit v. 2 p. 57 in discussing this topic cites the Bet Sharim who understands the Rambam (Pirush Mishnayot Niddah 21a) as a proof to the Chavot Daat. See, however, Igrot Moshe YD 2:76 who writes that if it were true that a woman's cervix opened in the last few weeks before the birth she would be automatically tameh. He just argues that it can't be the case since the poskim never discussed this problem. Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (Darkei Tahara p. 110) writes that if the cervix is 4cm open she is tameh. See [http://www.whattoexpect.com/pregnancy/symptoms-and-solutions/dilation-and-effacement.aspx whattoexpect.com] about early labor dilation of up to 3cm in up to weeks before the birth. [http://americanpregnancy.org/pregnancy-complications/incompetent-cervix/ americanpregnancy.org] for some medical discussion of the risks of a weakened cervix. </ref> | # Even if the doctor checks and sees that the cervix is 2 centimeters or more open in the 8th or 9th month the woman is still tahor if there wasn't any birth pangs yet.<ref>Shevet Halevi 4:106 writes that even though it is often the case that a woman's cervix opens up already in the sixth or seventh month, especially if it is her fourth baby or more, she is nonetheless tahora. Based on the Nodeh Beyehuda 116 he writes that since nothing came out when the cervix opened the woman remains tahora. This fits with the Chavot Daat 194:1. Taharat Habayit v. 2 p. 57 in discussing this topic cites the Bet Sharim who understands the Rambam (Pirush Mishnayot Niddah 21a) as a proof to the Chavot Daat. See, however, Igrot Moshe YD 2:76 who writes that if it were true that a woman's cervix opened in the last few weeks before the birth she would be automatically tameh. He just argues that it can't be the case since the poskim never discussed this problem. Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (Darkei Tahara p. 110) writes that if the cervix is 4cm open she is tameh. See [http://www.whattoexpect.com/pregnancy/symptoms-and-solutions/dilation-and-effacement.aspx whattoexpect.com] about early labor dilation of up to 3cm in up to weeks before the birth. [http://americanpregnancy.org/pregnancy-complications/incompetent-cervix/ americanpregnancy.org] for some medical discussion of the risks of a weakened cervix. </ref> | ||
# If a woman has birth pains and thought she was in labor but it was a false alarm, most poskim are lenient to assume that she isn't tameh.<ref> The Nachalat Shiva 2:9 (cited by Pitchei Teshuva 194:8) writes that if a woman thought she was in labor she is automatically tameh since once a woman sits on the birthing stool it is considered as though the cervix opened and once it opens automatically blood comes out. Most poskim disagree for one of two reasons: (1) The Chavot Daat 194:1 argues that we only assume that blood automatically comes out when the cervix opens if something actually came out. Since it was a false alarm and don't know anything came out we can assume no blood came out. Nodeh Beyehuda 116 agrees. (2) The Sidrei Tahara 194:25 argues the signs for giving birth includes her not being able to walk, however, since it was a false alarm and we see that she can walk afterwards, we know that she wasn't really in labor such that the cervix opened. Chatom Sofer 179 agrees. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe YD 2:76) prefers the reason of the Sidrei Tahara but the Shiurei Shevet Halevi 194:2:4 seems to side with the Chavot Daat.</ref> | # If a woman has birth pains and thought she was in labor but it was a false alarm, most poskim are lenient to assume that she isn't tameh.<ref> The Nachalat Shiva 2:9 (cited by Pitchei Teshuva 194:8) writes that if a woman thought she was in labor she is automatically tameh since once a woman sits on the birthing stool it is considered as though the cervix opened and once it opens automatically blood comes out. Most poskim disagree for one of two reasons: (1) The Chavot Daat 194:1 argues that we only assume that blood automatically comes out when the cervix opens if something actually came out. Since it was a false alarm and don't know anything came out we can assume no blood came out. Nodeh Beyehuda 116 agrees. (2) The Sidrei Tahara 194:25 argues the signs for giving birth includes her not being able to walk, however, since it was a false alarm and we see that she can walk afterwards, we know that she wasn't really in labor such that the cervix opened. Chatom Sofer 179 agrees. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe YD 2:76) prefers the reason of the Sidrei Tahara but the Shiurei Shevet Halevi 194:2:4 seems to side with the Chavot Daat. Taharat Habayit v. | ||
2 p. 50-3 is lenient.</ref> | |||
# Once she feels birth pains so much that she calls the doctor and birth is imminent that she needs to sit on birthing stool she is considered a niddah.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 2:75 based on Sidrei Tahara 194:25. Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (Darkei Tahara p. 110) argues that she isn't automatically a niddah when she can't walk, is sitting on the birthing stool, or has contractions 5 minutes apart but they do have the status of a veset.</ref> | # Once she feels birth pains so much that she calls the doctor and birth is imminent that she needs to sit on birthing stool she is considered a niddah.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 2:75 based on Sidrei Tahara 194:25. Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (Darkei Tahara p. 110) argues that she isn't automatically a niddah when she can't walk, is sitting on the birthing stool, or has contractions 5 minutes apart but they do have the status of a veset.</ref> | ||
# The husband may stay in the birthing room to provide emotional support but he is forbidden to see the actual birth since he is forbidden to see the areas which are usually clothed uncovered when she is a niddah. Furthermore, he may never see that are of a woman uncovered. It is equally forbidden for the to watch looking through glass.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 2:75. Darkei Tahara p. 111 seems to assume that the husband can be at the door but not in the room.</ref> | # The husband may stay in the birthing room to provide emotional support but he is forbidden to see the actual birth since he is forbidden to see the areas which are usually clothed uncovered when she is a niddah. Furthermore, he may never see that are of a woman uncovered. It is equally forbidden for the to watch looking through glass.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 2:75. Darkei Tahara p. 111 seems to assume that the husband can be at the door but not in the room.</ref> | ||
# Some say that the water breaking doesn't render her a niddah but it has the status of a veset.<ref>Darkei Tahara p. 110</ref> | # Some say that the water breaking doesn't render her a niddah but it has the status of a veset.<ref>Darkei Tahara p. 110. Badei Hashulchan 194:30 writes that the poskim consider a woman to be a niddah after the water breaks. However, Taharat Habayit v. 2 p. | ||
54 argues that it doesn't mean she is tameh automatically unless there is blood in the water. He quotes the Mahachavat Hatahara p. | |||
121 in the name of Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach as being lenient.</ref> | |||
==Sources== | ==Sources== | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
