Chicago, IL – When Nelson Derbigny said he met Elina Margolina in 1995. The two got married had a child — but divorced in 2007.
Join our WhatsApp groupSubscribe to our Daily Roundup Email
On Wednesday — after both since remarried and Margolina became a devout Hasidic Jew — the two sat on opposite sides of a Cook County courtroom for the start of a bitter trial to determine custody of their now 8-year-old son.
The fight centers on religious tradition, as Margolina — who is in her late 30s — claims Derbigny’s refusal to keep a kosher household and ensure the boy wears a yarmulke to school is sabotaging the child’s religious upbringing. She wants sole custody of the boy and wants an earlier joint custody agreement to be dissolved.
But Derbigny, 52, who works in real estate and lives on the North Side, says he deserves sole custody because the wife’s strict religious upbringing of the child is alienating him from the boy’s life.
“The question here is who is the better decision-maker,” the father’s attorney, Joel Brodsky, said in his brief opening statements before Cook County Circuit Court Judge John Thomas Carr Wednesday. Brodsky said before the hearing that he intends to bring up Margolina’s previous work and her subsequent conversion to devout Judaism — to show the court that she “tends toward extremes.” But Rush University child psychiatrist Louis J. Kraus, who was called by Margolina’s attorney, David Grund, testified that the mother should get custody.
Kraus had recommended a joint parenting agreement back in 2007. Back then, he testified, the parents had agreed that the boy would be raised Jewish.
But after a recent evaluation of the boy and discussions with the warring parents, it was clear mom and dad had different expectations about what it meant to raise a Jewish child, Kraus said. Derbigny, a Roman Catholic who attends Mass on Christmas and Thanksgiving, did not believe he was required to keep a kosher household — especially since they hadn’t done that or even observed the Jewish Sabbath when the family was together. But Kraus said in his talks with Derbigny, the father seemed to be making a point of serving the boy bacon and other non-kosher foods. Kraus said he was concerned the parents’ stalemate was causing the boy anxiety and other behavioral problems.
“I’m recommending Ms. Margolina have sole custody … because of the high level of conflict,” Kraus said.
Brodsky said he plans to call a doctor later in what is expected to be a week-long trial that will recommend Derbigny get sole custody.
Grund declined to comment to the Sun-Times about the case.
B”H she had the sense to become frum and even better Hassidic. Its good she divorced him to lead a normal hasidic life.
Usually in the US the mother has the upper hand
and i bet, that in court their arguments might have a faint scent of this argument.
The article mentions the mother’s conversion to devout Judaism… does that mean she’s a giyores? If so, the child’s not Jewish. End of story.
b’hatzlacha to her and the son
# 2, one of the ironies of the feminist movement is that in some ways it disadvantaged women. the courts are trying to do away with the whole “a child belongs with its mother” concept especially nowadays when there is a high percentage of “un-traditional” households ie where the mother works and the father stays home with the children and tending to domestic chores. In this case, unfortunately, it is very likely that the court will side with the father since, based on the article, it seems that the mother made some pretty radical changes to her lifestyle, changes that her husband should not have to conform to.
#1 , why do you say “even better Hassidic”?
If as the article mentions, her conversion took place after the birth of the child.. #4 is correct the child is not a Jew. Interesting situation, any other children born to her will be Jewish. Even if she were to re-marry the same man and have more children brothers and sisters would be Jewish… different religion than the first child.
Messy situation, religious or not marrying one of your own before children come sure makes it a lot clearer as to who the kids really are.
Unfortunately in cases such as these the bickering couple is more interested in hurting the former partner than in cooperating to raise the child, and they only see the child as a weapon to beat the partner with.
I know of a case like this from years ago, in which a giyores and her non-Jewish ex-husband had a tug-of-war over their kid. The judge, thinking to be wiser than Shlomo Hamelech, decided that the child should be brought up “in both religions.” Needless to say the kid ended up as a complete basket case.
When the judge says “Cut the child in half!” that means one of the parents should say “Don’t do that! Let the other parent have him!” They’re not supposed to say “Yeah, do it!”
Although the artcile says she had a conversion, I don’t believe she is a giyores. I think conversion here means coverting to a different lifestyle. The legal documents state an agreement to raise the child jewish, even before the “conversion”.
Why can’t the father give him kosher food. He is trying to undermine her at every step. They agreed to Jewish [how Jewish I don’t know], but how Jewish I don’t know; however what he is doing is definitely undermining Judaism
i don;t know if they are using the word “conversion” literally, it might just be she did tshuva
Suppose she is a giyoret, and the kid isnt Jewish. But he is still her child. Would it be wrong for her to want to do a get katan kind of thing? Not in my opinion…
Number 14 should have read “ger katan”, as in conversion of a child. Not “get katan”, as in “small divorce” 🙂