Is the Jury In on the Jewish Mother?
I once defended my meddling Jewish mother on live television. Now, in the wake of Donna Adelson’s conviction, I struggle over how this trope was placed on trial.
In 2008, my mother and I appeared on The Morning Show with Mike and Juliet to promote Have I Got a Guy for You: What Really Happens When Mom Fixes You Up. My essay in this anthology had given it a happy ending. Still, the show had invited a naysayer who vilified my mother for interfering. Under glaring lights and heavy makeup, Mom, for once, was at a loss for words. I pushed back, bristling, yet burning with shame: “My mom knows better than anyone what is best for me.” I added silently: It’s a Jewish mother thing. They don’t stand idly by.
This summer, the memory of that incident came flooding back when the valedictorian of my high school, Wendi Adelson, came under the media spotlight. Touted in our yearbook as “most likely to succeed,” Wendi Adelson had become a successful lawyer and married a prominent law professor. But these past few years she has been dominating YouTube, Reddit, CourtTV and national news as a witness for the defense in the criminal trials of her brother, his associates and, finally, of her mother, Donna, all of whom stood accused of taking part in the killing her ex-husband Dan Markel.
It was hard not to cringe at the Jewish stereotypes highlighted in court. Equally distasteful was the in-fighting between the Adelsons’ secular Judaism and Markel’s stricter observance.
I had always looked up to Wendi, and our paths had crossed tangentially after high school. My husband and hers had mutual friends; she and I gave birth within weeks of each other. So I had been following with interest as Wendi’s fourth turn on the stand ended with Donna’s conviction on September 4 for helping Wendi’s brother Charlie contract the hitmen who killed Wendi’s husband. After their divorce in 2013, Dan had blocked Wendi’s attempts to relocate with their children from Tallahassee to Miami, where Donna lived, and then had petitioned the court to mandate supervision while Donna watched the boys. As this motion was pending, in 2014, two men rented a Prius in Miami, drove to Tallahassee, tailed Markel home and shot him in his driveway. The hitmen received washed and stapled stacks of cash, allegedly supplied by Donna.
Donna was always known as a Jewish mother par excellence. My mom would see her at the drugstore or Kinko’s, both running errands on their daughters’ behalf. The dermatologist who treated teenage acne knew both women well. At the trial, a friend of Donna’s testified that she was “the ultimate Jewish mother…very involved with her children’s and grandchildren’s lives.” It’s chilling for me to see the “Jewish mother” trope on trial and under scrutiny. What I have always experienced as loving warmth is now linked to a crime of hate. Donna screened profiles of potential husbands for her daughter on Jdate, planned Wendi’s wedding, gave orders framed as advice: everything that my own mom does as a point of pride. Of course, Donna brings the “meddling Jewish matriarch” archetype to disturbing extremes. When Wendi moved out while Dan was away, Donna helped execute what he described as “Pearl Harbor-style separation”: secretly renting an apartment under her own maiden name, then driving seven hours to direct the move. (Wendi left divorce papers, but no address, on the mattress.) Donna allegedly offered Dan $1 million to allow the children to move to Miami. She then turned to Charlie, described by Yahoo News as a “black sheep and mama’s boy,” to contract hitmen through a girlfriend. Shortly after the murder, Wendi changed her sons’ surnames from Markel to Adelson.
The Bible Belt jury may not have known any Jewish mothers personally. But for two weeks, they heard the divide between the honeyed drawl of prosecutor Georgia Cappleman and Donna’s heavy New York accent (in phone calls played as evidence—Donna declined to testify). Even Donna’s defense lawyer said: “She’s a meddler…not a murderer.”
It was hard not to cringe at the Jewish stereotypes highlighted in court and the media: the family portrayed as scheming unscrupulous elite, running a “dental empire” while having goyim do their dirty work and take the fall (the hitmen were arrested years before the Adelsons).
Equally distasteful was the in-fighting between the Adelsons’ secular Judaism and Markel’s stricter observance. When the boys skyped with Dan, Wendi fed them bacon. Prosecution suggested that the Adelsons’ nickname for Markel, “Jibbers,” was short for “Jew in Boots,” scathing mockery that helped Wendi cut him down. And as Donna helped Wendi build her case for relocation, the Adelsons framed Dan’s “fanatical and extremist” beliefs (such as reportedly dragging them to temple, or withholding food on Yom Kippur) as “sick and dangerous” to the children. She even, according to prosecutor Cappleman, suggested her grandsons dress as Nazi Youth for Facebook photos in an attempt to rile Dan up.
As a Jewish mother constantly dealing with her own, I struggle with the darker question: Can one parent not be trusted to raise their own kids alone? Is one opinion never enough? Would freezing out Grandma invite disaster, even when she isn’t homicidal? When Cappleman asked Wendi, “Did [your mother] think you incapable of driving to South Florida?” I anticipated her answer: “I was breastfeeding.” My mother’s voice rang in my head: You can’t travel with two babies while breastfeeding! For me, this is not condescending; it’s comforting. This is our love language.
Like Donna, many Jewish mothers cling to the belief that exerting control will shape the right outcome: higher-achieving, better-rounded children than we, their daughters, could raise ourselves, whether we’re single or married, working or not. After all, double the resources and double the attention yields exponential dividends. When exhausted parents pack two sandwiches in one lunchbox—as I did recently—grandparents can make it right with a hot meal after school. And yes, this dynamic can trod over tender feelings and healthy boundaries. But the goal is to give children every advantage in a harsh and unpredictable world. A world that doesn’t always go our way, especially when we’re Jewish.
And yet the attempt to control lives can end up destroying them. As another Jewish mother—Dan’s mother Ruth—said in her victim impact statement as she described the devastation Donna’s decisions left in her wake. “It was a murder for convenience, so one grandmother could live closer to her grandchildren.” Their family, she added, “has endured years of forced estrangement, blocked communication, and exclusion from milestones in the boys’ lives. The harm has been generational.”
Melissa Pheterson is a writer and reporter based in Rochester, NY.
Top image: Donna Adelson (screenshot)
10 thoughts on “Is the Jury In on the Jewish Mother?”
Correction: According to an email SENT BY Donna Adelson to her daughter, she even suggested …. The writer’s phraseology implies that the DA interpreted the defendants written words “ She even, *according to prosecutor Cappleman,* suggested her grandsons dress as Nazi Youth for Facebook photos in an attempt to rile Dan up.”
“PLAN OF ACTION
1. Take photo of boys (dressed nicely) standing at ‘.the front door or by the sign of a Tallahassee church. Then, change your Facebook
status photo to this one so everyone will see this.”
https://www.stevenbepstein.com/_files/ugd/ab1a99_675b26f1c6dc43298105cd89cc93e62d.pdf
I believe that Wendi was a witness for the prosecution, not the defense, in her mother’s trial.
Is she a “Jewish Mother” or an over controlling “helicopter mom”? If she was truly a Jewish mother she would have faith in G-d, and would be kind, caring and wouldn’t be plotting the relocation of her daughter and grandsons by conniving the baptism of grand sons and murder of her ex son in law.
It was a very, very cringy moment when her witness at her trial referred to her as the “typical Jewish mother”!
I agree with se green. The “Jewish mother” was not on trial. A depraved murderer was on trial. She was a mother, grandmother, mother-in-law, etc. She may have tried to put up a defense of some stereotyped persona, but that is simply gross. Mothers should, and many do, want the best for their (adult) children; some insert (& assert) themselves more than others; some less subtly than others. To use such a gross cultural stereotype as a defense shield in a murder case, to try to justify unjustifiable anti-semitism against her former son-in-law, is abhorrent and offensive to Jews and non-Jews alike. To suggest the stereotype is what was on trial is off-base & unhelpful. Justice for Dan Markel.
As a Jewish mother and great grandmother, I always thought my role was to give my children everything they needed to be successful adults, including a good Jewish education, and then let them make their own decisions as responsible adults. It has worked out beautifully.
The expression “Jewish mother,” known to me for decades means a mother who is greatly concerned God-forbid you will get sick (hurry, make some chicken soup), worries about your well being, and wants the best for you – perhaps over protective. Never have I heard it in reference to scheming or life threatening situations. It was tasteless to refer to the defendant in this fashion and smacks of antisemitism. A divorce by Jewish or Gentile couples is painful and involves the same pain to all especially when it comes to the children and possible relocation. There have been many divorce cases that went to the extreme and involved crime in cases of Gentile couples. I never heard anyone labeling the mother-in-law as a “Christian mother” in any of those cases. What the defendant in this case did, plotted, and carried out had nothing to do with her ethnicity. It had to do with her lack of character just like the Gentile defendants in similar cases.
I don’t know the case but the article reminded me of an incident that occurred when I was a LCSW. I was asked to present an intake cinvolving a young man who was diagnosed with schizophrenia. His mother was very concerned about him and his treatment. One of the professionals on the case laughed mockingly and remarked that his mom was a “typical Jewish mother.” If this happened today I would call her out on her racism.
Drawing from the late Irving Howe in “World of our Fathers:” In the years of the great migration from Southern and Eastern Europe to America (1880-1920), the divorce rate was highest among the Jewish immigrants, the main reason being that divorce was allowed. The rate of desertion by Jewish spouses was also high. In the absence of husbands and fathers, Jewish women of that period had to step up and take control of their family. And they did so as a matter of necessity. This was the beginning of the “Jewish mother”. That necessity morphed into the stereotype we now see. There are other cultures in our country that are referred to as matriarchal and never as a positive attribute.
It’s time to re-form the idea and own it on our own terms.
I’m a Black Texas grandma who watched Donna’s trial (and Charlie’s trial, and Katie’s 2nd trial, and Sigfredo/Katie’s trial in 2019). In none of the other proceedings was race, ethnicity, or religion so front-and-center as Donna Adelson’s was. And why was that? Because of Charlie, sister Wendi, dad Harvey, and mom Donna.
It started when the parents insisted their oldest son marry a Jewish girl, which isn’t alarming because my parents wanted me to marry a Catholic (So what? I didn’t). But when Rob instead fell in love with Haritha (rhymes with Aretha), Donna and husband Harvey allegedly threatened not only to disown him, but to cut him out of their lives completely. Which is why Rob remained cordial with his family, but semi-estranged after he married Haritha and they started having kids. Charlie was dating a ton of Asian/Pacific Island women, which was fine with Donna because they were decorative nothings to them both, and “mama’s boy” would never marry any of them. Right now, Wendi is living with a Hispanic man rich enough to acquire a member of Trump’s 1st term legal team (John Lauro) to represent her.
Charlie threatened “Nazi s—” aka murder, on an undercover cop. Donna wanted to threaten Dan with the nightmare of his Jewish kids in Catholic Catechism classes and Nazi uniforms (“They won’t know any better,” wrote Donna to Wendi. “It will be like playing dress-up. Like Jake the Pirate.”) In one of Charlie’s jail phone calls, he asked his parents to lock up and safeguard some valuable World War II memorabilia for him. I shudder to think what those might be. Donna and Wendi mocked and scorned a Christian judge presiding over the latter’s divorce. They also posited that if their Hitler Youth ploy worked, the judge would be thrilled that Wendi is converting the boys to Christianity (sheesh), and hand her everything she wants. Pretty poor understanding of what religious devotion is. Regarding victim Dan Markel’s dedication to his faith, Donna labeled him dangerous to his own children and too insane to parent, insisting that religion is a trap. A way to hypnotize and control the masses. On and on yakety-yak. All so ugly and disrespectful it made me ill…and I’m a freaking atheist nowadays!
Wendi’s and Donna’s “Jibbers” name for Dan is something they probably picked up on one of the family’s many trips to Israel. The “Jew in Boots” comic book cover with Hebrew words at the top shocked and embarrassed Wendi in court. She likely thought the Leon County farmers (in boots) and ranchers (in boots) and country music fans (in boots) would never learn what the Miami Adelsons really think of the “common folk” of Tallahassee, of their jury pool. As a Jewish mom/grandma, Donna is a dud and clearly a freak of nature, representative of nothing but a relentless need for control. And no one had better tell her no…Not even the judge at her sentencing this week.
She was found guilty based on phone calls and payments linking her directly to people who murdered the father of her grandchildren.
She is not a Jewish Mother.
She is a psychologically violent and disturbed individual who likely should have been locked up a long time prior to any of this but, who got a pass because no
one believed she was capable of causing such trauma, including to her own daughter.
She should have gotten life for each grandchild and life for her daughter.
The system should have a way to warn the public when the disagreement in custody cases becomes hostile so people, like those she hired, won’t be fooled by what their getting
into is always someone else’s mental disturbance and not justice so next time, G-d forbid, those who do, can get the death penalty. At any point in all that, they had the choice
to say no and to not kill.
Calling her a Jewish Mother in any sense of the word, is shameful!
I didn’t watch the sickening trial and if they used her “Jewishness” against her, that’s not ok yet, if they had her on tape, her paying people to kill and witnesses to that plus her wanting to move to Vietnam and with all her money she had no defense nor could take the stand even to say in her own words why all that was incorrect, she already left her “Jewishness” somewhere else. That, should have been grounds for an insanity defense.
But, please! She is nowhere near a Jewish mother, even those who meddle.
The word you’re looking for is “clinically insane convicted criminal”.