הלכה אויף ישעיהו 58:7

The fifth detail that we wrote of above, namely, that he intend benefit, is as we shall explain. That is, if the people to whom he tells [the story] can help the one who was robbed, or wronged, or damaged, or shamed, then certainly it is correct to do this [i.e., to expose the perpetrator]. And even if this benefit cannot result through his telling, but his intent is that people distance themselves from the way of wickedness when they hear of it (for people condemn doers of wrong), and perhaps he himself will repent through this of his evil ways and correct his deeds when he hears others condemning him [the offender] for this — [If this is his motivation,] then this, too, is not in the category of lashon hara, and is considered a benefit, since, in any event, his intent is not to derive pleasure from this taint that he ascribes to his friend, but only to be zealous for the truth, that perhaps some future benefit will result. But if he assumes that of a certainty no benefit will result — as when the people he tells it to are also men of wickedness, that they, too, have many times done such evil to people, and they do not consider it a sin at all — to such people he must be careful not to speak of this matter at all. For aside from the fact that no benefit will result from his doing so, great damage may yet result from this. For they may go and relate it to the thief or the wronger or the shamer and they will thereby transgress "You shall not go talebearing among your people." And also, through this, great quarrels are likely to result. And, especially, if, G–d forbid, this can lead to informing, even if all the [above] details are satisfied, it is forbidden to say anything. And know that there is no difference in all of these details as to whether he is asked by the robbed or the damaged or the shamed to "investigate" [the cause of] his damage or his shame, or if he is not asked. For where [to tell] is permitted, it is permitted even if he were not asked. And where it is forbidden (that is, where all of the [above details] were not satisfied), it is not permitted even if he were asked. And even if he is his relative, it is still forbidden. (Many people go astray in this. For if they hear that someone did something to their relative, then even if it is not clear to them what the truth is or what the cause is, they immediately go and requite him [the offender] with evil, thinking that they thereby fulfill the mitzvah of (Isaiah 58:7): "And from your flesh you shall not conceal yourself." They thereby fall into great error, for there is no difference between relative and non-relative in all of the above dinim. For "And from your flesh you shall not conceal yourself" was not said in order to commit an issur, G–d forbid.

The relatives of Rabbi Yochanan had [to support] their father’s wife [widow] who needed daily medical treatment. They approached Rabbi Yochanan for advice. He responded, “Go, fix a price with the doctor [for all the widow’s future medical treatment].” Rabbi Yochanan later [regretted his action and] stated, “We have made ourselves like lawyers (orchei hadayanim).” Initially, what did Rabbi Yochanan think [when he decided to advise his relatives]? Since the Tanach states, “From one’s relatives one should not turn away (Yeshayahu 58:7),” [he thought that he should assist his relatives]. In the end, [he regretted his decision because] a prominent figure (adam chashuv) is different [and this behavior does not befit him].⁴See Encyclopedia Talmudit 1:175-180 for a discussion of the status of “adam chashuv.” Rav Yonah Reiss (Sha’arei Tzedek 2:202) suggests that all Torah scholars act like “prominent figures” regarding this issue.

A man is permitted to support his divorcee, and it is [even] a mitzvah to do so more than to another poor person, for it is said, "Do not hide from your own flesh."¹²Isaiah 58:7. But he may have no personal contact with her, and should send her support through an agent.