Eugenics in America After 1945: Term Post #2

...Here are some examples:

North Carolina had a sterilization program in place from 1929-1974 in which approximately 7,600 individuals were sterilized with over 70% of those coming after 1945 when the program expanded after World War II. One unique aspect of North Carolina's laws was that they were written allowing people to be recommended for sterilization by doctors, social workers and other government employees they dealt with in their communities and homes. About 85% of those referred for sterilization were women. One guideline for sterilization was if a person had an IQ of less than 70. In July 2013, the state set aside ten million dollars for compensation to the verifiable victims of this program of which approximately 3000 are thought to be still alive.

In the 1950’s, black women in the south became targets of forced sterilization via tubal litigation or hysterectomy, commonly referred to by women as “Mississippi appendectomies,” because women entered hospitals to have abdominal surgery and left unknowingly without their uteri. In 1972, testimony before a US Senate committee brought to light at least 2,000 involuntary sterilizations that had been performed on poor black women who were mothers with multiple children. They were usually told that their appendix needed to be removed and were sterilized at that time or at the birth of a child, especially if the women was unmarried. There is evidence that many women may never have known why they couldn't conceive.

Forced sterilization practices changed and were focused on specific populations in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s through newly established federal family planning programs. Mexican and Mexican-American women were coerced or tricked into forced sterilization at the Women’s hospital of the University of Southern California- Los Angeles County Medical Center. Public concerns that the rise in Mexican immigration was overpopulating the state and purposely expanding state welfare needs was high. The idea that women became pregnant and then worked their way across the American – Mexican border to give birth and give themselves and their new family a secure financial benefit through the various welfare programs available is still an active concern in our present political climate. There is no known number of how many involuntary and coerced sterilizations there were before the federal class court case Madrigal v. Quilligan - a lawsuit brought against a hospital and their doctors by some women who discovered their unwanted sterilization. However, statistics show that elective hysterectomies had a 742% increase and tubal ligations a 470% increase within a two year time frame. At least 140 women shared their stories of being forced to agree or not being given any kind of informed consent at all. Some described situations that can only be described as blackmail. i.e.; I will not give you pain medication to finish your labor and delivery unless you comply. The lead defendant in the court case, Dr. Edward Quilligan, was quoted by a medical technician as stating, “poor minority women in L.A. County were having too many babies; that it was a strain on society; and that it was good that they be sterilized.” The plaintiffs lost their case, but the case did change and created stronger informed consent rules through legislation in California including bilingual language on the consent forms.

In 1955, the federal government changed the way that health care for Native American populations was provided. Depending on many factors, the quality of care throughout the Indian Health System varied considerably due to individual facilities, staff opinions/prejudices, and changes in 'coverage' due to Congressional appropriation hearings and decisions. These changes had some significant benefits as the new program was much better funded which helped increase services and decrease mortality. Another potential benefit which was added was the provision of family planning services. On reservations, Native American women became targets of physicians employed by the Indian Health Services who believed that restricting these women’s reproduction would reduce their poverty and dependence on the state. Through the

sharing of stories, complaints of coercion or harassment, and from research and interviews preformed through investigations, it is estimated that IHS hospitals and their affiliates sterilized between 25 and 42 percent of all Native American women of childbearing age between 1970 and 1976. Even with mandated changes requiring informed consent, added waiting periods and added safeguards, in 1974 more accusations cropped up that IHS staff in some places were not following the new guidelines and questionable sterilizations were still taking place - almost all subsidized with federal funds. Evidence shows that these types of experiences not only changed the relationships between Native Americans and the government/Indian Health System but also caused significant changes in an individual’s life and their standing in the community, as well causing economic and familial harm- some marital relationship were also severed over the procedure. In 1976, Congress passed the Indian Health Care Improvement Act which gave tribes the right to control Indian Health Service programs and there is no evidence that inappropriate sterilizations have happened after that time.

In case we believe that our society’s beliefs and behavior has changed since the late 1970's, we have other more recent examples. In 1909, California was the third state to pass a eugenics sterilization law and over the years had sterilized around 20,000 patients or around 1/3 of all the sterilizations in the country. That law was finally repealed in 1979 after a lawsuit by several women who had been coerced or forced into their own sterilizations. Yet, at least 148 women incarcerated in four California prisons were illegally sterilized in the years 2006-2011 costing the state $147,460 for the procedures. One of the physicians, Dr. James Heinrich, has stated that the practice of sterilizing female prisoners saves the state money because the patients would no longer have “unwanted children as they procreated more.” Auditors found in those cases that sometimes paperwork was altered to look like compliance with current laws was achieved and in many cases, no informed consent was attained. On September 25, 2014 California Governor Jerry Brown signed a bill prohibiting forced sterilization in the state.

That the United States has not been able to shake the ideas and prejudices that informed and created the original Eugenics movement. Today eugenical ideas and procedures are still officially permitted. Voluntary sterilization for therapeutic or for reproductive reasons is a great blessing for thousands of people and should be accessible for those who need it. However, its availability gives eugenic proponents the tools they need to pressure individuals to give up their dignity and human right to reproduction. Some women may lose that right without being told of the procedure or are given false information such as it is reversible. There is even incidental evidence that federal money is being spent on experiments and science that are clearly eugenic in nature. In the end, eugenics is still very much successful in America. I am aware that I personally fit several of the ideals for eugenic sterilization –I am so myopic I am considered legally blind, suffer from celiac disease, and have two other severe medical issues as well as PTSD, and severe sensory/ anxiety issues. I have given birth to a child that also has problems with celiac disease, has sensory problems and had seizures for seven years before outgrowing them. And yet, my son is a wonderful human being and he is well liked in his community. He is smart and compassionate in spite of his disabilities and my life wouldn’t really feel worth much without him. I have chosen to not have any more children and being able to make that choice for myself is one of the most wonderful things I appreciate in my life. I am hopeful that as society recognizes the individual worth of all individuals, may the concept of eugenics pass away… and rest in peace.

pictures from: http://www.carolinapublicpress.org/9854/house-passes-eugenics-compensation-bill, http://www.indyweek.com/indyweek/the-american-eugenics-movement-after-world-war-ii-part-1-of-3/Content?oid=2468789&storyPage=3, http://gloriamolina.org/2014/01/15/looking-back/, http://www.quora.com/Native-Americans, http://www.uvm.edu/~lkaelber/eugenics/SD/SD.html, http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jul/12/opinion/la-ed-sterilization-female-prisoners-california-20130712, http://www.examiner.com/article/illegal-sterilizations-forced-on-women-california-prisons, http://rt.com/usa/167660-california-illegal-sterilization-women/

Eugenics in America After 1945: Term Post #1

The study of human history shows the many achievements and journeys of our race. From our humble beginnings, through the development of culture, religion, communities, hierarchy and power structures, to what and who we are today... well, as a less-than-humble commercial suggests- 'You've come a long way, Baby!’ The path to the twenty-first century has not been smooth nor painless and, like our predecessors, we view ourselves, our lives, and our world as an improved and civilized place with the human race as the most intelligent and virtuous beings on it. Looking at the history of the human race, I see many recurring themes that are a part of every society; hope, love, beauty, want, etc. The theme of self-improvement or change that benefits ourselves and, in turn, society has been a reappearing idea that became more pronounced after the Enlightenment and the Renaissance along with the concept of improving groups of people to improve society. However, like all virtues, self-improvement or personal development can come with a dark side that is exposed when the virtue itself is placed on a pedestal or idolized without regard to the thoughts and rights of those we consider 'lesser' than us. When this happens, any noble or virtuous ideas are shown to be the shallow horrors that they can become ... the virtue is pulled and stretched out of its normal view to a pained and stretched mask of what it actually is. During the twentieth century, the themes of human breeding, genetics, prejudice, self-improvement and social progress collided to serve the virtue of better breeding and health of human beings. Eugenics, which means 'well born', was created in

America. This movement was so strong and large that it was able to spread into other cultures and countries before its horrors and Machiavellianism tendencies became apparent enough to create a sizeable opposition that attempted to crush it. In response to the common belief that eugenics was no longer an important movement after World War II, I will discuss briefly the history of eugenics in the United States before WWII and then analyze the way the movement changed after the war. I will show that the ideas behind eugenics are still alive, well and being acted upon in our society today. Recognizing the way the movement itself has adapted to our changing culture and its opposition helps place us in an informed position to focus on the fearful and reactive areas of ourselves and our society so we may work to create a more lasting and peaceful change in our thoughts and fears. Hopefully, that will help us change how we act upon our fears and prejudices and how we justify acting on them in our communities and society.

The idea of eugenics is a simple idea with more complex answers. The word was coined in 1883 by Sir Francis Galton who advocated the scientific regulation of human breeding to ensure that 'better' genes had a larger chance of predominating in the continuation of the human species. Eugenics encompassed the progress of medical practice and scientific thought and recognized the inseparable relationship between medicine and social progress. To be blunt, the idea of the eugenics movement was that better breeding would lead to a healthier population and was an effective way to deal with social problems. It provided a comfortable way to rationalize people's prejudices about race, poverty, etc... and also suggested that 'undesirable traits' could be minimized within a few generations if people were only brave and good enough to work towards it. Undesirable traits that were thought

to be correctable through eugenical reproduction included epilepsy and other physical disabilities, alcoholism, tendencies towards rape (rapists), and other criminal behavior, promiscuity, and more. Races and immigrants that were not of Anglo-Saxon heritage were also of 'suspect' genetic material and poverty was thought to be a characteristic of genetic inferiority. Always a controversial movement, eugenics has had its loyal adherents since its conception and even the tragedy and knowledge of the German Holocaust in World War II didn't change those who believed and followed its tenets. Before the war, it was common to institutionalize the ‘feebleminded’ or those that those in power worried about reproducing. The rationale was that the only way to stop a living being from reproducing was to limit its movements, monitor it in risky situations, or make it biologically impossible for breeding to take place. Institutions for those who were ill, the ‘feebleminded’ or those who had medical difficulties were created to isolate and remove those individuals from active society. Laws were passed that forbade marriages between people who had specific medical or mental health problems. However, locking people up costs a lot of money and the inability to remove everyone from the community that fit the criteria (due to lack of funds or institutional space) made the original eugenics process less effective than its early adherents wished. Sterilization allowed the individuals to be released back into their local communities to support themselves while not crating any more individuals like ‘them’. Because of that, sterilization became the easy, cheap, and irreversible weapon in the eugenics supporter’s arsenal.

The Holocaust did shift some of the popular views of how eugenics should work, but didn’t change any of the eugenic and popular thoughts of a large part of the populace nor did it change the most popular procedures that were used. In 1927, psychologist George Ordahl explained at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco that if it was possible to calculate “the economic burden of the moron” that [was] paid for by taxpayers, “every patriotic citizen would become a eugenicist in search of methods of prevention even more drastic than any now known.” The tone may have softened since WWII, but not by much. Dr. Charles Gamble wrote in 1947, “Tomorrow's population should be produced by today's best human material” and he complain[ed] that only one in forty-one people with severe mental illness had been sterilized, leaving dozens of others to spread defective genes. In 1966, C. Lee Buxton published an article titled

“The Doctor’s Responsibility in Population Control” in which he reminded his colleges that “medical responsibility demands more action than just passing resolutions and making recommendations...” and advocated sterilization as a solution to the ‘problem’ of unwed mothers on welfare. In his view, the problem was multiplying “because the medical profession has controlled the death rate but has done very little about the birth rate.” The exact number of women- for women were by far the more common victims of eugenics- involuntarily sterilized after the end of World War II into the 1980’s remains unknown due to the lack of collected statistics, listings in medical records of coerced sterilizations as ‘voluntary’, the social and reluctance of women to file formal complaints, and the ignorance of individuals who never knew or were never told that they had been sterilized. (The reason I stop at the 1980’s is due to a lack of information on current trends.)

Euthanasia programs never gained popular ground in the Unites States, but did have their supporters before WWII. One egregious example is Dr. Harry Haiselden who advocated and practiced denial of life saving treatment (even of newborns) and thought it was acceptable for an institution to give inmates tuberculosis through infected milk because only those with ‘defective’ genes would get the disease and die. In the end, after the Holocaust, sterilization was the procedure of choice and was perfectly legal through the decision in Buck vs Bell decided by the Supreme Court. This court decision has never been overturned and has been used to support involuntary sterilizations since its publication and over the last sixty years. Here are some examples....

pictures from: https://mediachecker.wordpress.com/2013/11/10/bill-gates-its-gods-work-monsanto-vaccines-eugenics/, http://www.uvm.edu/~eugenics/whatis1.html, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Galton, http://predicthistunpredictpast.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-horrifying-american-roots-of-nazi.html, http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/05/darwin_day_in_may_buck_vs_bell003669.html, http://galleryhip.com/american-eugenics.html, http://365daysofthis.blogspot.com/2013/02/define-eugenics.html
eugen

Eugenics in America after World War II /1945 : An Introduction to the Term Paper

I know a few people have been waiting for this paper so here it is! I will need to break up the paper into a few posts but it will give a very basic outline of eugenics before World War II and our influence on other countries… and then move into how eugenics changed and what groups were affected by these legal policies. I do give current examples when I was able to find some and I am hopeful that after I share this research, maybe we can have a discussion about how to create community awareness and change in our areas…..

Here is my abstract paragraph:

The study of human history shows the many achievements and journeys of our race. From our humble beginnings, through the development of culture, religion, communities, hierarchy and power structures, to what and who we are today... well, as a less-than-humble commercial suggests- 'You've come a long way, Baby!' The path to the twenty-first century has not been smooth nor painless and, like our predecessors, we view ourselves, our lives, and our world as an improved and civilized place with the human race as the most intelligent and virtuous beings on it. Looking at the history of the human race, I see many recurring themes that are a part of every society; hope, love, beauty, want, etc. The theme of self-improvement or change that benefits ourselves and, in turn, society has been a reappearing idea that became more pronounced after the Enlightenment and the Renaissance along with the concept of improving groups of people to improve society. However, like all virtues, self-improvement or personal development can come with a dark side that is exposed when the virtue itself is placed on a pedestal or idolized without regard to the thoughts and rights of those we consider 'lesser' than us. When this happens, any noble or virtuous ideas are shown to be the shallow horrors that they can become ... the virtue is pulled and stretched out of its normal view to a pained and stretched mask of what it actually is. During the twentieth century, the themes of human breeding, genetics, prejudice, self-improvement and social progress collided to serve the virtue of better breeding and health of human beings. Eugenics, which means 'well born', was born and This movement was created in America and was so strong and large that it was able to spawn into other cultures and countries before its horrors and Machiavellianism tendencies became apparent enough to create a sizeable opposition that attempted to crush it. In response to the common belief that eugenics was no longer an important movement after World War II, I will discuss briefly the history of eugenics in the United States before WWII and then analyze the way the movement changed after the war. I will show that the ideas behind eugenics are still alive, well and being acted upon in our recent history. Recognizing the way the movement itself has adapted to our changing culture and its opposition helps place us in an informed position to focus on the fearful and reactive areas of ourselves and our society so we may work to create a more lasting and peaceful change in our thoughts and fears. Hopefully, that will help us change how we act upon our fears and prejudices and how we justify acting on them in our communities and society.

pictures from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States#/media/File:Eugenics_supporters_hold_signs_on_Wall_Street.jpg, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States

Thoughts on the Film: "Forgiving Dr. Mengele"

I originally wrote this review last December. I hope you enjoy. :)

It is dark outside and I still see snow on the ground and feel the wind seeping through the cabin walls around me. There is very little moon outside... and so the only light in the room comes from my computer screen and the reflective views of light from my cat's blinking eyes nearby. I cannot see my face nor anything in the room around me, but I can feel the tears on my face as the moisture in them chills on my cheeks and I see the blurring images on the screen through the tears that are still gathering and pooling in my lower lids. This was a very painful and powerful documentary and I am grateful for the opportunity to learn some of the life, deeds and thoughts of Eva Mozes Kor.... prisoner number #8706 in the Auschwitz concentration camp in Germany during World War II.

Eva Kor was one of a set of twins that survived the Holocaust and Dr. Melange’s twin studies in Auschwitz during WWII. Her sister Miriam survived, but later died from complications with her kidneys from the experiments performed on her in the concentration camps. In an attempt to save her sister's life, Eva not only managed to will herself to live through the experimental treatments in the camp- for if she died her sister would be killed- but she donated a kidney to her sister after the war. She also tried to discover the records kept by Dr. Mengele of his experiments to possible help her sister and other victims. Miriam died in 1993 and Eva's efforts towards finding the documents were not successful, but those efforts helped create a group that brought many of the surviving 'twins' together and also brought her to the doorstep of Dr. Hans Munch.... a former SS doctor who knew Dr. Mengele in the past. Dr Munch has been tried for war crimes, but had also been found not guilty due to the number of people who testified that he saved them from death during the Holocaust. Ms Kor contacted him interviewed him looking for information on the experiment or any memories that he might have that could have helped. Dr Munch discussed his thoughts about Mengele and his experiments ('… did things in a very amateurish way) and his memories of Auschwitz – he still has nightmares about the gas chambers. This experience/ opportunity had a very profound impact on Ms Kor and she decided to go to Auschwitz for the anniversary of the liberation of the prisoners. She also made the unusual request that Dr Munch should also attend with her and her family. He agreed and she read out a statement that Dr Munch wrote stating that he was a witness to the 'gas chambers' and it was important to acknowledge his past as a testimony to the deniers and the revisionists of the Holocaust. After a chance emark from a reporter, she too decided to make a statement later . That statement was that for herself, she was forgiving not only Dr Mengele, but all the Nazi's who killed her family and the millions of others who died in the genocide.

Later, Eva opened up a small Holocaust museum in her town and has spent a lot of time traveling, teaching and talking about her experiences. Her work on forgiving Dr Mengele and the Nazi's who harmed her and her family has been met with different responses. Some of the individual twins that survived and were at Auschwitz when she brought Dr Munch were offended and angry. Others over time have been angry and have had negative responses to her talks and her advocating forgiveness as a way of healing. In November 2003, an arsonist successfully burned down the museum destroying almost all of the memorabilia and exhibits housed inside. One the outside of the building, a message was spray painted on the wall; 'Remember Timmy McVeigh'. (I am not really sure I understand what the arsonist was trying to say with that statement. I do not feel like what Timothy McVeigh was trying to express has anything to do with the Holocaust or its education, but I am pretty ignorant on all of his radical goals so there might be a clear link I haven't recognized.) She has begun rebuilding the museum and continues to travel and teach about the Holocaust and her experiences.

“... to forgive that God of Auschwitz. Me, the little nothing... I might as well forgive everybody.”
“It time to forgive, but not forget. It is time to heal our souls.” - Eva Kor

One thing that I found while listening to Ms Kor was the idea that she thought/thinks of herself as 'nothing' in comparison to Dr Mengele. In the documentary, the doctor was described as an individual who was at the forefront of German science and genetic research. In other research and testimony from survivors, his near obsession with twins and with his job as one of the doctors of Auschwitz camp is mentioned and some suggest that he went out of his way to work and make medical and life/death decisions for prisoners even when he was off duty. To be fair, before the war all of his studies were connected scientifically and for the most part ethically as well toward test subjects. It was only in the concentration camps where the life, death or pain of his subjects no longer mattered and so his studies and research were able to be given more of a full range in regards to his ideas and curiosity. It was here that Eva Kor, her sister, many other sets of twins as well as large populations of Jewish, Roma or other 'undesirable' individuals fell under his 'care' and supervision. In his work and what we know of it, Dr. Mengele tortured and killed hundreds if not more (depending on if you count arrivals to the camp in his numbers) and she is very lucky to have survived at all. To think of him as a 'God' seems so offensive to me and yet, I see it clearly. In his capacity, Dr Mengele had many of the powers that we ascribe to our deities (both good and bad). I can see the image of her- of myself- struggling to recognize that while the power situations are different, the human beings involved are equal... the same.... we are 'one'. To recognize that powerful fact is sometimes a hard and amazing moment. To seize the opportunity that she did within herself is simply breathtaking.

“... the pain of the shots that Mengele did to us...” - Pearl Pufeles

I just got shots in both my shoulders at the beginning of the week. For my internship in a doctor's office next year, I am getting all of my vaccines again as I have no titers to them in my body (long story.) When I am given one shot, I am febrile for a week with on and off migraines, vomiting, dizziness, weakness and shaking. I spend the days ahead downing Tylenol and ibuprofen and praying the symptoms and side effects will pass as quickly as Heavenly Father will allow. The effects are much stronger with two shots and so I found myself this week trying to rationally remind myself that the pain and discomfort will pass and it is short lived. Yet I sit with swollen shoulders and everything else and listening to Eva talk about a shot that her sister was given that eventually killed her and the years of pain and challenges that she struggled with and I listen to Ms. Pufeles and I am finally able to rationally realize how easy my situation is. I know it will pass.... I know it will pass soon.... I can be quite sure I will not have any significant long term problems. To recognize that these victims could not have even these simple assurances- if fact, they could be sure that it probably would cause pain and long term problems- is another window into a world and a reality that I have never had true first hand experience in. To be able to learn, to understand, to develop clarity about the experience of others, the depths of thought and behavior that humanity can dive and to recognize those traits or small flaws in myself... and work on transforming them to something positive and more wholesome is a beautiful gift

“Most of my fellow survivors are so hurting, they do not even have the ability to even understand what I am talking about. And so many of them will die without ever feeling free from that pain” - Eva Kor

“Forgiveness has nothing to do with the perpetrator, has nothing to do with religion- it has only everything to do with the way the victim is empowering him or herself and taking control of their lives” - Eva Kor

When watching and listening to the other survivors and their stories and emotions as they flowed forth, the overwhelming thing I felt was anger. They talked about sorrow and grief, but the tone of anger was interwoven throughout every word and motion they made. In some situations it was so palpable that I felt like I could reach out, touch it and even pick it up and hold it for a closer look. While I feel like sometimes Ms Kor pushes people too quickly to accept her thoughts and she acts defensive, I can see how she must find herself verbally confronted by many people about her choices. Not only does she have to deal with the deniers and the revisionists, but she must also deal with those who feel like she is giving the Nazi's and those who worked with them excuses or justification for their misdeeds. Few people have to deal with the challenges of the process of forgiving others while being criticized for participating and utilizing that process for their own healing. I couldn't figure out how anyone could criticize her and after that was mentioned in class and how her forgiveness was 'controversial', I decided I needed to see this film only to try and understand that. It feels so sad that people who are stuck can feel so much anger about someone working to loosen themselves from the grief and anger. I felt some anger listening to the arguments that forgiving was forgetting and forgiving was accepting and absolving the perpetrators of the crime. I can tell I'm still angry because I want to argue for the defense even as I write this. ;) Watching this has made me even more convinced that the process of reconciliation is so important to the well being of the survivors, the offenders and the communities which surround them both.


“... and not create a catastrophe for the Palestinians... and say what have we done”

I thought it was interesting to watch Eva Kor sit at the table with those working towards peace in Palestine and Israel and hearing her say she didn't want to hear the stories that were being shared. On one hand, she recognizes that stories are important and educate people about situations and yet when it comes to the idea that some groups of Jewish individuals themselves are now being perpetrators of genocidal violence towards Palestinians she is unable and unwilling to listen. I was disappointed and annoyed, but when I continued to think about it I realized how distinctly challenging that must be for anyone in her position. I heard this line and realized that, at least in my opinion, a catastrophe has already been created for the Palestinians and I do not think that at this point, the use of the word genocide is that far off. Here is an opportunity for her and she wasn't able to really use it. I wonder what opportunities I have that I haven't noticed or taken to work towards this horrible problem and ending it successfully. I do not think that I have had any opportunities, but I might not have recognized them when I did. I have decided to write my governor and my representatives to ask for a change of name for Columbus Day and to also ask for a state holiday acknowledging genocides- not sure how to address my thoughts on the latter.

Thank you so much for mentioning this film. I am very glad I watched it and that I have the opportunity to share it with others. I am also happy to learn a little more about Holocaust awareness and how Dr Mengele's experiments affected people long after the war was over.

pictures from: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0489707/, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lhAU868230, https://www.tumblr.com/search/forgiving%20dr.%20mengele, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2807743/How-Angel-Death-saved-mother-s-life-creator-world-s-iconic-dress.html, http://gauredevta.blog.com/2014/06/26/dr-mengele-experiments/, http://tmcnews.tendenciapp.com/articles/survivor-of-nazi-experiments-speaks-at-medical-ethics-conference/, https://googlingtheholocaust.wordpress.com/tag/forgiving-dr-mengele/

Thoughts on the Film: "The Music Box"

When this film was mentioned in my genocide class, I didn't really get a real idea of what the film was about. That was a very difficult piece of cinema to watch. I consoled myself a few times with the idea that it was fictional, but that wouldn't stay in my head very long as I heard the stories and thought about listening to Dr. Steve Rogers from the OSI and the testimonies that I heard, watched and read. Before I watched this film, I felt pretty secure in the idea that there shouldn't be a statute of limitations on war crimes- I totally agreed with Dr. Steve Rogers. After watching this film, I still feel the same way, but I see what damage can be caused in the present far removed from the crimes themselves. It's clear that these crimes and those who perpetrate them have created the potential for harm throughout their lives and the lives of others. It's really a challenging situation because I also feel that if they are hiding their past, they haven't repented or recovered from it. The metaphor of the music box was really apt- the music cannot go on forever and truth does sometimes come out.... and underneath the beauty and simplicity that can be seen can hide some pretty awful stuff.

“It's never going to be OK again” - Michael Laszlo

The story is focused on a man called Michael J. Laszlo, an immigrant to the United States from Hungary. He is a single father who lives in the same town as his daughter Ann Talbot with her son Michael. Ann Talbot is an attorney and when her father is charged by the Office of Special Investigations for lying on his US citizenship application and has the potential to be extradited to Hungary to be charged for perpetrating war crimes, she agrees to be his attorney. She reads the paperwork and evidence and finds herself slowly questioning her father's past and defending him until his case is dismissed. However, she struggles mentally and emotionally as she discovers her father is the man that is described in the documents and she has set him free. Discovering his past and confronting him with it, realizing that he still cannot admit it and is willing to cut her off for it, recognizing he is only interested in the pictures and where they are.... The film ends with her mailing the photographs along with a letter to the prosecutor in the OSI and the photos being released to the media. She then has the hard task of explaining to her son that her father and his grandfather is guilty of the crimes he was charged with. As Mr. Laszlo says, things will never be OK for him again. When secrets are discovered, the world appears to change for everyone.... even though nothing has changed but perspective.

“The Holocaust is the world's sacred cow. Holocaust survivors are secular saints. You'd be better off pissing on the tomb of the unknown soldier than cross examining them” – Harry (her father-in-law)

This quote was pretty revealing to me and it suggested two things to me. It suggested that individuals who have survived the Holocaust are singled out and get special help and that this character doesn't agree with that. I looked at my own feelings and feel like I see and understand part of this statement in my own life and perspective. I think that I do treat known Holocaust victims differently. I think that I would be more likely to give them special treatment and if I could find a politically correct way to do it, I would want to hear and document their stories. I also recognize that I feel like their experiences were so horrible that if I can make their current life a little easier, I want to do it. I can't make up for what happened and I wasn't even alive, but I still feel a debt. I feel like my country didn't do enough soon enough and they were human beings that were significantly persecuted. Heck, I am a Mormon and my religion has a history of persecution against its members as well... not nearly as much as those of the Jewish faith I must stress. However, I see that as a debt I owe and I feel no anger towards the victims themselves nor do I feel that if people feel the same way I do it is inappropriate. I listened to that statement and realized that character feels annoyance that these victims may get special treatment. He even described them as 'sacred cows' – animals who are treated better than some people... Funnily enough, I agree in one way as I feel like we should be treating all people better and only see a problem with treating the cows well and people poorly.... can't we treat people and animals well? Is that possible for us as a race? I do wonder and doubt sometimes....

“I'm not a beast, I'm a father. It's not me... It's not me” - Michael Laszlo

“None of the men I knew were monsters. They were salt of the earth men like your old man.” - Harry (father in law)

These statements are an amazing commentary on perspective and values and the ability to excuse behavior in those we like. All of us have done things we are ashamed of in our lives.... mistakes, poor choices, etc... I believe that is part of being human and so we feel pressed to attempt to learn and to understand our experience better. This helps us to understand other people and their experiences and how the world and our communities and we as human beings really work. I look at my friends and see only good and wonderful people. I look at my church community and I see many people that I may not know well or even may not like, but people that I think are generally good and kind and nice people. I found myself really identifying with Ann Talbot as she looks at the people around her and is confused as to why they say some of the things that they say and discovers new aspects of those she cares for. It is sometimes very easy to see what we want to see in other people and in ourselves.

“He's not a monster. I'm his daughter. I know him better than anyone.”

When I heard this line, I thought about the character standing in front of a mirror that then cracked and became several views that she was trying to put together but the pieces didn't seem to fit. They didn't fit because she was trying to keep the image and perspective that she had of her father intact... It was a challenge to recognize that was the problem with the image. (It's a challenge for any of us.) This was a powerful moment because I thought back on my life and my parents and realized that I do not know much about their pasts as well. I have some ideas and have been told things, but that's it. Except for a quirk of fate, my parents can't surprise me in the same way that Ann Talbot was. These people that we call monsters can be the man next door who is someone we like, we respect. And we just didn't know.

“I care about remembering. It's too late to change what happened but its never too late to remember what happened.... Our country has always tried to be a haven for those who have been persecuted and after the war we let in thousands of its victims, but unfortunately we also let in some of the executioners.” - Prosecutor Burke

I feel the same way. I cannot change anything and watching this film was so immensely painful. It is not too late to remember, to recognize and to try and understand. I believe that when in doubt, our country needs to let someone in. I would rather save a few executioners to save victims just like I would rather a few guilty men to not go to jail if it makes it sure that no innocent person will go. I had never heard of the OSI before this class and one thing I feel sure of is that this department is not a waste of governmental resources. I feel its importance more strongly as I watched this prosecutor having to explain that he isn't being vindictive, that this isn't a personal vendetta, that his job is needful and has meaning. Dr Steve Rogers seemed to have some of the same experiences and I wonder how much of a struggle that has been for him. When I listened to him I found myself wondering how much of his experience was more of a view of his perspective and not entirely the way 'it might be'. I watched Ann Talbot tear that prosecutor apart and I saw his frustration that years of research was simply being disregarded and I thought of Dr. Rogers and felt I understood his history a little better. I hope we do continue to fund the Office of Special Investigations.

“How could you do those things papa? How could you do those things to us... to Mikey?... Why can't you try to say the truth.?” - Ann Talbot

Michael Laszlo was unable to even verbalize or admit his part. It is always someone else persecuting him. Whether it's communists or other enemies, he feels like he shouldn't have to pay for his past and that its not important. What he wants is what matters. In that moment, we can see the young man he was and so can Ann. She can see the angry, violent man that she didn't know was in there. He sees the past as the past and lying as nothing... it isn't important. Throughout the film we get hints that he really hasn't changed his mind on things. He doesn't have any Jewish friends or relationships and his comments on the Holocaust suggest that by denying it, he can deny his past and potential complications in his own life. He lied on his application – which suggests he knows that his behavior was questionable if not wrong. The fact that he can't even admit it to his daughter after she helped him and seems only interested in the proof suggests to me his concern with his safety and what he wants and that no acknowledgment of sorrow, remorse has entered his head. I did like Michael Laszlo and I commend how he changed his life. But he didn't change what was important.... all he did was do what he could to stay out of trouble. He treated those he loved and respected well- like he did when he was younger. He avoided anyone who was Jewish – I didn't feel like we were able to be sure whether he was avoiding those populations out of fear of being recognized or from dislike (I suspect it was both) just as he did when he was younger. He hasn't made it possible to reconcile his acts to himself, his family or anyone else. In fact, by denying them I feel like he makes the whole situation worse. He resurrects the 'monster' within himself and we can see more clearly the emotions and behaviors that he allowed to get out of control.

Thank you for the opportunity to discover this film. I appreciate a better perspective on the Office of Special Investigations and on Dr Roger's life experiences. I appreciated seeing a fictionalized, but realistic understanding of the trauma and difficulty that these cases bring to families and communities. I questioned some of my own history and thoughts on defending war criminals and whether good behavior really changes anything. We all act 'good' in most circumstances but that doesn't mean our thoughts or ideas have changed... especially if they are not challenged. I appreciate the opportunity to think more and to recognize the challenges on all sides. I feel like I understand people who deny genocides more and while I do not like it, I understand. I wonder how many deniers do so to rehabilitate loved ones instead of just racism and prejudice. I wonder if the OSI has problems recruiting....? I also found myself wondering if laws restricting speech when it comes to genocide denial are a good idea... yet I really believe in free speech. I leave this film with many more thoughts than I walked in with and more questions. That is the sign of a good piece of art.

pictures from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_Box_%28film%29, http://www.snipview.com/q/Music%20Box%20%28film%29, http://www.filmmisery.com/women-in-film-jessica-lange/, http://nuovocinemalocatelli.com/2013/06/28/film-stasera-sulle-tv-gratuite-music-box-di-costa-gavras-con-jessica-lange-venerdi-28-giugno-2013/, http://forum.tntvillage.scambioetico.org/?showtopic=232866,