Thursday, December 11, 2008

Ethical Dilemmas for Doctor Gisella Perl

The book I Was a Doctor in Auschwitz was written by Dr. Gisella Perl and published within three years of the end of World War II. The sources used for the book were personal recollections and memories from the life of Dr. Perl from 1940 – 1945. Her story is told in short chapters, like flashbacks in nature. Her purpose in writing this book were made clear in the book’s forward:
This book is a “monument commemorating Nazi bestiality, Nazi sadism, Nazi inhumanity and every individual story, every picture, every description is but a stone in that monument that will stand forever to remind the world of this shameful phase of history and to ask of it vigilance, lest the events of these years be repeated.”[1]
The argument detailing the sadism, brutality and inhumanity of Nazi actions during the Holocaust is an easy one to make. The evidence not only of the author, but of many other survivors is damning. However, while reading her book, I became more fascinated by the ethical dilemmas presented to Dr. Perl and her justifications for her actions during this period of her life.
Dr. Perl describes the confusing collection of arbitrariness that surrounded life in Auschwitz. She puzzled at absurd contradictions like driving newly arrived prisoners selected for cremation to the crematorium in ambulances marked with a red cross. She noted with irony the difference between American beauty parlors and the “beauty parlors” at Auschwitz whose
purpose was the exact opposite that of an American beauty parlor; its purpose was to deprive its unwilling clients of even their last remnants of beauty, freshness, and human appearance. It was one of the typical Nazi Jokes, a creation of their devilish imagination, which served to humiliate their victims and make their short remaining life-span all the more horrible and distressing.[ii]
Not only were situations puzzling, so were the people. Dr. Josef Mengele performed surgery without using any anesthesia, and without intention of sparing the life of the patient, yet insisted on using sterile instruments. He seemed to many observers to derive a perverse pleasure from the selection process and the performance of vivisections on prisoners. A female SS guard named Irma Greze daily inflicted pain, torture and death on prisoners; yet when she demanded an abortion from Dr. Perl at gunpoint, she was terrified of the pain that might be involved in the procedure or recovery.
I found the doctor herself equally as puzzling. Here is one of very few female doctors of her generation who took an oath to do no harm performing over 3000 abortions[iii] without the use of instruments or anesthesia and justifying it with the idea that she was saving the life of the mother who, if she lived until liberation, might be able to have other children. She does not make clear if she discontinued the abortions when pregnancy no longer was punishable by gassing at Auschwitz in the late spring of 1944; two months after her deportation to the ghetto from her home in Sziget and roughly six months prior to her transfer to a prison in Hamburg. She also falsified blood samples of typhus patients to deceive Mengele and save the lives of the patient while continuing to spread the disease throughout the camp, endangering the lives and health of thousands.
I enjoyed reading about her life-renewing turning point at Auschwitz:
I sank down on my bunk, dazed with suffering and fear… but a moment later I was on my feet again. No! I would not let this happen to me! I would come out of the apathy which had enveloped me for the last two months and show the Nazis, show my fellow prisoners that we could keep our human dignity in the face of ever humiliation, every torture…Yes, I was going to remain a human being to the last minute of my life – whenever that would come.[iv]
However, my pride in her triumphant decision was tempered by her lack of defiance to Mengele in the performance of her duties. I was saddened by her denial of human dignity to those she robbed of the opportunity to live while justifying her actions as necessary in order for her to live.
The horrors she endured at Auschwitz seemed idyllic when compared with the conditions when she arrived at Bergen Belsen in 1945. Prisoners entered a smaller camp with no crematorium to burn the dead, so typhus infected dead and dying bodies were piled in heaps. They were left without food, water, and medicine in a lice and typhus infested environment to slowly die. Prisoners became desperate enough for food that they consumed the internal organs of the corpses. Dr. Perl and the prisoners at Bergen Belsen were liberated by the British April 15, 1945. While the soldiers went to work to bury the dead, Dr. Perl led a team of doctors in an attempt to bring as many prisoners back to health as possible. She was given the opportunity to immigrate to Palestine and attempted to locate her husband and son. When she learned that her husband was beaten to death a short time before the liberation and her son was cremated, she made her second attempt at suicide; her first was upon her arrival at Auschwitz almost three years earlier. She would have perished if not for the efforts of Abbé Brand, a French Priest.
The ethical dilemmas faced by the different individuals and groups we have studied this semester are difficult ones. I have been fascinated by the various justifications used for the inhumane and immoral actions during this period of history. I wonder if the justifications used are good enough to satisfy the consciences of those who give them once the danger of looming death has passed. I hope that it would be impossible for any participant in these acts of genocide to walk away from the ethical breeches of the period without any regrets.
I also find myself questioning the assertion that there were no other choices that could be made in these situations. Did Dr. Perl really have “no other choice”? I am sure that she was convinced that other options were not available. Yet, stories are beginning to emerge about those who did stand up to Nazi orders and were not killed for doing so. There was a midwife named Stanislawa Leczynska[v] who worked in three different blocks in Auschwitz. She delivered 3000 babies in 21 months. Although only 1% lived to be liberated, she retained her dignity, as did the mothers who cared for their weak children for the few short months they did live. They made these choices under the same possible conditions of death if their actions were discovered. Making correct moral choices is always an option, but not always the easiest choice to make.When I consider the story of Dr. Gisella Perl, I see instances of her being a victim of Nazi brutality, but I also see ways in which she was also a perpetrator of the deaths of more than 3000 Jews by her own hand. Not even Hitler himself can claim to have killed 3000 Jews with his bare hands. Justifications for their actions used by the perpetrators we have studied this semester are hollow and unsatisfying. For me, the justifications of Dr. Perl for her actions left me conflicted. I see within the doctor a perpetrator of death, a victim of Nazi brutality and a person who did all in her power to save the lives of Jewish women. Which one is it? Can it be all of them together? Was it possible for her to find peace before she died in 1988? Like Alma the Younger, Dr. Perl dedicated the remainder of her life to practicing her profession and helping thousands of women to usher in new life. She dedicated her services in women’s clinics in New York and Israel. Regret for her ethical breeches must have been like a shadow. Redemption is possible, but I doubt that she was able to purge the memories of her interment out of her mind.

[ii]
[iii]
[iv]
[v]

New York Trip

On November 14-16, 2008, I traveled with SVU to New York City to see two plays on Broadway. The whole group of SVU students saw Wicked on Friday night, and In the Heights on Saturday afternoon. Johanna Shiraki and I were able to see a third play, Gypsy, on Saturday night. I had an incredible time!
I was impressed by the uniqueness of the theatres on Broadway. There were varying degrees of opulence in the theatres as well as different views of the stage. The Richard Rogers theatre where I saw In the Heights had a steep mezzanine level and a great view of the whole stage. The St. James theatre where I saw Gypsy had a gradual incline on the Orchestra level, so even though my seat was close to the stage, my view was semi-obstructed by the people seated in front of me. My seat for Wicked was fabulous and I had a full view of the stage and sat house right about 10 feet over the stage.
There seemed to be a more formal atmosphere in the audience for the evening performances than the matinee. People were more dressed up, especially the drag queens in their sequins and mink. There was an excitement in the air and I felt like I was about to take part in something special. Each production was successful at making the world disappear during their performance. In two days I went to Oz, Washington Heights, and on the road with Rose and her troupe through the magic of theatre.
Wicked was the highlight of the trip. I had heard a little bit about the play before going to see it, but I fought the urge to research it before going to New York. I didn’t want to have any preconceived ideas or expectations. I was delighted by the story and identified with Elphaba on multiple levels. I loved the music! I especially liked the songs Popular, Defying Gravity, For Good, I’m Not That Girl, and As Long As You’re Mine. The cast had phenomenal voices and I have tremendous respect for the dedication they have to their craft. I would have purchased the Original Broadway Cast recording on the trip, but my budget was extremely limited. It would be wonderful if a DVD recording was made of the play. While a movie would be interesting; however, the play and the methods used to portray the magic on stage would be lost.
We took a backstage tour and had a question and answer session with the actors after seeing In the Heights. I wasn’t really interested, because I enjoy the magic from the audience. I took a few pictures during the tour with the stage lights on, but it really didn’t reflect the mood on stage during the performance. The play featured too much hip-hop music for my taste, but I enjoyed the salsa music and dancing. After two years of Spanish I understood a fair amount of the Spanish dialogue.
I enjoyed seeing Gypsy because it was an opportunity to see Patti LuPone perform. She won the Tony for her performance. It was marvelous. My favorite scene in the play featured the song Ya Gotta Have a Gimmick. I laughed out loud. The strippers were all older, sagging and washed up, not just lacking talent, so it was hilarious.
I am very glad I was able to go on this trip and watch true professionals at work. I am more in love with the theatre than ever before.

Life Lessons from Literature

The epic poems and plays that we read in class this semester have reinforced a belief that I have had since childhood: There is something to be learned from every person we meet and every situation we encounter. The prophet Nephi likened the scriptures to his people for their profit and learning (Book of Mormon 46); I apply the same technique to fictional characters in movies, books, and plays. The characters we have followed in our readings may have lived thousands of years ago in far away places, yet their adventures and struggles can entertain us and teach us valuable lessons.
Regardless of how sophisticated modern men think they are, the modern world is still teaming with human beings full of weaknesses and human tendencies that plagued medieval and ancient people centuries ago. Differences in values and culture are variables that distract the casual reader from learning from the past in the same way they distract the casual observer of the modern world from learning from the life that surrounds him. With a little effort, we can increase our wisdom by learning from their successes and failures instead of insisting on making similar mistakes ourselves. The themes in our readings this semester that resonated with me fell into the categories of advice, questions to ponder, and moral lessons.
The Iliad contains an example of a moral lesson. Achilles was a unique character in this work because he had two fates, he knew them both, and he consciously chose the one he preferred. His mother told him that he could choose to remain at the ships and die at a ripe old age without kleos, or he could lay siege to Troy, die young, and gain immortality on the lips of men. (Homer, Iliad 267) While a modern reader wouldn’t necessarily be faced with choosing between the same specific fates, he often faces the moral dilemma on whether to choose a safe, long, ordinary life or risk it for excitement, fame, wealth or passion. We learn from Achilles that the choices we make in our life are important, and through our choices we have the ability to decide our fate.
The Odyssey teaches us about the transition from child to man through the example of Odysseus’ son Telemachus. Early in the work, Telemachus realizes that he must take on the responsibilities of head of the household before the suitors squander his inheritance. He follows the counsel of the gods and his elders, learns that his father is alive, and returns home in time to be reunited with his father. As father and son prepare to take their revenge, Telemachus makes a critical error by leaving the door ajar where the arms were stored. Instead of acting childish and blaming a servant for the misdeed, he accepted responsibility for his act in the presence of his father. Modern teenagers should be able to see some connection to Telemachus. They stand in the gulf between childhood and adulthood, wanting to be treated as an adult while continuing to behave as a child. I have often told my teenagers that I would treat them as an adult only when they chose to act like an adult. Now I can look to Odysseus to back me up, because from the moment Telemachus accepted responsibility for his misdeed, Odysseus treated him as a grown man and his equal.
Great literature has the ability to pose timeless questions for the reader to ponder. One of the many themes in The Odyssey concerns the nature of nobility. A question arises as the story unfolds: Is nobility something in the blood or is it taught? This type of question is more familiar to the modern reader as the familiar “Nature or Nurture” Argument. Lord Aegyptius, the swineherd Eumaeus, the suitors and Telemachus were all born into nobility, yet all did not act the part. Lora Aegyptius was lax in training his son Eurynomus the ways of nobility. Eurynomus was among the group of suitors abusing the hospitality of Odysseus’ estate. Unlike Eurynomus, most of the suitors did not have fathers around to mold their noble character because they were off fighting at Troy. Telemachus’ father was at Troy, but he had the benefit of a father figure in the swineherd Eumaeus to teach him proper noble behavior. Both Telemachus and Eumaeus acted as nobility should; the suitors, including Eurynomus, did not act nobly yet all had noble blood. It is true that modern readers don’t concern themselves much with nobility, but The Odyssey’s argument favoring nurture over nature can be applied to understanding the influence of fathers on sons in a society with an increasing number of single mothers raising boys alone.
Most of the lessons I take with me from reading these works falls under the category of advice. The Odyssey, Inferno and The Aeneid all raise caution toward seductive women and The Aeneid cautions not to let passions deter you from greater aims. I think this applies to young men as they prepare to serve missions. Oedipus the King and King Lear warn readers of the danger in making hasty judgment. This advice applies not only to kings, but to anyone in a position of responsibility and leadership. Vanity is a theme addressed in King Lear as he asks his daughters to express verbally how much they love him in order to help him decide on how to divide up his kingdom between them. We learn that you should beware of people who tell you what you want to hear. This is particularly useful advice during an election year in the modern world. And we learn from Oedipus and Dido not to be hasty to vow publically that you will act in a particular way; it might cost you your sight or your life. Now that I have taken the opportunity to read these classic works of literature, I can see why people love them enough to read them again. They can be tough to get into at first, but they are well worth the effort. I found it easy to glean modern day application from the characters and I enjoyed the rich imagery woven by each well-crafted line. And like the scriptures, I anticipate that every new reading will increase my perspective and enlarge my understanding of humanity and of myself.