Andreas Frewer is a professor of ethics in medicine at Friedrich-Alexander-Universität (FAU) in Erlangen, where most of a historic sanatorium and nursing home is currently being demolished. Several hundred sick people were killed there during the Nazi regime. An SZ conversation.
SZ: Mr. Frewer, the Erlangen sanatorium and nursing home is about to be demolished. What is lost as a result?
Andreas Frewer: The “HuPfla”, as it is called in Erlangen, was built in 1846 as a so-called district insane asylum, and once housed up to 1200 patients. The last wing is currently threatened with demolition. What is highly problematic: New research results show that the “euthanasia” measures of the National Socialists – namely killings by starvation – took place exactly in this part of the building complex. This place was a center of Nazi mass murder.
The number of victims in this clinic takes one’s breath away.
The dimension of the mass murder in Erlangen is actually a special one. From here, more than 900 patients were sent to their deaths with “Action T4”; deaths from starvation are likely to be at a similar level. But there is a second special feature of this historic clinic, one with a positive sign: Cases of medical resistance are documented here, a phenomenon unfortunately extremely rare in the Nazi era.
A middle section of the building complex where all this happened is supposed to remain standing.
True, but that was the place of the medical profession and civil servants. By far the larger part, where the psychiatric patients were housed, was in the basement of the two wings. The women’s wing has already been demolished, the men’s wing is still standing.
Consequently, the authentic place, which is an example of suffering, should be demolished – and the “perpetrator’s place” would remain?
That’s the way it is. Although there is no denying that the central part of the building complex is an aesthetically beautiful place. But in a “sanatorium” it’s not about the attending physicians – but about the affected patients. In the men’s wing we can document the terrible events of this place of sacrifice right down to the microarchitecture. This place is of particular importance for the history of the process, euphemistically known as “euthanasia”. Because it was actually the test phase of the Nazi mass murder. A form of killing was tried out here: some of the same medical and nursing teams from the killing centers were then employed in the concentration camps and used for the genocide.
Continuity in its most dreadful form.
That’s the way it is. This bridge from “euthanasia” to the Holocaust is historically particularly significant. And I believe that as later generations, we should ensure that it is properly documented. This once huge facility, which was previously a listed building, once consisted of many wings. Large parts of it have already been demolished, only this last building wing from 1879 still exists. You have to think very carefully before you tear it down.
Andreas Frewer, Professor of Ethics in Medicine at Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), wants to save as much of the building complex as possible.
(Photo: private)
Among other things, the Max Planck Society is building there.
Which is historically particularly explosive. Historically, this society is the direct successor organization to the Kaiser Wilhelm Society, which carried out research during the Nazi era – including on the brains of the murdered. In order not to be misunderstood: As far as I can see, everyone is in favor of us got a Max Planck Center in Erlangen. Nobody wants to prevent medical research. Being a doctor myself, research is very important. But it is important what happens where. And we have to think very carefully about whether we shouldn’t keep this last wing as far as possible for a differentiated culture of remembrance, especially since a design competition is still to come. This is a unique monument.
Those in favor of further demolition say: Contrary to the original plans, a compromise has long been found. Even the representative central part of the building, in which the “euthanasia” murders are to be commemorated in the future, was about to be demolished.
It is thanks to the dedicated action alliance “Shape commemoration – preserve HuPfla” that this did not happen. And when talking about compromise, I would like to ask a drastic counter-question: “Would someone tear down a concentration camp?”
A rhetorical question.
Even. But demolishing such a place of “euthanasia” almost completely is perhaps even more dramatic. Because killings happened here in the midst of civil society.
Here, too, many of those responsible may reply: But in Erlangen – as a result of the citizens’ protest – there has long been a commemorative concept for a memorial commissioned by well-known experts.
True, but this concept has serious weaknesses. An example: The neurologist, Nazi opponent and only German expert in the Nuremberg medical trial, Werner Leibbrand, was the managing director of the “HuPfla” for years after the Second World War. As early as 1946, together with colleagues, he published the document “On the Human Rights of the Mentally Ill” – that was even before the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. It is the first document that puts the finger in the wound and says that the Doctors have to make a fresh start. None of this is included in the commemorative concept at all. Just as little as the knowledge about the events in the said basement of the women’s and men’s wings. It should be clear that stone testimonies are becoming increasingly important at a time when most contemporary witnesses have already died. The findings on the basement are the result of the latest research. Shouldn’t medicine always be based on the latest results?
You are a professor at FAU yourself. Aren’t you afraid of being accused of getting in the way of medical progress and research at the emerging Max Planck Center?
The accusation would be far too short-sighted, also historically. Again, no one wants to stop progress. The new Max Planck Center is already there. Incidentally, Werner Leibbrand was also confronted with exactly this accusation at the Nuremberg Doctors’ Trial. With people like him, one would still be scientifically in the “Stone Age,” he was told. That was as clever as it was perfidious, because it was intended to cover up murderous experiments – and everyone always wants medical progress. Only: Even the medicine of the 1930s thought it was very “modern”.
In the women’s wing, which has since been demolished (foreground), “euthanasia” victims were also accommodated.
(Photo: Harald Sippel)
Is the women’s wing already irreversibly lost?
Unfortunately yes, “euthanasia” victims were also housed there. By the way, there was a dedicated doctor there who tried to save patients. Every memorial site manager should be able to tell you this: The actual museum in such places is the building itself. People there want to know exactly what happened where. What is difficult to understand: the official historical project did not handle the issue of location and demolition well. It is only thanks to the voluntary commitment of Erlangen residents that we now know exactly what happened at this location.
You are a member of the medical faculty in Erlangen. Are you under pressure?
There has been considerable pressure, in some cases considerable, on a number of people who are concerned with the culture of remembrance. There were colleagues at the Erlangen Clinic who said they were allowed and didn’t want to comment on the conflict with the culture of remembrance. I think that’s problematic.
That means you are under pressure.
Yes, massive pressure was exerted on several levels, which is inappropriate, since it is about clarifying historical facts and sharing history. Every doctor and scientist in a medical school should have a commitment to patients. And this ethic should include the fact that injustice and murders, which unfortunately happened in Erlangen, are dealt with adequately.
How much longer is there to save at least the men’s wing?
Difficult to judge. Probably just a few more weeks. The preparatory demolition measures have apparently already begun. It is up to politicians and those responsible to adapt the decisions to the latest findings.
The “HuPfla” is – a bitter coincidence – only a few hundred meters away from a lecture hall that was named after Rudolf Wöhrl in 2009. According to a recent report, he had been a supporting NSDAP member since 1931 and joined the SS in 1933.
Functioning in the Third Reich means shared responsibility. Our view today, on the other hand, should be focused primarily on the suffering people, on the victims. that the hall Apparently, it will bear the name “Rudolf Wöhrl” until January 2024, I don’t think that’s good. One has to ask oneself whether students should be trained for almost two more semesters in a lecture hall that bears the association with the SS in its name.