________________________________________
Las Vegas SUN
________________________________________
November 03, 2006
Some 'Lebensborn' to Meet for First Time
By MELISSA EDDY
ASSOCIATED PRESS
BERLIN (AP) - For decades they suffered in silence, aging Germans who as children were selected by the Nazis for their Aryan qualities and handed over to SS families. Collectively known as "Lebensborn children," some will gather publicly Saturday for the first time.
Many are trying to make peace with pasts they long kept cloaked from shame. They are asking questions, tracing their roots and demanding that the truth be told about SS chief Heinrich Himmler's Lebensborn, or "Source of Life," program.
"It is an important issue and it is time that it finally comes to light," said 64-year-old Dagmar Jung, whose adoptive parents refused for years to answer her questions about her past as a Lebensborn child.
This weekend, Jung will be in the eastern town of Wernigerode, where the Nazis ran the "Harz" Lebensborn home, for a meeting of Lebensspuren - Traces of Life - an association formed last year. For the first time, part of the session Saturday will be open to the public.
Of the group's 60 members, nearly two-thirds are Lebensborn children who, now in their 60s, feel a growing need to uncover their past and break one of the last taboos about the Adolf Hitler era in Germany.
Lebensborn was a lesser-known side of Nazi racial experiments. While millions of Jews and others deemed "undesirable" were being slaughtered, thousands of children were carefully selected for Aryan physical qualities and given to families of SS members to be raised.
The Nazis kept the program so secret that many of those selected often do not know who they really are.
Created in 1935, the program became the stuff of legend in the postwar years. Misleadingly depicted in several films as a high-end bordello offering blue-eyed blondes to SS officers with the aim of creating a master race, association with the program became doubly shameful.
"To this day, many of them suffer from the consequences of secrecy and the Nazi ideologies of race," said Matthias Meissner, a Lebensspuren member.
Conservative estimates put the number of Lebensborn children in Germany somewhere around 5,500, but exact numbers do not exist.
"There is far too little written about it in history books and reference works," said Jung, who has spent 30 years trying to piece together her true identity.
After years of urging, her adoptive father revealed clues that finally led to her birth mother, and Jung has built a relationship with her. The search for her father took several more years and ended in disappointment when Jung discovered they had lived in the same city for years but he died in 1963.
In the early years, those running Lebensborn preyed on the difficult situation many unwed pregnant women found themselves in during those more conservative times. It offered them a chance to have babies in comfortable state-run homes, where the children stayed until they were adopted.
Adoptive mothers and fathers were required to prove not only their Aryan qualities, but also the absence of any mental or other genetic illnesses or defects. Only about 50 percent were accepted, historians say.
Lebensborn was expanded after the Nazis overran Denmark and Norway in 1940. There, German occupation soldiers were encouraged to find suitable local partners, who were offered the chance to have babies in one of 10 Lebensborn homes set up in the region.
Some 8,000 children were eventually born in Norway, and thousands more were registered in Denmark. Lebensborn also operated in the occupied Netherlands.
Stigmatized and reviled by their own societies as "war babies," some Lebensborn children began speaking out several years ago. In 2002, the Norwegian government offered them compensation.
In Germany, the focus is more on education than on compensation, and on creating a network of support. Germans raised in the program have contacted similar groups in Denmark and Norway.
"I want to give others courage," said Jung. "To send the message, no matter how old you are, it is worth it to find out where you came from."
--
All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
GREAT INSIGHT FROM GEORGEANN HUGHES OF THE BYTE SHOW
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2006 02:32:17 -0700
From: "GeorgeAnn" <thebyteshow@zianet.com>
To: "Russ Dizdar" <shatterxmail@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Lebensborn
1. Some 'Lebensborn' to Meet for First Time
2. Secret Nazi 'baby farm' children meet
______________________________________
November 03, 2006 at 11:40:14 PST
Some 'Lebensborn' to Meet for First Time
By MELISSA EDDY
http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/w-eur/2006/nov/03/110306897.html
ASSOCIATED PRESS
BERLIN (AP) - For decades they suffered in silence, aging Germans
who
as children were selected by the Nazis for their Aryan qualities
and
handed over to SS families. Collectively known as "Lebensborn
children," some will gather publicly Saturday for the first time.
Many are trying to make peace with pasts they long kept cloaked
from
shame. They are asking questions, tracing their roots and
demanding
that the truth be told about SS chief Heinrich Himmler's
Lebensborn,
or "Source of Life," program.
"It is an important issue and it is time that it finally comes to
light," said 64-year-old Dagmar Jung, whose adoptive parents
refused
for years to answer her questions about her past as a Lebensborn
child.
This weekend, Jung will be in the eastern town of Wernigerode,
where
the Nazis ran the "Harz" Lebensborn home, for a meeting of
Lebensspuren - Traces of Life - an association formed last year.
For
the first time, part of the session Saturday will be open to the
public.
Of the group's 60 members, nearly two-thirds are Lebensborn
children
who, now in their 60s, feel a growing need to uncover their past
and
break one of the last taboos about the Adolf Hitler era in
Germany.
Lebensborn was a lesser-known side of Nazi racial experiments.
While
millions of Jews and others deemed "undesirable" were being
slaughtered, thousands of children were carefully selected for
Aryan
physical qualities and given to families of SS members to be
raised.
The Nazis kept the program so secret that many of those selected
often
do not know who they really are.
Created in 1935, the program became the stuff of legend in the
postwar
years. Misleadingly depicted in several films as a high-end
bordello
offering blue-eyed blondes to SS officers with the aim of creating
a
master race, association with the program became doubly shameful.
"To this day, many of them suffer from the consequences of secrecy
and
the Nazi ideologies of race," said Matthias Meissner, a
Lebensspuren
member.
Conservative estimates put the number of Lebensborn children in
Germany somewhere around 5,500, but exact numbers do not exist.
"There is far too little written about it in history books and
reference works," said Jung, who has spent 30 years trying to
piece
together her true identity.
After years of urging, her adoptive father revealed clues that
finally
led to her birth mother, and Jung has built a relationship with
her.
The search for her father took several more years and ended in
disappointment when Jung discovered they had lived in the same
city
for years but he died in 1963.
In the early years, those running Lebensborn preyed on the
difficult
situation many unwed pregnant women found themselves in during
those
more conservative times. It offered them a chance to have babies
in
comfortable state-run homes, where the children stayed until they
were
adopted.
Adoptive mothers and fathers were required to prove not only their
Aryan qualities, but also the absence of any mental or other
genetic
illnesses or defects. Only about 50 percent were accepted,
historians
say.
Lebensborn was expanded after the Nazis overran Denmark and Norway
in
1940. There, German occupation soldiers were encouraged to find
suitable local partners, who were offered the chance to have
babies in
one of 10 Lebensborn homes set up in the region.
Some 8,000 children were eventually born in Norway, and thousands
more
were registered in Denmark. Lebensborn also operated in the
occupied
Netherlands.
Stigmatized and reviled by their own societies as "war babies,"
some
Lebensborn children began speaking out several years ago. In 2002,
the
Norwegian government offered them compensation.
In Germany, the focus is more on education than on compensation,
and
on creating a network of support. Germans raised in the program
have
contacted similar groups in Denmark and Norway.
"I want to give others courage," said Jung. "To send the message,
no
matter how old you are, it is worth it to find out where you came
from."
_________________________________________________
Secret Nazi 'baby farm' children meet
By ALLAN HALL
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/
worldnews.html?in_article_id=414385&in_page_id=1811
Last updated at 23:56pm on 3rd November 2006
Children born on the Nazi baby farms were intended to be the
germseed
for Hitler's Ayran master race
Children born on Nazi baby farms who were intended to be the
germseed
for Hitler's Ayran master race are meeting in public to break a
taboo
that has lasted more than 60 years.
They are the product of the Lebensborn programme of the S.S., the
'Fountain of Life' scheme that turned racially and idealogically
pure
S.S. men into studs and blonde, blue-eyed single girls into
child-rearing machines for the Fuehrer.
Thousands of such children were born in Lebensborn camps across
Europe. They were immediately seperated from their mothers to be
brought up in homes where the only religion was Nazism and
qualities
like mercy and kindness were frowned upon.
Hitler and his S.S. chief Heinrich Himmler believed they were
creating
a superrace: instead the lack of affection and poor education
besides
Nazi indoctrination led many to be educationally backward and
emotionally crippled.
The results of this genetic engineering experiment have lived in
silence, and often shame, for decades. In Norway, where S.S.
eugenecists decided the natives had the right qualities to produce
Ayran children for the Reich, some still battle through the courts
for
compensation for postwar humiliation and neglect.
"It is an important issue and it is time that it finally comes to
light," said Dagmar Jung, 64, a Lebensborn child whose adoptive
parents refused for years to answer her questions about her past.
Today she travels to the eastern German town of Wernigerode, were
the
Nazis ran the "Harz" Lebensborn home or the first public meeting
of
the Lebensspuren, or "Traces of Life", association that the
children
formed last year.
Of its 60 members, nearly two-thirds are Lebensborn children who,
now
in their 60s, feel a growing need to uncover their past and break
one
of the last taboos about the Nazi era in Germany.
For the first time, parts of their meeting today will be open to
the
public. "To this day, many of them suffer from the consequences of
secrecy and the Nazi ideologies of race," said Matthias Meissner
of
Lebensspuren.
Conservative estimates put the number of Lebensborn children in
Germany somewhere around 5,500, but exact numbers do not exist.
The Lebensborn programme became known in England during the 1980's
when it was revealed that Princess Michael of Kent's father was an
S.S. officer involved in the planning of the project.
Mothers and fathers accepted for it were required to prove not
only
their Aryan qualities, but also the absence of any mental or other
genetic illnesses or defects.
--
News " World news
Secret Nazi 'baby farm' children meet
By ALLAN HALL Last updated at 23:56pm on 3rd November 2006
Reader comments (0)
Children born on the Nazi baby farms were intended to be the germseed for Hitler's Ayran master race
" NEWS HOMEPAGE
Children born on Nazi baby farms who were intended to be the germseed for Hitler's Ayran master race are meeting in public to break a taboo that has lasted more than 60 years.
They are the product of the Lebensborn programme of the S.S., the 'Fountain of Life' scheme that turned racially and idealogically pure S.S. men into studs and blonde, blue-eyed single girls into child-rearing machines for the Fuehrer.
Thousands of such children were born in Lebensborn camps across Europe. They were immediately seperated from their mothers to be brought up in homes where the only religion was Nazism and qualities like mercy and kindness were frowned upon.
Hitler and his S.S. chief Heinrich Himmler believed they were creating a superrace: instead the lack of affection and poor education besides Nazi indoctrination led many to be educationally backward and emotionally crippled.
The results of this genetic engineering experiment have lived in silence, and often shame, for decades. In Norway, where S.S. eugenecists decided the natives had the right qualities to produce Ayran children for the Reich, some still battle through the courts for compensation for postwar humiliation and neglect.
"It is an important issue and it is time that it finally comes to light," said Dagmar Jung, 64, a Lebensborn child whose adoptive parents refused for years to answer her questions about her past.
Today she travels to the eastern German town of Wernigerode, were the Nazis ran the "Harz" Lebensborn home or the first public meeting of the Lebensspuren, or "Traces of Life", association that the children formed last year.
Of its 60 members, nearly two-thirds are Lebensborn children who, now in their 60s, feel a growing need to uncover their past and break one of the last taboos about the Nazi era in Germany.
For the first time, parts of their meeting today will be open to the public. "To this day, many of them suffer from the consequences of secrecy and the Nazi ideologies of race," said Matthias Meissner of Lebensspuren.
Conservative estimates put the number of Lebensborn children in Germany somewhere around 5,500, but exact numbers do not exist.
The Lebensborn programme became known in England during the 1980's when it was revealed that Princess Michael of Kent's father was an S.S. officer involved in the planning of the project.
Mothers and fathers accepted for it were required to prove not only their Aryan qualities, but also the absence of any mental or other genetic illnesses or defects.
Add your comment Reader comments (0)
The “Lebensborn”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Picture found on a German soldier: the kidnapping of a Polish (?) child
Lebensborn means "spring of life". The "Lebensborn" project was one of most secret and terrifying Nazi projects. Heinrich Himmler created The "Lebensborn" on December 12th, 1935. The goal of this society ("Registered Society Lebensborn - Lebensborn Eingetragener Verein") was to offer to young girls "racially pure" the possibility to give birth to a child in secret. The child was then given to the SS organization which took in charge his "education" and adoption.
In the beginning, the "Lebensborn" were SS nurseries. But in order to create a "super-race", the SS transformed these nurseries in "meeting places" for "racially pure" German women who wanted to meet and make children with SS officers. The children born in the Lebensborn were taken in charge by the SS and it is important to know that most of them were also victims of this race policy....
From 1939, one of the most horrible side of the Lebensborn policy was the kidnapping of children "racially goods" in the eastern occupied countries. These kidnappings were organized by the SS in order to take by force children who matched the Nazi's racial criteria (blond hair, blue eyes, etc....). Thousands of children were transferred to the "Lebensborn" centers in order to be "Germanized". In these centers, everything was done to force the children to reject and forget their birth parents. As an example, the SS nurses tried to persuade the children that they were deliberately abandoned by their parents. The children who refused the Nazi education were often beaten. Most of them were finally transferred to concentration camps (most of the time Kalish in Poland) and exterminated. The others were adopted by SS families.
In 1942, in reprisals of the assassination of the SS governor Heydrich in Prague, a SS unit exterminated the entire male population of a small village called Lidice. During this "operation", some SS made a selection of the children. 91 of them were considered as good enough to be "Germanized" and sent to Germany. The others were sent to special children camps (i.e. Dzierzazna & Litzmannstadti) and later to the extermination canters.
It is nearly impossible to know how much children were kidnapped in the eastern occupied countries. In 1946, it was estimated that more than 250,000 were kidnapped and sent by force to Germany. Only 25,000 were retrieved after the war and sent back to their family. It is known that several German families refused to give back the children they had received from the Lebensborn centers. In some cases, the children themselves refused to come back in their original family: they were victims of the Nazi propaganda and believed that they were pure Germans. It is also known that thousand of children not "good enough" to be Germanized were simply exterminated.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: The Forgotten Camps
© 2000 Maureen Dabbagh
author
“Recovery of Internationally Abducted Children”
Introduction
American children abducted to Germany are not being returned as sent down by the articles of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, reports Mike Dewine, Republican Senator for Ohio. Dewine explains,
"Germany has signed the Hague Convention, which means that they agree that if a child is kidnapped to Germany, to return that child to the country wherever that child came from," said Sen. Mike Dewine, R-Ohio. "Yet, in only about a fifth of the cases do they do this." (CNN, 2000).
After a meeting between American President Clinton and German President Schroder, German authorities have indicated that they were addressing U.S. concerns that children that had been international child abducted and not returned by setting up a special task force with the United States to Review individual cases.
“At a meeting in Berlin on June 1, 2000, Chancellor Gerhard Schroder and President Bill Clinton addressed the issue of cross-border custody disputes and accusations that German courts unfairly favor German parent in awarding custody. Schroder proposed that the Federal Ministry of justice and the U.S. Department of justice establish a working group to examine individual cases and to consider whether instituting changes are needed to improve resolution of custody disputes within the framework of the Hague Convention.” (German Embassy, 2000).
The high rate of non-return of American children by German authorities may be the result of the current social welfare practices of the German State, with Hague non-compliance being only one of the “symptoms” of German Social welfare policies and practices. In the majority of cases involving children that have been abducted to Germany, social services and or a psychologist were called in to provide the Hague courts and family courts with recommendations regarding return and access in these abduction cases. The courts, deferring to the recommendations and finding of representatives from the German social Services and child psychologists, have put into place a practice of recognizing those recommendations in deference to the Hague guidelines. It is therefore suggested that the source of non-returns of American child by German authorities lies not with the Hague courts, but rather with German social welfare practices. While children have been returned to the United States under the Hague treaty, the question remains as to way so few returns are ordered or honored as well as access issues. In order to determine the practice of the German social welfare system in cases of international child abduction, a look at the evolution of that system may provide answers. It should be noted that Germany has been aggressively working to restructure their social welfare system in efforts to improve services. The current system is defined as:
“Social Service Agency head of German Welfare Organizations Approximately 1 million full-time workers. This year, the Social Service Agency of the Evangelical Church in Germany takes over the rotating role of overall control / coordination of the six.” (EDK, 2000).
History: Re-defining the Family role
Post WW1 found Germany in a state of economic crisis. With the rise of Hitler and the Nazi party, laws were put into place which redefined the rights, duties and status of the individual in German society. These affected the roles of women, men and children at the most intimate level of social obligation in regards to their role in the family unit. Those roles were often obeyed as a result of economic relief to those who were compliant to the law, while others were forced to obedience. The restructuring of German society and the explicit defining of the roles of individuals and their obligations to Germany had a profound impact on all, including the children. An understanding of the specific laws pertaining to children then and now may lead to a better understanding of why children are not returned, or why children are not returned as desired by the United States.
In redefining the role of individuals, Germany past a series of laws known as the Nuremberg laws. These laws put into place mechanisms to further the adherence to the redefined roles of individuals non-Aryan individuals. (Gilbert, 1979).
Some of the issues addressed were:
1. Who could marry
2. Who could have children
3. The number of children considered to be a family
4. Grounds for divorce
5. Women in the work place
6. Men’s roles
7. Child Support
8. Education
These laws, known as the “race laws” were put into place to also divide and define Aryan from non-Aryan people. These laws had a profound effect on individual family members from both groups. The central theme to all social restructuring laws was to create a master race of German people and at the same time, exterminate those that did not meet the definition of Aryan. While the history of the Holocaust is well documented, the plight of children and the affects these laws had on children have not.
In order to carry out this agenda, Aryan mothers were encouraged to have children to increase the Aryan populous, in part, by:
1. Lowering of marriage law
2. Having sexual intercourse with only Aryan men
3. Encouragement of child birth outside of marriage
4. Creation of the Lebensborn Program
5. Outlawed working mothers
6. Rewarded mothers with large families
7. Outlawed abortion
8. Outlawed marriage for sterile women
9. School ciriculum for girls was geared towards physical education and homemaking skills
Laws and programs effecting non-Aryan women and children included:
1. Sterilization
2. Illegal to have sexual intercourse with an Aryan male
3. Children were experimented on (twin experiments) in an effort to determine how twins were conceived for the further population of the Aryan race.
4. Non-Aryan children not permitted to attend school, or education was minimal
5. Non-Aryan children not permitted to play in parks, go to children’s activities
7. Non-Aryan children were placed into forced labor
8. non-Aryan children were routinely separated from their families
9. Non-Aryan children were murdered.
In both categories, fathers by far and large were absent from the children’s lives. Many children, both Aryan and non-Aryan were sent to live with family, friends, convents and orphanages for protection during the war years. Others were orphans of soldiers or separated in concentration camps. Still yet were a category of children that were kidnapped by order of the German State. It is this group and the policies regarding the treatment and “Germanization” of these children that were forcibly removed from their families under State ordered international kidnapping laws and policies.
Lebensborn: State Ordered International Child Abduction
The encouragement of producing Aryan children lead to the lebensborn program. This program not only encouraged Aryan women to have children, but also rewarded those efforts through economic incentive. Lebensborn homes were set up in Germany and occupied countries for the benefit of Aryan mothers to live during their pregnancy and delivery. The demand for children brought with it a change in moral code regarding unwed mothers. Unwed mothers were elevated to the status of the married woman, including the ability to use Mrs. In front of their name. These children were often adopted out or housed in orphanages. Nazi SS men were ordered to father children with Aryan women. It has been suggested by John Hooper, that economic incentives offered to those women prompted some into compliance at a time when the economy was in a disastrous state.
“Though portrayed as a way of getting young Nazi to “, mate for the fatherland”, the Lebensborn project had some characteristics of a welfare scheme for single mothers.” (Hooper, 1999).
While many Aryan children were being conceived and born under the Lebensborn program, authorities were not satisfied with the rate of population increase of Aryan children and expanded the Lebensborn program. Himmler (1943) ordered the international kidnapping of children from those countries they had conquered. In a speech to the SS Group leaders in Poznan, Himmler ordered those children meeting racial qualifications be abducted from families in conquered countries, particularly Poland. These children were placed with German families in Germany.
“Such good blood of our own kind as there may be among the nations we shall acquire for ourselves, if necessary by taking away the children and bringing them up among us.” (Himmler, Oct ,1943)
The children abducted under the policy and programs of the Third Reich, specifically the SS, fell under the Lebensborn program. The Intent was to “Germanize” these abducted children. German authorities believed that younger children would acclimate easier than did older children. As such, age limits were discussed in regards to those children that should be kidnapped.
“Dear comrade Brandt, Concerning the matter "children of executed Czechs" I wish to reply to your letter as directed to SS-Lieutenant General Frank, date 6 February of this year, diary index No. 26/2/44 g Bra/H, that the conversation between SS-Lieutenant General Frank and SS Colonel Sollmann took place on 2 July of last year in Prague. Colonel Sollmann stated during this conversation that racially valuable children up to six years would be considered eligible by the "Lebensborn"... It was intended, to have children up to six years and suitable for Germanization brought into German families through the "Lebensborn"... It is intended to have the racially acceptable elements of the collectively housed children transferred through the "Lebensborn" to German families or to a children's home whereas the children over 16 years are to be sent to a concentration camp. “ (the Minister of State for the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, 1944).
Abducted children taken into the Lebensborn program were systematically “Germanized” by programming [brainwashing] the child into what the authorities expected him or her to be. Names were changed and they were encouraged not to speak any language other than German. The children were not allowed to contact their families and were often told that their families no longer existed or that their families did not want them.
“Thousands of children were transferred to the "Lebensborn" centers in order to be "Germanized". In these centers, everything was done to force the children to reject and forget their birth parents. As an example, the SS nurses tried to persuade the children that they were deliberately abandoned by their parents. The children who refused the Nazi education were often beaten.” (JSOURCE, 2000).
While the Actual numbers of children internationally abducted through the Lebensobrn program are unknown, estimates reach as high as a quarter of a million. Ironically, even after Europe was liberated, many German families refused to return the kidnapped children to their families, citing they were too ‘Germanized” to return.
“In 1946, it was estimated that more than 250,000 were kidnapped and sent by force to Germany. Only 25,000 were retrieved after the war and sent back to their family. It is known that several German families refused to give back the children they had received from the Lebensborn centers. In some cases, the children themselves refused to come back in their original family: they were victims of the Nazi propaganda and believed that they were pure Germans. It is also known that thousand of children not "good enough" to be Germanized were simply exterminated.” (Châtel & Ferree, 1997-2000).
Children abducted under the Lebensborn program that were targeted for ‘Germanization’ were programmed [brainwashed] using a variety of techniques. They included:
1. The forced separation from family
2. Denial of access to family
3. Forced separation from friends
4. Forced separation from community
5. Restrictions on speaking any language but German
6. Children were often told their parents were dead, did not want them or they were unfit
7. Children were told German way was superior than their own culture
8. Children denied knowledge of their past
9. German abductors can qualify for economic incentives from German government.
The Child Victims
The effects of the Lebensborn program are evident more than half a century later as the children that were products of this program, defined in the Nuremberg Trails as crimes against humanity, struggle for identity. Several groups exist in Europe for Lebensborn children to cope with the decades of uncertainty and their search for identity.
“The personal histories of the children of Lebensborn who ended up in East Germany were hidden for decades by the authorities of that postwar Communist state. .. says Wilhelm Lenz, head of the department for documents from the Third Reich. "Until recently, many didn't know or suspect they were Lebensborn children." (Williams, 2000).
"Before the change (in 1989), no one ever talked about the past," says Harzendorf, who still lives barely half a mile from the orphanage. "All my foster mother ever told me was that I didn't have any parents anymore and I was coming to live with her. She was a good person and would never have imagined such things (as Lebensborn) ever existed." (Williams, 2000).
“After the war, many of the Lebensborn children grew up scorned as Nazi progeny and tormented by dark uncertainties about their origins." (Hammer, 2000).
“Having rejected our origins, we have ended up as refugees in our own country. The result is that most of us don't know other NS children but our own brothers and sisters. .. we NS children have fought a battle lasting forty-five years more than our parents' war. This one lasted only five years. We have been in continuous struggle with society, with our parents and with ourselves." (Klüwer , 2000).
Abductions from The United States of America
Today, children are still being abducted to Germany from other countries. While these abductions are no longer ordered by the German government, German practice in regards to the return of these children as well as “germanizing” them, appear to find more similarity in the Lebensborn Program than in the Hague Treaty, an International treaty providing language that provides for the return of children that have been illegally abducted to Germany. The Hague Treaty is not the only treaty which Germany has ratified in regards to the treatment of children.
As a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, obligations towards recognition of a child’s rights as well as obligations towards to signatory state to implement policies and resources that would ensure those rights, particularly in regards to parental abduction, have been ignored. While the Child’s Rights Convention is not provide for any mechanism by which individual grievances can be heard, it does recognize that children are deserving of special consideration and protection. In regards to parental abduction, the Rights of the Child Convention states that signatories, at the highest level, will ensure these rights:
1. The right to know and be cared for by his or her parents.
2. The right of the child to preserve his or her identity, including nationality, name and family relations as recognized by law without unlawful interference.
3. Where a child is illegally deprived of some or all of the elements of his or her identity, States Parties shall provide appropriate assistance and protection, with a view to speedily re-establishing his or her identity.
4. Ensure that a child shall not be separated from his or her parents against their will
5. Respect the right of the child who is separated from one or both parents to maintain personal relations and direct contact with both parents on a regular basis
6. In accordance with the obligation of States Parties under article 9, paragraph 1, applications by a child or his or her parents to enter or leave a State Party for the purpose of family reunification shall be dealt with by States Parties in a positive, humane and expeditious manner. States Parties shall further ensure that the submission of such a request shall entail no adverse consequences for the applicants and for the members of their family.
7. A child whose parents reside in different States shall have the right to maintain on a regular basis, save in exceptional circumstances personal relations and direct contacts with both parents.
8. Respect the right of the child and his or her parents to leave any country, including their own, and to enter their own country.
9. States Parties shall take measures to combat the illicit transfer and non-return of children abroad.
10. shall respect the rights and duties of the parents and, when applicable, legal guardians, to provide direction to the child in the exercise of his or her right in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child
11. No child shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his or her honor and reputation.
12. Shall use their best efforts to ensure recognition of the principle that both parents have common responsibilities for the upbringing and development of the child
13. Measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse, while in the care of parent(s), legal guardian(s) or any other person who has the care of the child.
14. When considering solutions, due regard shall be paid to the desirability of continuity in a child's upbringing and to the child's ethnic, religious, cultural and linguistic background
15. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to promote physical and psychological recovery and social reintegration of a child victim of: any form of neglect, exploitation, or abuse; torture or any other form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; or armed conflicts. Such recovery and reintegration shall take place in an environment which fosters the health, self-respect and dignity of the child.
The underlying theme to all the right dues to a child is “in the child’s best interest”. It is in the context that the German social Welfare system appears to define a child’s best interest as that of being “German”, even to the extent of “Germanizing” the child as per the Lebensborn policy. It is under the theory of “best interest of the child” that German psychologist, family courts and social welfare services, apply policies and practice in direct violation of both The Hague Convention and the Rights of the Child Treaty. German social welfare does not recognize child abduction as child abuse, and therefore, the perpetrators are often rewarded and protected by the German system, further enabling the abuse of the child. German social welfare system also does not recognize reunification, deferring rather to denial of access in the event a child has been brainwashed or “Germanized” as seen in many of the Lebensborn cases.
"Their view of the child's welfare is such -- and it's so distorted -- that there's no way they can conceive of a child ever being better off in any country outside of Germany," Feinerman said. [Law professor]. (CNN, 2000).
The effects of the Nuremberg laws as the Lebensborn policies put into place during the Nazi era in regards to the roles and responsibility of family members are still being felt. It may be these, the social and welfare policies and practices of Germany, that are retarding the return of internationally abducted children, rather than the Hague Treaty, citing failure of the Hague as one of the casualties of social welfare policies and practices. Allegations against Germany in its non-return policy of abducted children come not only from the United States,[ but also France].
“I informed him [German Judge] that the "new" German law stated that I had unquestionable rights to visitation. The judge told me that he "did not believe in the new law". (Gebhard,2000).
The current practice of those that have abducted children to Germany as well as the systems that support and enable these abductions, i.e. German social welfare services and German child psychologists are ‘Germanized’ using a variety of techniques. They include:
1. The forced separation from family
2. Denial of access to family
3. Forced separation from friends
4. Forced separation from community
5. Restrictions on speaking any language but German
6. Children being often told their parents were dead, did not want them or they were unfit
7. Children being told that the German way was superior than their own culture
8. Children being denied knowledge of their past
9. German abductors being eligible for economic incentives from German government.
Concern over abduction complaints regarding Germany, the governments of both France and the United States have resulted in meetings with German authorities in an attempt to remedy the problem. There was no question that the complaints by brokenhearted parents were true. Children were being abducted to Germany and German authorities were not returning them to their parents as per the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Even with the Presidents of both the United States and Germany meeting and discussing the problem, little has been accomplished except promised visitation to a selected few cases. The United States Congress responded to allegations of German non-compliance by urging compliance to the Hague.
“Whereas some contracting states, for example Germany, routinely invoke Article 13 as a justification for non-return, rather than resorting to it in a small number of wholly exceptional cases …[H. Con. Res. 293].
The House passed Congressional Resolution naming Germany as one of the countries in violation of the Hague treaty in regards to their refusal to return American children, or even ensure access between the children and the American parent.
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That Congress urges--
(1) all contracting parties to the Hague Convention, particularly European civil law countries that consistently violate the Hague Convention such as Austria, Germany and Sweden, to comply fully with both the letter and spirit of their international legal obligations under the Convention;
(2) all contracting parties to the Hague Convention to ensure their compliance with the Hague Convention by enacting effective implementing legislation and educating their judicial and law enforcement authorities;
(3) all contracting parties to the Hague Convention to honor their commitments and return abducted or wrongfully retained children to their place of habitual residence without reaching the merits of any underlying custody dispute and ensure parental access rights by removing obstacles to the exercise of such rights;
(4) the Secretary of State to disseminate to all Federal and State courts the Department of State's annual report to Congress on Hague Convention compliance and related matters; and
(5) each contracting party to the Hague Convention to further educate its central authority and local law enforcement authorities regarding the Hague Convention, the severity of the problem of international child abduction, and the need for immediate action when a parent of an abducted child seeks their assistance.
“Germanization” is another term for programming [brainwashing] a child to acclimate to the German culture, giving preference to those things that are German, whilst divorcing themselves from those things not considered German, thus retarding any sense of ethnicity outside that which is German. In Dr. Nancy Faulkner’s presentation to the United Nations, Human Rights Commission, 1999, Parental Child Abduction is Child Abuse, she writes, “Children who have been psychologically violated and maltreated through the act of abduction are more likely to exhibit a variety of psychological and social handicaps. Faulkner’s seventeen page report outlines the emotional and psychological effects that abduction can have on children, including alienation.
“‘Brainwashing’ and ’programming’ are terms used more and more frequently by experts of parental child abduction. These terms may initially offend or alienate the reader who is not familiar with Parental Alienation and abduction dynamics. ‘Brainwashing’ and ‘programming’—or changing a child’s belief systems,--may be intentional, or, it may be the unintentional process of a parent imposing their belief systems on the child through an extended period of inadvertent repetition.”. (Faulkner,1999).
In the process of “Germanizing” American abducted children, different forms of alienation, and programming [brainwashing] are being used to program any sense of being American out of them.
“Naomi (now 12) exhibits the mentality of a hostage. She is afraid to talk to me freely on the phone in her father's presence. In CA she was an excellent student, but in Germany she barely passed to the next grade level. Her teacher for the previous two years commented on her report card, "she cannot formulate her own independent ideas", contradicting the German Youth Authority and judges who said, she was mature and capable of forming her own opinions. She told us, she has difficulties concentrating in school.” (Gerbatsch-Bornemisza, 2000).
Records indicate that American children have had their names changed by the abductor. The vast majority of abducted children are forbidden to contact their parents in the United States.
“…it will be 3 years since I have seen my children or spoken with them. The German authorities refuse to tell me where they are.” (Marquette, 2000).
Abducted American children are taught to speak German, forgetting English. Many abducted children under the Lebensborn program were not returned after the war because they had become too “Germanized”, so is the reasoning for German authorities in not returning children abducted today.
“Daniel and Michelle now speak only German and cannot understand English. The German courts have used this language barrier as another justification for keeping them in Germany.” (Jeffreys, 2000).
“…because the children had been living in Germany for over a year now (This was due to the fact that the case was dragged on despite the requests my lawyers and I made to have the case speeded up) and because they were in German schools and adapting well, it would cause undue stress to have then moved back to the US.” (Vajko, 2000).
“A German court ruled in 1995 that the children had bonded with the foster family and would suffer if they were returned to their father.” (CNN, 2000).
Economic incentives also exist today for German abductors. German courts are issuing orders for American parents to pay child support for their illegally kidnapped child whom they are denied access to. German foster care families receive money from the German government on a monthly basis. The amount of money these foster care families receive is dependent on the number of children they have taken in.
“Wehs, who have six foster children and get paid the equivalent of $1,000 a month for each…” (Jeffreys, 2000).
“I have done nothing wrong, have always played by the rules of the German courts, have continued paying child support, but have not seen my children in almost six years. Physical and psychological bonds have been severed between two children and a father who loves them.” (Gebhard, 2000).
Today’s internationally abducted children find themselves searching for answers and some sense of identity in their adult years. Many of the Lebensborn children are now grandparents and a new generation of lost children are being harvested by Germany.
“As adults, many victims of bitter custody battles who had been permanently removed from a target parent, whisked away to a new town and given a new identity, still long to be reunited with the lost parent. The loss cannot be undone. Childhood cannot be recaptured. Gone forever is that sense of history, intimacy, lost input of values and morals, self-awareness through knowing one’s beginnings, love, contact with extended family, and much more. Virtually no child possesses the ability to protect him-or herself against such an undignified and total loss”. (Clawar & Rivlin, p.105).
Germany is a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. This international treaty sets forth ideals regarding the basic rights of children. This treaty addresses issues of parental abduction and the right of every child to know their parent and extended family members. It provides for the “ethnic” protection of children and for children and parents to have access to each without fear of reprisal from governments. The ideals and beliefs that children have rights and are entitled to certain protection are the to be ensured by the signatory country.
Germany has not only failed in implementing the Hague Convention, but has grossly infringed on the basic rights of the child as defined in the Child’s Rights Convention by arguing the “best interests of the child” resembling many of the Lebensborn ideals, polices and practices. There is no room in the civilized world for the barbaric and inhuman practices against children to continue, regardless of how well disguised under the auspices of “best interests of the child”, in programs such as the Lebensborn or refusing to return children because they have been “Germanized”. The German social and welfare attitudes based in the Lebensborn ideology have failed to recognize abduction and denial of access as abuse, just as the SS refused to consider the State ordering of child abduction to be “Crimes Against Humanity”. The current practice of German authorities in the handling of the vast majority of children abducted to Germany, not only of children from American, but also from countries like France, likewise are not handled nor viewed as child abuse. A closer look at the attitudes that continue to influence the German system, supporting abduction and Germanization, may provide a basis for restructuring that system so that it falls within the acceptable western norm in regards to the handling of children’s issues.
