The Holocaust Timeline : LUSENET : TB2K spinoff uncensored : One Thread

This is a great, detailed and informative site. Very sombering though.

The History Place-The Holocaust Timeline

-- cin (, March 06, 2000


bad URL cin. Pleez repost?

-- (, March 06, 2000.

H olocaust Timeline

Woops! =)

-- cin (, March 06, 2000.

Thanks cin,

The article said, "June 26, 1935 - Nazis pass law allowing forced abortions on women to prevent them from passing on hereditary diseases."

Now we're having a similar debate about how much genetic information life insurance companies and HMOs should receive on people, and whether it should be allowed to be held against them (in terms of rates, coverage). I wonder if some sort of "incentive" to abort might soon be provided to people with big time genetic problems.

But it's nice to know we weren't the only people down this road.

It's too bad our travelling companion is the Nazi Party.


-- Someone (, March 06, 2000.

Interesting site.

From :

"In one case, a man named Willi Schmidt was at home playing the cello. Four SS men rang the doorbell, entered and took him away, leaving his wife and three young children behind. They had mistaken Dr. Willi Schmidt, music critic for a Munich newspaper, for another Willi Schmidt on the list. Dr. Schmidt was assassinated and his body later returned to his family in a sealed coffin with orders from the Gestapo that it should not be opened."

That reminds me of the Diallo case, and a few others too.

And THIS reminds me of things a little closer to home:

"On July 13, Hitler gave a long speech to the Nazi controlled Reichstag (Parliament) in which he announced seventy four had been shot and justified the murders.

"If anyone reproaches me and asks why I did not resort to the regular courts of justice, then all I can say is this: In this hour I was responsible for the fate of the German people, and thereby I became the supreme judge of the German people."

-- Charles Underwood Farley (chuck@u.farley), March 06, 2000.


You said: "I wonder if some sort of "incentive" to abort might soon be provided to people with big time genetic problems."

I think there already has been at least an attempt to explain to folks the role genetics plays in some maladies. I won't suggest that this would be called an incentive to abort, but more an incentive to question whether further reproduction is prudent.

When my daughter was perhaps 17 months old [1980] our dog attacked her. He basically ripped a hole in her forehead, caught her cheek on the way down, and dug a hole in her jawbone with the lower portion of his bite. We rushed her to the local emergency room, but the doctor there didn't want to treat her. His theory was "This is a girl...and this is her FACE." He sent us to Children's Memorial Hospital to be treated by a plastic surgeon.

At Children's, someone attended to her wounds a bit, but we mostly waited for HOURS while the surgeon completed HIS 17-hour treatment on a child born with no bones in his face. I sat next to the boy's mother in the waiting room, and she said, "Your daughter has a hang- nail in comparison."

Perhaps a few weeks after my daughter's surgery, we began receiving information on genetic malformities from Children's Memorial. My husband questioned WHY we were getting this information, but it was clear to me that they felt some folks needed to know WHY kids were being born minus the common body parts. I know it's a touchy subject, but allow me to make a little joke, eh? If you've already had one kid born without bones, would you say, "Ya know, Marge, if we keep havin' kids we're bound to have ONE come out with bones."

-- Anita (notgiving@anymore.thingee), March 06, 2000.


I agree that giving PARENTS genetic information could save families a great deal of anguish and as a side benefit, save the country some cash. However, what I am objecting to is the other implication of the technology which is for insurance companies to screen people based on this same information. What if you and your daughter came out HER2 positive increasing your *risk* for breast cancer? Do you think that you should be asked to pay increased heatlh and life insurance premiums as you are more likely to get an expensive disease than "normal" people (as smokers are forced to pay a premium)? On the one hand, it would make sense to me as you would BE a higher risk, but on the other, I'd like everyone to have an equal shot at becoming insured!

On the developing baby issue I agree that if a universally lethal syndrome is found early in pregnancy, there's no reason to make the mother carry the baby mostly to term. The problem again though is like with firearms registration. Once the information is obtained, it doesn't disappear, whether it's needed at that time or not.

Also, I hope your daughter has recovered fully from her incident. That must have driven you nuts sitting in the waiting room that long with the poor little girl half mauled like that.


-- Someone (, March 06, 2000.


I think it will come to that whether we like it or not. Insurance companies already know quite a bit about our genetic history. One of the first questions asked when visiting a new doctor is "Are your parents still alive?" If not, they go on to ask how they died, etc., and if by a disease, if others in your family have had the same disease.

My family has a history of colon cancer. My dad died from it, all but one of his brothers died from it, my mom's brother died from it; It's a double whammy with the predisposition on both sides. For this reason, we get frequent checks of the colon. The insurance company gets the bills for these tests, so THEY know the history and I'm sure they've entered it into a database somewhere so that every OTHER insurance company knows.

We were shocked recently to find that my brother has prostate cancer. Huh? You were SUPPOSED to get colon cancer, and not NOW...but 20 years from now.

Technology and data sharing is being used to learn everything about us from our tastes in automobiles to the state of our bodies. The only thing we can do about it is withhold information [which some of us do], but withholding information from one's doctor doesn't help us.

My daughter spent many years being called 'scar face' in school. It didn't help her build confidence in herself. In the past few years, however, the scars have moved for the most into her hairline and the others can be hidden quite well with makeup. Her confidence is strong now as she turned into a lovely swan. What really amazed me is that she never developed a fear of dogs.

-- Anita (notgiving@anymore.thingee), March 06, 2000.

Actually, Someone, I think we beat the Nazi's to the punch:

Eugen ics affected Va. law / Theory advocated social engineering

-- Hoff (, March 06, 2000.

There is a very good movie that touches on this subject, called 'Gattaca'. It's now on video. I would highly recommend it.

Anita...I am so sorry to hear about what happened to your daughter. Is she now terrified of all dogs and animals?

-- cin (, March 06, 2000.

Hoff -- California routinely sterilized mentally and physically disabled people living in state institutions in the 30's.

We had an unplanned baby later in life. Genetic screening had been offered with the other pregnancies, but the last pregnancy was the occasion for intense pressure to screen for defects. I lost count of the 'counseling sessions'. I had to sign papers stating that genetic screening had been offered and that I refused after 'counseling'.

I wasn't afraid of knowing the results. I was very afraid that the next step after bad results would be extreme pressure to abort. To each his or her own, we don't abort. After all the pressure, all the counseling, all the paper signing -- the medical staff in private conversation said they wouldn't undergo the tests either. They didn't say exactly why.

All medical information goes into shared databases accessible to insurance companies. I wonder if someday no 'unplanned' babies will be allowed?

Anita, your daughter must be a very strong young woman.

-- Miss (, March 06, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ