A Human Paradox: The Nazi Legacy of Pernkopf’s Atlas

PDF
Published: Dec 31, 2019
DOI: https://doi.org/10.12681/cjp.21076
Keywords:
human anatomy medical humanities narrative analysis ethics holocaust history of medicine
Jane A. Hartsock
Indiana Health University
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2359-7706
Emily S. Beckman
Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4966-0950
Abstract
Eduard Pernkopf’s Atlas of Topographical and Applied Human Anatomy is a four-volume anatomical atlas published between 1937 and 1963, and it is generally believed to be the most comprehensive, detailed, and accurate anatomy textbook ever created. However, a 1997 investigation into “Pernkopf’s Atlas,” raised troubling questions regarding the author’s connection to the Nazi regime and the still unresolved issue of whether its illustrations relied on Jewish or other political prisoners, including those executed in Nazi concentration camps. Following this investigation, the book was removed from both anatomy classrooms and library bookshelves. A debate has ensued over the book’s continued use, and justification for its use has focused on two issues: (1) there is no definitive proof the book includes illustrations of concentration camp prisoners or Jewish individuals in particular, and (2) there is no contemporary equivalent to this text. However, both points fail to address the central importance of the book, not simply as part of anatomy instruction, but also as a comprehensive historical narrative with important ethical implications. Having encountered a first edition copy, these authors were given a unique opportunity to engage with the text through the respective humanities lenses of history, ethics, and narrative. In doing so, an instructive and profound irony has surfaced: Nazis, including Pernkopf, viewed specific groups of people as less than human, giving rise to unthinkable atrocities perpetuated against them. However, these same individuals became the sources for the creation of the Atlas, which served as the model for primary instruction on the human form for more than half of the twentieth century. In this article, we recount the difficult and somewhat opaque provenance of this book, engage the ethical questions surrounding both its creation and its use, and ultimately propose a pedagogical methodology for its continued use in medical education.
Article Details
  • Section
  • Articles
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g. post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (preferably in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.

Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Author Biographies
Jane A. Hartsock, Indiana Health University

Director, Department of Clinical Ethics

Indiana University Health

Adjunct Assistant Professor, Medical Humanities and Health Studies

IU School of Liberal Arts, IUPUI

Emily S. Beckman, Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis

Director, Assistant Professor
Medical Humanities and Health Studies
IU School of Liberal Arts, IUPUI
Dept. of Medicine
Indiana University School of Medicine

References
Aharinejad, Sayed Hossein, and Stephen W. Carmichael. “First Hand Accounts of Events in the Laboratory of Prof. Eduard Pernkopf.” Clinical Anatomy 26, no 3 (2013): 297-303.
Angetter, Daniela C. “Anatomical Science at University of Vienna 1938-45.” The Lancet 355, no. 9213 (2000): 1454-1457.
Arango, Dillon, Patrick Grieffenstein, and James P. O’Leary. “Selected Anatomists: At the Boundary of Contemporary Ethics.” The Journal of the American Medical Association – Surgery 148, no. 1 (2013): 94-98.
Atlas, Michel C. “Ethics and Access to Teaching Materials in the Medical Library: The Case of the Pernkopf Atlas.” Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 89, no. 1 (2001): 51-58.
Beecher, Henry. “Ethics and Clinical Research.” The New Engand Journal of Medicine 278, no. 26 (1966): 1425-1430.
Begley, Sharon. “The Surgeon Had a Dilemma only a Nazi Medical Text Could Resolve. Was it Ethical to Use It?” In STAT (2019). Accessed August 20, 2019. https://www.statnews.com/2019/05/30/surgical-dilemma-only-nazi-medical-text-could-resolve/.
Brody, Howard. “Defining the Medical Humanities: Three Conceptions and Three Narratives.” Journal of Medical Humanities 32, no. 1 (2011): 1-7.
Büttner, Johannes. “The Origin of Clinical Laboratories.” European Journal of Clinical Chemistry and Clinical Biochemistry 30, no. 10 (1992): 585-593.
Carson, Ronald A. “The Moral of the Story.” In Stories and Their Limits: Narrative Approaches to Bioethics, edited by Hilde Lindemann, 232-237. New York: Routledge, 1997.
Coombs, Demetrius, and Steven J. Peitzman. “Medical Students’ Assessment of Eduard Pernkopf’s Atlas: Topographical Anatomy of Man.” Annals of Anatomy 212 (2017): 11-16.
de Campos, Fernando Peixoto Ferraz. “The Dawn of Modern Pathology.” Autopsy Case Reports, 6, no. 1 (2016): 1-5.
Elliott, Carl. A Philosophical Disease: Bioethics, Culture and Identity. New York: Routledge, 1999.
Ernst, Edzard. “A Leading Medical School Seriously Damaged: Vienna 1938.” Annals of Internal Medicine 112, no. 10 (1995): 789-792.
Hast, Malcolm. “Pernkopf Anatomy: Atlas of Topographic and Applied Human Anatomy. Vol. 1: Head and Neck.” The Journal of the American Medical Association 263, no. 15 (1990): 2115-2116.
Hildebrandt, Sabine. “How the Pernkopf Controversy Facilitated a Historical and Ethical Analysis of the Anatomical Sciences in Austria and Germany: A Recommendation for the Continued Use of the Pernkopf Atlas.” Clinical Anatomy 19, no. 2 (2006): 91-100.
Hubbard, Chris. “Eduard Pernkopf’s Atlas of Topographical and Applied Human Anatomy: The Continuing Ethical Controversy.” The Anatomical Record 265, no. 5 (2001): 207-211.
Israel, Howard A., and William E. Seidelman. “Nazi Origins of an Anatomy Text: The Pernkopf Atlas.” The Journal of the American Medical Association 276, no. 20 (1996): 1633.
Jewson, Nicholas. “The Disappearance of the Sick-Man form Medical Cosmology, 1770-1870.” International Journal of Epidemiology 38, no. 3 (2009): 622-633.
Montgomery-Hunter, Katherine. “Narrative, Literature, and the Clinical Exercise of Practical Reason.” The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 21, no. 3 (1996): 303-320.
Murray, Thomas. “What Do We Mean by ‘Narrative Ethics?’” In Stories and Their Limits: Narrative Approaches to Bioethics, edited by Hilde Lindemann, 3-17. New York: Routledge, 1997.
Nuland, Sherwin B. Doctors: The Biography of Medicine. New York: Random House, Inc., 1988.
Nussbaum, Martha C. Love’s Knowledge: Essays on Philosophy and Literature. New York: Oxford University Press, 1990.
Pringle, Heather. “Confronting Anatomy’s Nazi Past.” Science 329, no. 5989 (2010): 275.
Proctor, Robert N. “Nazi Doctors, Racial Medicine, and Human Experimentation.” In The Nazi Doctors and the Nuremberg Code, edited by George Annas, 17-31. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.
Riggs, Garrett. “What Should We Do about Eduard Pernkopf’s Atlas?” Academic Medicine 73, no. 4 (1998): 380-386.
Snell, Richard. “Pernkopf Anatomy: Atlas of Topographic and Applied Human Anatomy.” The New Engand Journal of Medicine 323, no. 3 (1990): 205.
The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, “The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research,” (1979). In U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. Accessed August 20, 2019. https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/read-the-belmont-report/index.html.
“Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10.” Vol. 2, 181-182. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1949. https://history.nih.gov/research/downloads/nuremberg.pdf.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, Office for Human Research Protections. “45 C.F.R. 46, et seq.: Basic HHS Policy for Protection of Human Subjects.” 2018. https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/sites/default/files/revised-common-rule-reg-text-unofficial-2018-requirements.pdf.
Vollmann, Jache, and Rolf Winau. “Informed Consent in Human Experimentation before the Nuremberg Code.” British Medical Journal 313 (1996): 1445-1449.
Weissman, Gerald. “Springtime for Pernkopf.” Hospital Practice 20, no. 10 (1985): 142-168.
World Medical Association, “World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for Medical Research involving Human Subjects,” Journal of the American Medical Association 310, no. 20 (2013): 2191-2194.
Yee, Andrew, Ema Zubovic, Jennifer Yu, Shuddhadeb Ray, Sabine Hildebrandt, William E. Seidelman, Rabbi Joseph A. Polak, Michael A. Grodin, J. Henk Coert, Douglas Brown, Ira J. Kodner, and Susan Mackinnon. “Ethical Considerations in the Use of Pernkopf’s Atlas of Anatomy.” Surgery 165, no. 5 (2019): 860-867.