Some would say that the story behind the most prestigious award in the field of medicine is more significant than the actual award. The Space Medicine Association (SMA), has been awarding the “Hubertus Strughold Awards” to top scientists and clinicians for their outstanding work in aviation (Lagnado) since 1963. The award has been named Hubertus. But I believe a prize of this magnitude should have been named after someone who is equally worthy. Hubertus Strughold as the recipient of this award should be changed due to the feelings that he has towards Nazi Germany. He also had no second chance in America.
Even after the devastating Second World War, many Americans are haunted by the Nazi Germany crimes. The mass extermination that resulted in the death of six million Jews is easily one of history’s most horrifying mass murders. After World War II, the United States launched the Nuremburg Trials to try Nazi criminals. Hubertus Strughold was a suspect in the trials.
It is understandable that one might wonder, “How can a criminal be named the recipient of such an eminent award?” Every time the award was given, it reminded the American public of Nazi Germany and not the excellent work that the scientist (Lagnado) had completed. Those that ask may want to know why it was named for him. The term for naming awards, movies, streets, etc. The term eponym is used. It is usually a name that has become popular, or the name of someone who contributed to its creation (Webster’s).
The SMA’s award should be named after a person who is a role model and carries it with dignity and honor. I don’t believe that honor and respect come from performing potentially fatal tests on children. German scholars have taken note that “at least one set of human experiments–involving children–took place inside Dr. Strughold’s own institute” (Lagnado). The truth of this event is documented. It involves a half dozen adolescent kids being transported from a local mental facility to a laboratory where human experiments took place (Lagnado).
Strughold, however, responded that he had “always forbidden the very idea of such experimental work in my institution” (Lagnado). As mentioned above, SMA has now chosen to focus their award on a war criminal who is untrustworthy. Some may say that everyone deserves a second opportunity to improve themselves and their world. I disagree. It would seem that Americans do not believe in second chances. You can ask President Jimmy Carter or Gerald Ford if they were denied a second term by the American public. Or, you can ask any of the millions who received “zeroes” for late assignments. In short, American infrastructure does not allow for many second chances. If Americans were not given the opportunity to try again, I believe they wouldn’t be willing.
Some may say that Dr. Strughold should be free, since he was never convicted. He would not have any wrongs to hold him back. Even though Dr. Strughold may not have been directly involved in Dachau’s experiments, the fact that these experiments were performed in his own lab would still make him responsible. During WWII, Dr. Strughold attended a German medical conference (Lagnado). During the conference, the doctor stated that he had no objection to hypothermia or “cold” tests. He also said the results of the test would be interesting for scientists. In multiple instances, Dr. Hubertus has shown that his name is not appropriate for an award that represents trust, knowledge, and care on a high level.
