DE

The German Doctors’ Court in Munich

“ABORTION. UNWORTHY”: A Verdict by the Jurist Ferdinand Mössmer

Photo of Ferdinand Mössmer, printed in <i>Das Deutsche Führerlexikon 1934/35</i>, Berlin 1934, p. 315. Photographer unknown<span class=prov></span>
Photo of Ferdinand Mössmer, printed in Das Deutsche Führerlexikon 1934/35, Berlin 1934, p. 315. Photographer unknown

The lawyer Ferdinand Mössmer (1893–1946) had been a member of the Nazi Party as well as the Association of National Socialist German Jurists since 1930. As a member of the Academy for German Law, he argued in its journal in 1934 for the creation of legal instruments aimed at “preventing further blood mixing of the German people”. 

In 1937, Mössmer was appointed head of the German Doctors’ Court. It was in this capacity that he participated in revoking the licence of Dr M. B., who had been charged with multiple counts of abortion. Mössmer’s verdict: “Unworthy”.

Duplicate copy of a decision by the German Doctors’ Court on 22 January 1943 against the physician M. B., page 1 | <span class=prov>Historical archive of the KBV, Berlin, 00769</span>
Duplicate copy of a decision by the German Doctors’ Court on 22 January 1943 against the physician M. B., page 1 | Historical archive of the KBV, Berlin, 00769
Duplicate copy of a decision by the German Doctors’ Court on 22 January 1943 against the physician M. B., who was accused of violating professional conduct by performing multiple abortions, notated “Abortion. Unworthy”, page 3 | <span class=prov>Historical archive of the KBV, Berlin, 00769</span>
Duplicate copy of a decision by the German Doctors’ Court on 22 January 1943 against the physician M. B., who was accused of violating professional conduct by performing multiple abortions, notated “Abortion. Unworthy”, page 3 | Historical archive of the KBV, Berlin, 00769
<b>“Rather, it must be ensured, through his expulsion from the ranks of the German medical profession, that the accused, who offers absolutely no guarantee of faultless conduct in the future, does not continue causing serious damage to the German people’s potency through wrongdoings against germinating life. It is for these reasons that the judgment of the district court is to be confirmed in the question of guilt and sentencing.”</b><br>Duplicate copy of a decision by the German Doctors’ Court on 22 January 1943 against the physician M. B., who was accused of violating professional conduct by performing multiple abortions, notated “Abortion. Unworthy”, page 4 | <span class=prov>Historical archive of the KBV, Berlin, 00769</span>
“Rather, it must be ensured, through his expulsion from the ranks of the German medical profession, that the accused, who offers absolutely no guarantee of faultless conduct in the future, does not continue causing serious damage to the German people’s potency through wrongdoings against germinating life. It is for these reasons that the judgment of the district court is to be confirmed in the question of guilt and sentencing.”
Duplicate copy of a decision by the German Doctors’ Court on 22 January 1943 against the physician M. B., who was accused of violating professional conduct by performing multiple abortions, notated “Abortion. Unworthy”, page 4 | Historical archive of the KBV, Berlin, 00769

Protecting the Patients or the Profession?

The first medical associations were founded in various German states from 1865 to 1887. One of their functions was to discipline members for professional misconduct. With the Reich Physicians’ Ordinance (RÄO) of December 1935, these disciplinary powers were extended to cover all doctors subject to the Reich Medical Association. Doctors who acted “in breach of duty” could be declared “unworthy” of continued professional practice. 

The doctors’ district courts established by the RÄO consisted of one lawyer and two doctors. The German Doctors’ Court in Munich acted as the court of appeal. An extensive repository of judgments rendered there is preserved in the historical archive of the National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians (KBV). Frequently ajudged “unworthy conduct” were violations of German Criminal Code paragraphs 175 (homosexual acts between men) and 218 (abortion), and of the “Treachery Act”. In such cases, the sentences were particularly harsh. Although the Doctors’ Court did try to protect patients—for example, in cases of alleged quackery or sexual harassment by physicians—protecting the “honour of the profession” took priority, and was often ideologically motivated.

all banners