¹ The German Penal Code was introduced for the newly established German Reich in 1872. Articles 218–20 prescribed penal servitude for up to five years for pregnant women who had an abortion. If there were extenuating circumstances this could be reduced to imprisonment for not less than six months. The same penalties were prescribed for anybody helping to procure an abortion. If the operation was performed for money penal servitude for up to 10 years was prescribed; if it was performed without knowledge or consent of the woman the penalty was penal servitude for not less than two years; if an abortion ended in death of the woman the penalty was penal servitude for not less than ten years, or for life.

² For abortion frequency see note 9 below.

³ Marschalck, Peter, Bevölkerungsgeschichte Deutschlands im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert (Frankfurt a.M., 1984), 145.Google Scholar

⁴ Knodel, John F., The decline of fertility in Germany, 1871–1939 (Princeton, N.J., 1974), 5Google Scholar; St J.d.DR (Berlin 1933), 32Google Scholar and intern, survey, 17; Soloway, Richard, Birth control and the population question in England, 1877–1930 (London, 1982) 3–4.Google Scholar

⁵ Cf. Usborne, Cornelie, ‘“Pregnancy is the woman's active service”. Pronatalism in Germany during the First World War’, in Wall, Richard, Winter, Jay eds., The upheaval of war: Family, work and welfare in Europe, 1914–1918 (Cambridge, 1988), 389–416.Google Scholar

⁶ SA Dresden, Aussm. 8644, preamble to the bill ‘concerning traffic with devices and potions to prevent births’, Bundesrat, , 8 11 1917, 4.Google Scholar

⁷ BA Koblenz, R 86, 2379, vol. 1, appendix to the bill concerning abortion and sterilization, 19 January 1918, 2; Reich health council, minutes, 21 12 1917, 2.Google Scholar

⁸ Cf. similar developments in nineteenth century America in Petchesky, Rosalind Pollack, Abortion and woman's choice: state, sexuality and reproductive freedom (London, 1984), 77.Google Scholar

⁹ For recent literature on demographic change and population policy see, for example, Knodel, , Decline of fertilityGoogle Scholar; Marschalck, , BevölkerungsgeschichteGoogle Scholar; Spree, Reinhard, ‘Der Geburtenrückgang in Deutschland vor 1939’, Demographische Informationen (1984), 49–68Google Scholar; Bergmann, Anneliese, ‘Von der “unbefleckten Empfängnis” zur “Rationalisierung des Geschlechtslebens”. Gedanken zur Debatte um den Geburtenrückgang vor dem 1. Weltkrieg’, in Geyer-Kordesch, J., Kuhn, A. eds., Frauenkörper, Medizin, Sexualität (Dusseldorf 1986), 127–58Google Scholar; idem, ‘Die “Rationaliesierung der Fortpflanzung”: Der Rückgang der Geburten und des Aufstieg der Rassenhygiene/Eugenik im Deutschen Kaiserreich 1871–1914’, (Ph.D., Free University of Berlin, 1988)Google Scholar; Weindling, Paul, ‘The medical profession, social hygiene and the birth rate in Germany, 1914–18’Google Scholar, in Wall, R., Winter, J. eds, The upheaval of war, 417–38Google Scholar; Usborne, Cornelie, ‘The Christian churches and the regulation of sexuality in Weimar Germany’, in Obelkevich, J. et al. , eds, Disciplines of faith: Studies in religion, politics and patriarchy (London, 1987), 99–112Google Scholar; idem, ‘“Pregnancy is the woman's active service”. Pronatalism in Germany during the First World War’, in Wall/Winter, Upheaval of war, 389–416Google Scholar; Woycke, James, Birth control in Germany 1871–1933 (London, 1988).Google Scholar

¹⁰ Marcuse, Max, ‘Zur Frage der Verbreitung und Methoden der willkürlichen Geburtenbeschränkung in Berliner Proletarierkreisen’, Sexualprobleme, 9 (1913), 752–80Google Scholar; Hirsch, Max, ‘Zur Statistik des Aborts’, Zentralblatt für Gynäkologie (ZfG) 3 (1918), 41–3Google Scholar; there were other similar surveys.

¹¹ Dresden, SA, Aussm. 8664, preamble to bill against sterilization and abortion, 1918, Bundesrat printed matter, no. 148, 22 06 1918, 5.Google Scholar

¹² BA Koblenz, R 86, 2379, vol. 1, newspaper cuttings on the disciplinary action against Gustav Henkel, professor of gynaecology and obstetrics in Jena, Thuringia, and director of the Jena university hospital for women, October to December 1917: Henkel, who was accused of serious negligence and misconduct, was found to have performed abortions and sterilizations on a large scale without sufficient grounds; ibid., minutes of the meeting of the Reich Health Council, 21 December 1918, p. 15 concerning the trial against the gynaecologist Hope Bridget Adams–Lehmann of Munich for suspected criminal abortions in 1913.

¹³ Koblenz, BA, R 86, 2379, vol. 1, Prussian Interior Minister to Reich Interior Minister, 19 01 1918Google Scholar; ibid., 1916 statistics by the sick fund of the General Electrical Society in Berlin: of 100 married women workers there were 65 ‘miscarriages’; of 100 unmarried women 59 ‘miscarriages’, of which the majority were undoubtedly abortions.

¹⁴ Cf. Duden, Barbara, ‘Keine Nachsicht gegen das schöne Geschlecht. Wie sich Ärzte die Kontrolle über die Gebärmutter aneigneten’, in Pazensky, S. V. ed., Wir sind keine Mörderinnen (Reinbek, 1980), 109–26Google Scholar; Huerkamp, Claudia, ‘Ärzte und Professionalisierung in Deutschland: Überlegungen zum Wandel des Ärzteberufs im 19. Jahrhunderts’, Geschichte und Gesellschaft, 6 (1980), 349–382Google Scholar; idem, Der Aufstieg der Ärzte im 19. Jahrhundert (Göttingen, 1985)Google Scholar; Frevert, Ute, Krankheit als politisches Problem 1770–1880 (Göttingen, 1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; idem, ‘Frauen und Ärzte im späten 18. und frühen 19. Jahrhundert – zur Sozialgeschichte eines Gewaltverhältnisses’, in Kuhn, A., Rüsen, J. eds, Frauen in der Geschichte II (Dusseldorf, 1982), 177–212Google Scholar; Spree, Reinhard, ‘The impact of the professionalisation of physicians on social change in Germany during the late 19th and early 20th centuries’, Historical Social Research, 15 (1980), 24–39Google Scholar; Kater, Michael H., ‘Professionalization and socialization of physicians in Wilhelmine and Weimar Germany’, Journal of Contemporary History, 20 (1985), 677–701.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

¹⁵ Spree, Reinhard, Soziale Ungleichheit vor Krankheit und Tod (Göttingen, 1981) 147.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Hirsch, Max, ‘Die volkshygienische Bedeutung der Fruchtabtreibung und die Mittel zu ihrer Bekämpfung’, Zeitschrift für Geburtshilfe und Gynäkologie (ZfGuG) (1922), 815–37Google Scholar; cf. Frevert, , ‘Frauen und Ärzte’.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Cf. Petchesky, , Abortion, 80.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Fischer, Alfons, ‘Gesundheitsstatistik’, in Möllers, Bernhard, Gesundheitswesen und Wohlfahrtspflege im Deutschen Reich, (Berlin, 1921) 86–103, 90Google Scholar; Marschalck, , Bevölkerungsgeschichte, 148Google Scholar; BA Koblenz, R 86, 2371, vol. 1, paper by Hirsch, Max to Prussian Ministry of Public Welfare, 15 01 1921, 156.Google Scholar

¹⁹ For English estimates see Glass, D. V., Population policies and movements in Europe (London, 1967), 54Google Scholar; Lewis, Jane, The politics of motherhood (London, 1980), 211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁰ St.J.d.DR (Berlin, 1933), Int. survey, 15.Google Scholar

²¹ Reichstag printed matter, 1725, memorandum on state of public health, 1923/1924, 4: the rate of puerperal fever cases per 1,000 live and still births went up from 3.8 in 1921 to 4.7 in 1923. This is not surprising since 1923 was the peak of the inflation but it is interesting that the rise was blamed entirely on criminal abortions.

²² Cf. Woycke, James, Birth control in Germany 1871–1933 (London, 1988).Google Scholar

²³ Cf. Grossmann, Atina, ‘Abortion and economic crisis: The campaign against paragraph 218’ in Bridenthal, R. et al. , eds, When biology became destiny: women in Weimar and Nazi Germany (New York, 1984), 66–86.Google Scholar

²⁴ Cf. Grotjahn, Alfred ed., Eine Kartothek zu Paragraph 218. Ärztliche Berichte aus einer Kleinstadtpraxis (Berlin, 1932)Google Scholar. Grotjahn published the medical diary of a small town practitioner who had procured over four hundred abortions in the space of two years but who, for obvious reasons, wished to remain anonymous.

²⁵ Ärztliches Vereinsblatt (ÄV), 48 (1921), column 14Google Scholar; ibid., 52, (1925), 42–61, 57.

²⁶ GSTA Dahlem, Rep 84a, 8232, Bl 90: in 1,925 of 6,707 cases prosecuted under article 218, 6,548 were punished with imprisonment (the majority to between 1–12 months) and only 113 to penal servitude.

²⁷ Vollmann, Sigmund, ‘Die Bekämpfung der Abtreibungsseuche’, ÄV, 152 (1925), 42–9, 48.Google Scholar

²⁸ Vollmann, Sigmund, Die Fruchtabtreibung als Volkskrankheit (Leipzig, 1925).Google Scholar

²⁹ ÄV, 52, 1925, 46–9.Google Scholar

³⁰ Mbl.d.VSÄ. 4 12 1925, 19–20.Google Scholar

³¹ Crede, Carl, ‘Ärztevereinsbund und Artikel 218’, Der Sozialistische Arzt (SA) (05 1930), 120.Google Scholar

³² Kater, Michael, ‘Professibnalization’, 19.Google Scholar

³³ E.g. Ernst Bumm of the Berlin first university hospital for women received his approbation in 1880; Winter, Georg of Königsberg university, in 1881.Google Scholar

³⁴ Bumm, , ZfG. 1 (1917), 6Google Scholar; Stoeckel, , ZfG. 17 (1931), 1452.Google Scholar

³⁵ Döderlein, A. ed., Handbuch der Geburtshilfe, III (Munich 1925), 13 f, 313–14Google Scholar; Fischer-Homberger, Esther, Krankheit Frau (Bern, 1979), 27–30Google Scholar; Cianfrani, T., A short history of obstetrics and gynaecology (Springfield, 1960), 310–14, 357Google Scholar; Shorter, Edward, A history of women's bodies (London, 1983), 198–9, 204–5Google Scholar; BAK R 86, 2379, vol. 4, letter Döderlein, to president of the RGA, 21 10 1927.Google Scholar

³⁶ Roesle, E., ‘Die Magdeburger Fehlgeburtenstatistik vom Jahre 1924’, Archiv für soziale Hygiene und Demographie (AfsHuD), 3 (1925'1926), 189–95Google Scholar; Freudenberg, K., ‘Berechnungen zur Abtreibungsstatistik’, Zeitschrift für Hygiene und Infektionskrankheiten (ZfHuI), 4, 1925, 529–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar; DrEngelsmann, , ‘Der Paragraph 218 in seiner bevölkerungspolitischen, ehtischen und rechtlichen Bedeutung’, Zeitschrift für Volksaufartung und Erbkunde (ZfVuE), 1, 1926, 83–4Google Scholar; Grotjahn, A., ‘Die Zunahme der Fruchtabtreibungen vom Standpunkt der Volksgesundheit und Eugenik’, AfsHuD, 3, 1925/1926, 173–6.Google Scholar

³⁷ BA Koblenz, R 86, 2371, vol. 1, Hirsch, Max, ‘Die volkshygienische Bedeutung der Fruchtabtreibung und die Mittel zu ihrer Bekämpfung’, paper given at the committee for racial hygiene of the Prussian Ministry of Public Welfare, 15 01 1921, Bl 154.Google Scholar

³⁸ E.g. LA Berlin, Rep 58 various files, e.g. 2064, 2439, 2453; Jahns, Helmuth, Das Deliktder Abtreibung im Landgerichtsbeirk Duisburg in der Zeit von 1910–1935 (Dusseldorf, 1938).Google Scholar

³⁹ BA Koblenz, R 86, 2380, statistics of miscarriages of various maternity hospitals in first six months of 1929.

⁴⁰ Hirsch, Max, ‘Zur Statistik des Aborts…’, 759, 766Google Scholar; Bumm, Ernst, ‘Zur Frage des künstlichen Aborts’, M.f.Geb.h.u.G., 5 (1916)Google Scholar; Siegel, W., ‘Abort und Geburtenrückgang’, ZfG, 11 (1917), 261.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Vollmann, , ÄV, 1925, 43Google Scholar; Liepmann, W., Die Abtreibung (Berlin, 1927), 5Google Scholar; Potsdam, ZSA, Min, R Jus, 6232, Bl 46, RT select committee for legal affairs, 17 12 1925Google Scholar; Düphrssen, A., ‘Die Reform des Paragraphen 218’, Sexus, 1926, 56.Google Scholar

⁴² Vollmann, , Die Fruchtabtreibung, 25–6.Google Scholar

⁴³ Bumm, , MMW, 1 02 1923Google Scholar; Vollmann, , Die Fruchtabtreibung, 23Google Scholar; cf. DrHüssy, Paul, Begutachtung und gerichtliche Beurteilung von ärztlichen Kunstfehlern auf geburtshilflich-gynäkologischem Gebiete (Stuttgart, 1935).Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Koblenz, BA, R 86, 23179, vol. 3, 25.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Koblenz, LHA, 403, 13425, Bl 604, letter Pruss. Min. f. Public Welfare to Reg. Pres., 17 09 1925.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Der künstliche Abort. Indikationen, Methoden, Rechtspflege für den medizinischen Praktiker (Stuttgart, 1926).Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Winter, G., ‘Die Einschränkung des künstlichen Aborts’. ZfG, no. 1, (1917), 6Google Scholar; Ebstein, Erich ed., Modernes Mittelalter (Leipzig, 1921).Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Bumm, Ernst, ‘Über das deutsche Bevölkerungsproblem’, inaugural lecture as chancellor of Berlin university, 15 10 1916 (Berlin, 1916)Google Scholar; Sellheim, Hugo, inaugural lecture as professor of gynaecology, Leipzig university, 05 1926, in Z.f. Sex. wiss., 13 (1926), 196–208.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Vollmann, , ÄV, 1925, 48Google Scholar; Lönne, , Das Problem, 10.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Engelsmann, R., ‘Der Paragraph 218’, 84–5.Google Scholar

⁵¹ Koblenz, BA R 86, 2379, vol. 3, Bericht des Ausschusses für Bevölkerungswesen und Rassenhygiene des Landesgesundheitsrats, 13 11 1925, 47, 50–52Google Scholar; quotation from resolutions at 1926 Leipzig conference in ÄV 52 (1925), 49.Google Scholar

⁵² E.g., Wolf, Friedrich's play CyankaliGoogle Scholar; Crede, Carl's novel Gequälte Menschen, adapted for the stage as Paragraph 218Google Scholar; Döblin, Alfred's play, Die EheGoogle Scholar; novels by Krey, Franz (Maria und der Paragraph 218)Google Scholar, Fallada, Hans (Kleiner Mann was nun?)Google Scholar: poems on the subject by Kurt Tucholsky and Erich Weinert. The initiatives for a radical abortion law reform came from the Independent Social Democrats (USPD) which later split and merged with the SPD and KPD: motion of 2 July 1920, RT no 90, to repeal articles 218–20 of the penal code; the SPD proposed a motion in 31 July 1920, RT no 318, tolegalize abortions performed by women themselves or by a medical practitioner within the first three months of pregnancy; both motions were unsuccessful. The KPD retabled versions of the USPD motion eleven times until 1932; the SPD a modified form of its own motion five times until 1931.

⁵³ Moses, Julius, ‘Der Kampf um die Aufhebung des Abtreibungsparagraphen’, Biologische Heilkunst, 34 (12 1929), 934.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Crede-Hörder, Carl, Volk in Not! Das Unheil des Abtreibungsparagraphen (Dresden, 1927), 54.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ E.g. Moses, N. L., ‘Proceedings of the first conference of women textile workers, October 1926’, Textilpraxis (1926), 76, 82Google Scholar; Brupbacher, Fritz, ‘Der proletarische Standpunkt in der Frage der Geburtenregelung’, SA, 1930, 96.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ E.g. Crede, Carl, Volk in Not!, foreward.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Crede, Carl, Volk in Not!Google Scholar; Koblenz, BA, Z Sg 2, 178, ‘Sturm gegen den Paragraphen 218 (Unser Stuttgarter Prozess). Die Voruntersuchung von Friedrich Wolf’Google Scholar; there were many other cases: see, for example, Potsdam, ZSA, Min, R. Jus., 6235, Bl 51.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Hirsch, Max, Monatsschrift fur Geburtshilfe und Gynäkologie (M.f.Geb.h.u.G.) (1913), 38, 56Google Scholar; idem.Die Fruchtabtreibung, ihre Ursachen, ihre volkshygienische Bedeutung und die Mittel zur ihrer Bekämpfung (Stuttgart, 1921)Google Scholar; Orotjahn, Alfred, Die Hygiene der menschlichen Fortpflanzung (Berlin, 1926), 112 ff, 320.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Moses, N. L., Der Kassenarzt, 52 (1925), 1Google Scholar; Koblenz, BA, R 86, 2369, president of RGA to R Min of I, 26 03 1929 about Berlin Medical Council's vote.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Boak, Helen L., ‘The status of women in the Weimar Republic’ (unpubl. Ph.D. thesis, Manchester University, 1982) 151–63Google Scholar; Vierteljahresschrift des BDÄ (VdBDÄ), 2 (1926), 89Google Scholar; ibid., 7 (1931), 70; Davies, C., ‘The O.P. and infant welfare in the interwar years’, Bulletin of the Society for the Social History of Medicine, 30/31 (1982), 9–12.Google Scholar

⁶¹ VdBDÄ, 2 (1926), 89–90Google Scholar; Boak, , ‘The status’, 163.Google Scholar

⁶² Hodann, Max ed., Korrespondenz des Informationsbüros fur Geburtenregelung 1 (1932), 9–11Google Scholar; see also Frankenthal, Käte, Der dreifache Fluch: Jüdin, intellektuelle, Sozialistin. Lebenserinnerung einer Ärztin in Deutschland und im Exil (Frankfurt a.M., 1981), 119.Google Scholar

⁶³ Die Ärztin (1933), 242.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Boak, , ‘The status of women’, 162.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ E.g. Lotte Fink, Hertha Riese, Minna Flake, Käte Frankenthal, Laura Turner, Martha Wygodzinski were members both of the VSÄ and the BDÄ.

⁶⁶ The law of 21 May 1976 permits surgical termination on medical, social and eugenic grounds within 22 weeks of pregnancy. Women have to have consulted both a doctor and a counsellor who is recognized by the state.

⁶⁷ BA Koblenz, NL Lüders 133, petition by Berlin women doctors: abortion should be legal except if not performed by a physician, or if performed negligently or without consent. In case this was not acceptable abortion should be permissible on medical and socio-economic grounds; ibid., petition by Süßmann: only abortion on strict medical grounds should be permissible, necessitating a second opinion by a medical officer of health before each operation; this had been specifically rejected by the DÄVB.

⁶⁸ Vollmann, , ‘Die Umfrage der Ärztinnen über das Problem der Schwanger-schaftsunterbrechung’, DÄ (1932), 66–8.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Börner, Helene, ‘Zum Hamburger Fragebogen über den Paragraphen 218’, DÄ 58 (1930), 43–50Google Scholar: 70 per cent participated. 38 per cent voted for social, 66 per cent for eugenic indication.

⁷⁰ ‘Zur Abtreibungsfrage’, VdBDÄ 5 (1925), 11, 117–19.Google Scholar

⁷¹ Heusler-Edenhuizen, , ‘Was wir wollen, VdBDÄ 1 (1924), 1Google Scholar; idem‘Paragraph 218, ein Produkt vermännlichter Kultur’ Die Ärztin 6 (1930), 251Google Scholar; cf. Nathorff, Hertha, ‘Zum Problem der Geburtenregelung’, Medizinsiche Welt (M.W.) 24 (1930) (kindly sent by the author).Google Scholar

⁷² E.g., Piutti, Frau Dr, ‘Schwangerschaftsunterbrechung und uneheliche Mutterschaft’, Die Ärztin (1931), 46.Google Scholar

⁷³ Börner, , ‘Zur Frage der Schwangerschaftsunterbrechung’, Die Ärztin (1930), 177Google Scholar; Kelchner, Mathilde, Die Frau und der weibliche Arzt (Berlin, 1934)Google Scholar, a survey of 134 women patients on why they preferred women to men doctors.

⁷⁴ Klinische Wochenschrift 19 (1925), 933.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ Fink, , ‘Schwangerschaftsunterbrechung und Erfahrungen aus Ehe- und Sexual- beratung’, Die Ärztin 7, 70–4Google Scholar; Heusler-Edenhuizen, , ‘Kampf um das eigene Kind’, Berliner Tageblatt, 176, 14 04 1927, first supplementary page.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ Riese, , ‘Social indication for the interruption of pregnancy’, in Haire, N. ed, proceedings of the 3rd Congress of the World League of Sexual Reform (London, 1930), 627Google Scholar; Frankenthal, , ‘Das Problem der ledigen Frau’, Z.f.Sex. wiss. 12 (1925), 217–20.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ Wygodzinski, , Die Ärztin 6 (1930), 184.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ Schwörer-Jalkowski, , ‘Die Hygiene in der Ehe vom Standpunkt der katholischen Ärztin’, in Frauenbund, Katholischer ed., Katholische Ehe (Hildesheim, 1925), 89Google Scholar; Stegmann, in Potsdam, ZSA, RMind.I, 6232, Bl 74, RT, legal select committee 2 03 1926, 2.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ ‘Schwangerschaftsunterbrechung und praktische Berufserfahrung der Fürsorgeärztin’, Die Ärztin 8 (1931), 43.Google Scholar

⁸⁰ Fink, , ‘Schwangerschaftsunterbrechung’, 70–1Google Scholar; Heusler-Edenhuizen, , ‘Paragraph 218’, 255.Google Scholar

⁸¹ Stegmann, in the RT legal select committee, 18 12 1925Google Scholar (ZSA Potsdam, RMin.d.I, 6232, RT legal select committee).

⁸² Heusler-Edenhuizen, , ‘Paragraph 218’, 255.Google Scholar

⁸³ E.g. DrThust, Ilse, Die Grenzpfähle um den Paragraph 218. Die Ärztin als Frau und Mutter in Front (Zwickau, 1931), 7Google Scholar; DrKienle, Else, Frauen. Aus dem Tagebuch einer Ärztin (Berlin, 1932), 307Google Scholar; DrGrünbaum-Sachs, Hilde, ‘Das Sexualproblem der Bevölkerungspolitik’, Z.f.Sex. wiss. 12 (1926/1927), 231.Google Scholar

⁸⁴ DrPrager-Heinrich, Hedwig, Die Ärztin (1931), 17–18Google Scholar; DrDurand-Wever, Annemarie, ‘Die Ärztlichen Erfahrungen über medizinisch indizierte Konzeptionsverhütung’, MW 21 (1930), 759–6, no. 26, (1930), 936–7.Google Scholar

⁸⁵ Kienle, , Frauen, 309.Google Scholar

⁸⁶ Heidelberg, U. B., Radbruch, N. L., Heid.Hs.3716, II D44, ‘Wie stehen Sie zum Paragraphen 218?’ (n.d.), Stegmann's reply.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ Kienle, , Frauen, 310.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ ‘Für und wider den Paragraph 218’, MW 31 (1930), 1121.Google Scholar

⁸⁹ Heusler-Edenhuizen, , ‘Paragraph 218’, 73, 74Google Scholar; idem, ‘Kampf um das eigene Kind’; Riese, , Die sexuelle Not unserer Zeit (Leipzig, 1927).Google Scholar

⁹⁰ ‘Schwangerschaftsunterbrechung und praktische Berufserfahrung’, 44.Google Scholar

⁹¹ Die Ärztin 6 (1930), 186.Google Scholar

⁹² ‘Die Unfruchtbarmachung minderwertiger Volkselemente’, Die Ärztin 5 (1929), 16Google Scholar; cf. Durand-Wever, A., ‘Die ärztlichen Erfahrungen’, 316.Google Scholar

⁹³ E.g. Dr Johanna Höber, paper delivered at the AGM of the German Association of women citizens about marriage advice centres, Berliner Tageblatt, (31 10 1928)Google Scholar (FU Berlin, UB, Sg Rott, D3); Dr Ilse Szagunn, discussion contribution at the 1930 conference of the BDÄ, 48.

⁹⁴ Die Ärztin 6 (06, 1933), 117.Google Scholar

⁹⁵ The paste consisted of a mixture of etheric oils, iodine and other popular abortifacients and was squirted into the uterus. It was used successfully by the Danish sex reformer Leunbach and the German gynaecologists Sellheim and von Abel (Vollmann, Deutsches Ärzteblatt 59 (1932), 68Google Scholar); see also Präger-Heinrich, H., Die Ärztin (1931) 13, 18.Google Scholar

⁹⁶ Vollmann, S., ‘Die Stellung des Reichsgerichts zur Frage der Schwangerschafts unterbrechung’, ÄV 54 (1927), column 233–8.Google Scholar

⁹⁷ Czarnoswki, Gabriele, ‘Frauen, Staat, Medizin. Aspekte der Körperpolitik im Nationalsozialismus’, Beiträge zur feministischen Theorie und Praxis 14 (1985), 79–99.Google Scholar