What Happened to the Children of Nazi Leaders?

The architects of the holocaust left their children behind to face the consequences of their atrocious actions. What happens when the war ends and ancestral justice comes knocking at the door?

The lives of children raised in households where the swastika held a sacred place would forever be tainted by the actions of their Nazi parents. After World War II ended, some of the children of Nazi leaders would go on to distance themselves from their fascist inheritance, while others chose to remain silent.

Some would even go so far as to defend their parents. The post-war relationship between these kids and their ideological beliefs in adulthood depicts an oft overlooked aspect of the Nazi regime, defined by the intersection of historical tragedies with personal dilemmas.

Life Under the Swastika

Due to the privileges provided by their parents’ positions, the children of Nazi leaders grew up in an extremely sheltered environment. However, this also meant that they were completely immersed in the regime’s ideology. Segregated from the general public, they lived in rich neighborhoods which protected them from the reality of the Third Reich’s Germany.

This upbringing also exposed them to educational institutes which reinforced Nazi beliefs, such as an emphasis on military discipline, racial theories, and loyalty to Adolf Hitler. Many of them joined youth organizations aimed to indoctrinate them with Nazi values, like the Hitler Youth or League of German Girls.

Despite being raised in a sheltered environment, these children were still exposed to the impacts of the Second World War. With the war reaching new heights daily, they witnessed bombings and shortages just like other Germans. However, their families’ significant social stature meant that they were comparatively shielded from the severe hardships of the war.

The fall of the Nazi regime brought a drastic change in their lives. With the arrest, death, or unknown whereabouts of their parents, many of these children lost their homes and status overnight. The post-war world brought upon an extremely different reality, where these children lost all their privilege and came to be known as the offspring of war criminals. While some of them were detained and others were orphaned, all of them had to deal with the stigma which came hand-in-hand with having Nazi Leaders as their parents.

This period was marked by confusion and adjustment as they had to reconcile their indoctrinated beliefs with the revelations of their parents’ crimes. The conversion from being part of a ruling elite to being associated with defeated war criminals was abrupt and difficult, impacting their identities and future opportunities.

The aftermath of World War II left these children to navigate a world that was vastly different from the one they had known, often requiring them to confront and make sense of their family’s past.

Gudrun Himmler

Heinrich Himmler was one of the top officials in the Nazi regime, and a main architect of the Holocaust.

Born in 1929, his only child Gudrun Himmler grew up in an extremely privileged environment due to her father’s position. Shielded from Nazi brutalities, she was said to have a close relationship with her father, whom she often referred to as “Puppi” while being affectionate.

The end of the war brought upon unforeseen changes in Gudrun’s life. When her father was captured by the Allied Forces, he committed suicide to avoid trial. While Gudrun and her mother were initially detained post-war, they were not accused of any criminal charges. Even though the Nazi regime had ended, and her father’s heinous role in the Holocaust had come to light, Gudrun stayed loyal to his memory.

Gudrun Himmler did not publicly renounce her father or his actions. Instead, she spent most of her life involved in Stille Hilfe (Silent Aid), a controversial organization aimed at aiding arrested, condemned, or fugitive former SS members. She worked hard to preserve and defend her father’s reputation, denying his crimes, and maintaining that he was a good man.

A simple glance at Gudrun’s life is enough to give one a rough idea about the complexities faced by the children of high-ranking Nazi officials. Gudrun’s unwavering loyalty to her father demonstrates how the indoctrination and familial bonds of the Nazi era lived on despite the regime’s own downfall.

Gudrun Himmler remained dedicated to her father’s memory until her death in 2018. She faced criticism for her stance, which sparked debate on the nature of familial loyalty and the ethical responsibilities of the descendants of war criminals.

Niklas Frank

Hans Frank, also known as the “Butcher of Poland,” was the Nazi governor-general of occupied Poland. His son, Niklas Frank, chose to openly condemn his father’s actions post-war. Niklas was born in 1939, the year that World War II broke out.

He grew up in luxury, until the war turned in favor of the Allies. This led to the capture, trial, and execution of his father for war crimes during the Nuremberg Trials.

Most of Niklas’ adult life was spent coming to terms with his father’s legacy. On his journey to confront the atrocities committed by his father, Niklas became a journalist and author. He used his writings to criticize the Nazi regime and the broader implications of his father’s role in the Holocaust.

His book, Der Vater: Eine Abrechnung (The Father: A Settling of Accounts), is a personal exploration of his father’s life and crimes. In it, Niklas does not hold back in his condemnation. He offers a unique perspective on the responsibility and guilt associated with being the child of a prominent Nazi figure.

The act of publicly denouncing his father serves as a form of atonement for Niklas. By openly addressing the atrocious actions of his father, Niklas is attempting to responsibly face his past and the terrible things associated with it. His actions raise questions about memory, responsibility, and the ways in which individuals and societies can come to terms with historical crimes.

Niklas Frank has contributed to Holocaust education and remembrance through his writings and public appearances. His efforts to educate people about the dangers of hatred and extremism exemplify the potential for individuals to contribute positively to society despite a troubled heritage.

Martin Bormann Jr.

Martin Bormann was Adolf Hitler’s private secretary and a top official in the Nazi regime.

His eldest son, Martin Bormann Jr. chose a path of repentance after the war. He was born in 1930, and spent his early years amongst the Nazi elite. Here, he enjoyed a privileged life owed to his father’s position.When the war ended, his father was pronounced a war criminal. He died while fleeing from the justice that awaited him.

Severely disturbed by the actions of his father, Martin Jr. converted to Catholicism and became a priest in an attempt to distance himself from his family legacy. He hoped to make amends for his father’s sins by joining the Catholic Church.

He worked in the Congo as a clergyman, making the servitude of others a personal mission of his life. In this way, he sought to distinguish himself from the life of power and control that defined his father.

Although Martin Jr. did not publicly condemn his father, his lifestyle decisions can be recognized as a form of silent protest. He attempted to atone himself from the crimes of his family by dedicating his life to helping people, thus aiming for personal penance.

Edda Göring

Edda Göring was the only child of Hermann Göring, the commander of the German Air Force (Luftwaffe), founder of the Gestapo, and designated successor to Adolf Hitler. Born in 1938, she was raised amidst the highest echelons of the Nazi hierarchy, enjoying considerable luxury due to her father’s status. However, the fall of the Third Reich led to her father’s suicide, while he was scheduled to be executed for war crimes.

After the war, Edda chose a different path than the other children. She rarely spoke about her father or his actions during the war, spending most of her life away from the public eye. Whenever she did speak of her father, it was in a manner of fond remembrance.

She never condemned his role in the Nazi regime. This hesitance on Edda’s part has led to debates about her political stance and the moral responsibilities owed by descendants of Nazi leaders.

A certain form of coping can be detected in Edda’s silence, where she has neither fully accepted her father’s past nor is in denial about it. Her approach can also be seen as an attempt to preserve personal memories of her father, which she does not want to be tainted by his political or military actions. The path Edda chose is characterized by avoidance; a reaction to the psychological dissonance caused by familial loyalty and the evidence of her parent’s crimes.

Albert Speer Jr.

Albert Speer Jr. was born in 1934 to Albert Speer, Hitler’s chief architect and later the Minister of Armaments and War Production. Unlike his father, Speer Jr. pursued a career in architecture focused on sustainable and humanitarian projects, distancing himself from the Nazi legacy.

Faced by the intimidating task of building a career in the shadow of his father’s infamous history, Speer Jr. chose to concentrate on his professional capabilities. Consequently, he established a successful architectural practice that brought him international respect. His work was often described as innovative and forward-thinking; in clear opposition to the militaristic and oppressive undertones of his father’s projects.

Speer Jr. barely ever spoke publicly about his father’s crimes, preferring to keep his personal life private. Instead of condemning his family’s legacy, Speer Jr.’s approach was to contribute positively to society through his architectural work. Thereby, he managed to create a separate identity from his father.

Reflections

The different post-war approaches of the children of Nazi leaders tell us that while there is no proper way to find retribution for atrocities that were inherited with their last names, finding atonement is possible. The first step is to acknowledge generational crimes, only after which can begin to make amends for the actions of their forefathers.