School trip to Auschwitz - opimnions

[forsale]

dd has brought a letter home from school re: a visit to Krakow with a view to visiting Auschwitz - Does anyone have experience of this?

imho - it was wrong to say it wasn't to do with the war and also it was only people from occupied lands (wrong) - plus then trivilising it with shergar. This topic needs respect and it really did offend me to see that. Sorry if this gets to others but this is my opinion.

Why would anyone want their child to go to Auschwitz? I don't mean why shouldn't the place exist as a museum, I mean why would you want someone you cared for to go and be traumatised? Not what's the point of the wolrd knowing about it but why would you want an individual you cared about to be put under huge stress by visiting.

I don't plan to pack my ds off to Darfur or Ruwanda in a few years time for him to 'get' how miserable things are there.

Personally I would say no. I'm only 26 myself and going to a place like this I think would affect me greatly.

You do not need to go to these places to get the war. Just like you do not need to go to the site of the world trade centre to grasp the horror of what happened.

I'm not arguing with you BIWI, honestly . I agree they should learn about what happened. My girls have studied WW2 and have read about the attrocities and watched programmes regarding it. dd1 has developed an interest and has completed several projects over the last few years. It's just that, having been to Auschwitz myself and knowing I am still not over what I saw after a year, I just couldn't put my children through seeing it. I would encourage them to go when they are older but not when they are 14.

sorry if i offended you lisalisa

Message withdrawn

And btw, Cod - Dachau was a death camp. I remember visiting the gas chambers. The numbers killed weren't as great as Auschwitz, but enough to get the general gist of things.

I have read through the whole thread and still think NO

I think that provided the school are going to "debrief" adequately, children should definitely go to these places. It's giving me tyhe shivers to think about it, but some of the things I learnt in history at that age still inform my opinions today. And if you can BURN IN a hatred of violence and murder at a young age, that's no bad thing.

gibberish - didn't think you were arguing with me, this post is moving too quickly!

I can understand why people would disagree.

And it is terribly upsetting.

But I'm not always sure we should be protecting our children from the upsetting - when we're dealing with such important issues, of course.

Message withdrawn

Argh to 'burning in' anything about mass slaughter to children. The point is this trip is not necessary to become a rounded human being nor to being a historian.

when does the time come to move on though?

icod - you ask where you deny - well when you write the following "but altho deaths occured at dachu it wasnt an extermination camp liek auscwhitz"
and "wel LITERLLAY its not to do wiht he war is it "
and then when you post "id have classed it as aprt of hitlers domestic policy " not a denial but factually incorrect imho.

to me really offensive remarks.

FWIW, I think that cod has a point. Not that Auschwitz has nothing to do with WWII, obviously. It's impossible to dissociate Auschwitz and the Holocaust as a whole from what happened during the war. However, in a way, I think that to describe the people who died in Auschwitz as 'prisoners of war' is somehow to lessen the awfulness and senselessness of what happened there. The term 'PoW' normally refers to a prisoner taken legitimately by the opposing side in a war. There were, if I understand correctly, some PoWs in that sense at Auschwitz, just as there were political prisoners. But the vast majority of those who died there (as well as the few who survived) were sent there purely and simply for reasons over which they had no control (being Jewish (mostly)... or gay, or Roma, or having learning difficulties) and they were sent there not as a consequence of belonging to any army or military group but because someone had decided that the world would be a better place without them. So, I would agree that 'prisoners of war' is the wrong term.

I think I'd be OK with my dds going at 14 or thereabouts, but they are a long way off that now, so I'm not wholly sure. I'd prepare them for it though (out with the Primo Levi again...), and tbh I'd prefer to take them myself than have them go with school.

BIWI fair enough.

lisalisa, yes the cabinets are huge. And you are right about the birds and the silence at the site of the crematorium. I've never felt anything like it.There's a patch of water where they would throw the ashes in (still there) and there is no wildlife or birds there. Despite it being in the 70s, that particular spot was very cold. I'm not trying to sensationalise it - that is how it is. That's why I am so certain that it's not somewhere my children would be exposed to.

Please note that I am making no reference to the DC of any MN poster here: I think any teenagers who have shown signs of racially-motivated bullying of other kids should be taken to a museum like this as it might make them think a little. Even though it's highly likely that some teenagers might sttart off such a trip being flippant or unpleasant, I don not think they would be able to escape the effects of it entirely.

my mil was shot at as an 8 year old in hampstead heath. my fil fought in burma. my mum grew up in west london during the blitz. she saw some bloody awful things.

everyone suffered. but there comes a time to move on

I'm sorry, but I strongly disagree. Without this experience we offer our children a sanitised version of the war.

What we have available to us with places like Auschwitz and Dachau is living history. It is a fantastic resource to give us more insight into the facts that we learn.

Yes, it is harrowing. But so were the facts. (In fact I think we probably cannot even begin to understand just how harrowing it really was).

When they are being taught about the war, they should - IMO - be given as much insight into the whole experience as possible.

lisalisa your description made me cry, it must be so hard to be there.

however I'd want my child to see things like this. re the age, that should be judged by the parent as some 14yo are more ready than others. it will certainly shock them, give them some nightmares and they might not get as much as you would at 30, but it'll teach them a great deal. life is not just fun and pleasure, certainly not for everyone.

I remember having nightmares about the war and being terrified of another one starting.

I've forgotten who i disagree with!

Moving too quickly!

I honestly do not think that at 14 you have to go to these places to "understand" senseless mass murder.

Surely places like these are where you go when you are adult, make your own choices and want to go for one reason or another. Not going because its a school trip and the teachers think it is a good idea.

I know that I would have been affected by a trip to a concentration camp. And as my daughter gets older, it is my duty to protect her from having to do things which could seriously upset her mentally. Yes, she is going to learn about the wars that there have been, and how humans have treated one another, but there is a difference between watching documentaries, reading text books and being taught in a class room to standing in a room where you KNOW that so many innocent people died like animals.

i would be guided by ds.. but would rather he didn't go. i think 14 is way too young to go.
I do wonder how old the children are of people who say we are over protecting teens.

If you think I'm over protecting teens, my children are 15 and 12. My ds1 has been twice to the trenches in Normandy as part of school trips.

I would encourage both of them - even my youngest son - should trips be available - to go to Auschwitz.

I went when I was 11.

my ds has been to ypres. enough war for him I think