50 studies / 54 · Auschwitz – Pirna-Sonnenstein, Saxony

From Auschwitz to Sonnenstein: Selection of Patients for Death

At the end of July 1941, a medical commission selected at Auschwitz a group of elderly, chronically ill and disabled prisoners. They were taken outside the camp and killed with carbon monoxide at Sonnenstein. Most were Poles. The case documents a crime against people whom perpetrators judged to be unfit, carried out under cover of medical procedures. [1] [2]

Editorial account based on the sources listed below. Sources checked: 5 September 2026.

Victims and toll
575 deported prisoners, mostly Poles; the excerpts used do not provide an exact Polish number.
Perpetrators
The medical commission selecting Auschwitz prisoners, the SS apparatus organizing the transport and staff of the Sonnenstein killing centre.
Documented methods
selection of ill and disabled prisoners · deportation to a killing centre · killing with carbon monoxide

Basis for the facts and their qualifications: [1] [2]

Who was selected

The Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum states that on 28 July 1941 a commission selected 575 prisoners: disabled, chronically ill and elderly people. They came mainly from the camp hospital. They were transported to Sonnenstein in Saxony, where they were killed with carbon monoxide. Information about their health served to select victims, not to provide help. [1]

One name from the transport

In the introduction to a museum book of remembrance of foresters, Bohdan Piętka identifies Stanisław Furtak, prisoner no. 14332. Furtak was in the transport sent on 28 July; the next day he was murdered at the Sonnenstein centre near Pirna. The author expressly notes that Poles made up the majority of the group. This connects the overall total with a particular person without adding an undocumented number of Polish fellow prisoners. [2]

Why it must not be counted twice

This was a separate transport from Auschwitz, but not an additional 575 people outside the overall total of victims of the German camp system. Describing the place of selection and the place of killing separately does not create two crimes with two independent sets of victims. In this article, the dates mean removal and death respectively, not two transports. [1] [2]

The museum listing links this transport with the history of hospital selections but does not identify every member of the commission in the cited excerpt. The description of responsibility therefore remains at the level of documented institutions. The absence of an executor's name in a brief notice is not evidence that organized perpetration was absent. [1]

Limits of the findings

575 is the size of the whole transport, not an established number of Poles. The indicated extract from the book of remembrance was checked, not every biography in the publication. Both sources come from the same museum and are not two independent archival inquiries. [1] [2]

Sources and notes

Footnote markers identify the basis for specific findings. Bibliographic records remain in their original language; the notes indicate how each source is used.

The bibliographic record and source-use note are retained in Polish to preserve the original scholarly citation.

  1. opracowanie muzealne. Selekcje i śmiertelne iniekcje dożylne. Państwowe Muzeum Auschwitz-Birkenau.

    opracowanie instytucjonalne · Początkowe akapity o selekcji z 28 lipca 1941 r. i transporcie do Sonnenstein · Dostęp: 2026-09-05.

    Use of this source: 575 wybranych, stan zdrowia, data selekcji i zabicie tlenkiem węgla.

  2. Bohdan Piętka. Księga pamięci leśników deportowanych do KL Auschwitz w latach 1940–1944. Państwowe Muzeum Auschwitz-Birkenau.

    opracowanie naukowe · Wstęp, akapit o Stanisławie Furtaku, numer obozowy 14332 · Dostęp: 2026-09-05.

    Use of this source: Polska większość transportu oraz imienny los Furtaka i śmierć następnego dnia.

How we assess sources

The evidence base consists primarily of Polish scholarly publications, investigative findings, archives, museums and documented witness accounts. Reliability is assessed through the document’s provenance, scholarly method and the ability to check the finding. Statements by perpetrators and family accounts of perpetrators require especially critical comparison with other material. Two pages from the same institution may repeat one finding; they are not automatically treated as independent confirmation.

Full methodology