Roddie's Medal of Honor

I see a lot of stories posted on the Internet that appear interesting at first, but after researching further and doing some fact-checking, turn out to be exaggerated or even false.  Not so with a story I saw late last week.  It's worth repeating here.

Roderick W. Edmonds, known to all as his friends as "Roddie" was a soldier in the U.S. Army during World War II.  He fought at the Battle of the Bulge and was captured in December 1944, and he spent the remainder of the war in a German Prisoner of War (POW) camp, Stalag IX-A.  Master Sergeant Edmonds was the highest ranking American non-commissioned officer at the camp, and he was therefore responsible for 1,275 American POWs.  

On their first day at Stalag IX-A, the German commandant told Master Sergeant Edmonds that the next morning, all the Jewish soldiers should assemble outside their barracks.  He had heard rumors that European Jews were being sent to death camps, and he was determined to protect the Jewish servicemen under his command. Instead of following the Nazi’s orders, Master Sergeant Edmonds issued his own: All 1,275 American POWs would assemble outside the barracks in the morning.

The next day, when the Nazi officer saw that all the soldiers were outside, he angrily demanded that Master Sergeant Edmonds identify the Jews.  Instead, Master Sergeant Edmonds told his men that they would not obey the order. Then he turned to the commander and said, "We are all Jews here."

Furious, the Nazi officer took out his pistol and threatened to shoot him. "They cannot all be Jews!" he said, insisting again that Master Sergeant Edmonds identify the Jewish soldiers.

Even with a gun to his head, Master Sergeant Edmonds did not back down.  "WE ARE ALL JEWS,” he repeated. "If you shoot me, you’ll have to shoot all of us and after the war, you’ll be tried for war crimes."

The Nazi officer backed down, and 200 Jewish-American soldiers were saved.  Stalag IX-A was eventually liberated, and Master Sergeant Edmonds and his fellow POWs returned home to the United States.  He never told anyone about his experiences there.

Master Sergeant Edmonds died in 1985.  Shortly after, his children began to read the diary that he had kept during his time as a POW.  Most of the diary just listed the names and addresses for his fellow POWs.  When his son Chris contacted one of those individuals in order to learn more about his father's time as a POW, he learned what had really happened.  Chris contacted several others who confirmed the story.  

In 2015, Master Sergeant Roderick "Roddie" Edmonds was honored by the Israeli Holocaust Memorial Yad Vashem as Righteous Among the Nations. 26,000 non-Jews who saved Jews during the Holocaust have been so honored, but Master Sergeant Edmonds is the only U.S. serviceman on that list.  And after a decade of advocacy from his family, community, and legislators, Master Sergeant Edmonds’s bravery was recognized with the nation’s highest military decoration, the Congressional Medal of Honor, which President Trump awarded posthumously to Edmonds on March 2, 2026.  His citation ends:

Without regard for his own life Master Sergeant Edmonds gallantly led these prisoners in a relentless pursuit of opposition and resistance, forcing the Germans to abandon the camp leaving the 1,200 American prisoners behind. The full extent of his bravery, unbending will, and courageous leadership would be realized when soldiers from 3d U.S. Army liberated the camp on March 30, 1945. Master Sergeant Edmonds’ conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life, above and beyond the call of duty, are in keeping with the highest traditions of military service and reflect great credit upon himself, his unit, and the United States Army.

Master Sergeant Edmonds' bravery reminds me of one of my favorite poems, "First They Came" by Martin Niemöller, a German theologian and Lutheran minister (I posted about Niemöller's story in my post, "First They Came").  As I wrote in a post from August, 2017 ("A life of privilege - Part I"), "It doesn't matter whether you are white, black, brown, yellow, or red.  It doesn't matter whether you are gay or straight.  It doesn't matter whether you are male, female, or transgender.  It doesn't matter whether you are Catholic, Jewish, Protestant, Hindu, Buddhist, or Muslim.  It doesn't matter whether you first learned to speak English or another language.  It doesn't matter whether you were born here or whether you moved here later.  We are all Americans.  That is what this country stands for - and we need to stand up.  Or some day there will be no one left to stand up for us."

As Master Sergeant Edmonds said, "We are all Jews here."  

We've lost our third places...

Last October (see my post "Connections"), I mentioned a great online article ("How '6 points of connection' can repair our shared trust") by the social entrepreneur Aaron Hurst, who recently co-founded the U.S. Chamber of Connection.  The U.S. Chamber of Connection is a movement to reverse the decline in connection and trust in society today, something that they call the connection gap.  They have called this connection gap the greatest challenge of our time, stating that "We are divided and disconnected.  It is destroying lives, communities, and our country."  In the article, Hurst talked about how the six points of connection can help restore trust in society.  Notably, Hurst's fourth point of connection is what are known as third places.  

Sociologist Ray Oldenburg first coined the term third place in his 1989 book Great Good Place.  If the first place is your home and the second place is your place of work, then the third place describes the places you go to spend time with friends and family, such as church, cafes, bars, clubs, gyms, parks, etc.  Oldenburg argued that these third places are important not only for a sense of place and belonging, but also for civic engagement and, more generally, democracy.  Oldenburg co-authored the 2023 edition of the book with Karen Christensen.  Christensen makes the argument that third places are the answer to our current epidemic of loneliness, political polarization, and even climate resilience. 

Howard Schultz, founder and former CEO of Starbucks, famously wanted to turn his coffee shops into a third place (see my post "It's not about the coffee...").  He once described his vision, saying, "The idea was to create a chain of coffeehouses that would become America's third place.  At the time, most Americans had two places in their lives - home and work.  But I believed that people needed another place, a place where they could go to relax and enjoy others, or just be by themselves.  I envisioned a place that would be separate from home or work, a place that would mean different things to different people."  

Unfortunately, third spaces are disappearing across the United States.  As recently as 2019, nearly two-thirds of all Americans could name a regular, local third place.  However, that number has dropped to just over half in 2022.  An American Social Capital Survey from 2024 indicated that 63% of adults rarely or never visit a library.  Half rarely or never visit a park.  More than 1 in 5 Americans live in communities with no access to third spaces like parks, libraries, or community centers.  And, as I mentioned in a recent post ("The fox, the hound, and the body..."), a Dutch study on changes in personal relationships strongly suggests that the loss of third places is an important reason why many personal relationships fade with time. 

There are several reasons that can potentially explain the loss of third spaces in society today.  Certainly, suburban sprawl has pushed individuals further away from commercial and social hubs that are often located in the downtown areas of cities.  Americans are also spending more time at home in general, and frequently that time is spent alone.   I've also posted a lot about the role that television (see "Amusing Ourselves to Death"), technology (see "The Walkman Effect", "The Quiet Commute", and "Take a Break...") and social media (see "Familiarity breeds contempt...",  "Liberation", and "The truth about connection") have played with the growing trend to spend time alone.  I think we can easily make the argument that the more time we spend on technology (e.g. smart phone, Internet) or social media, the less time we are connecting with others (friends, family, etc).  

With all of this in mind, Aaron Hurst makes an important point in his article on the six points of connection.  Hurst writes, "Third places matter because they invite spontaneous connection - between generations, across cultures, and beyond our usual social circles.  They're where we bump into each other, strike up conversations, and build trust without needing an invitation."

He goes on to suggest, "The simplest and most powerful action is to show up. Visit your local third places regularly. Stay a little longer. Learn the names of the baristas or librarians. Say yes to the community event. When we consistently support these spaces, we keep them alive — and signal that connection matters."

For those so-called civic deserts, communities that lack third places, Hurst suggests that we should become advocates by "asking for benches, plazas, or gathering spots."  A lot of this is under our direct control, if we work together to spend time together.  Together, we can restore our third places, and as a direct result, improve the quality of our own lives and of those around us.  

Is "burnout" burning out?

I don't know how I missed this, but Dr. Tait Shanafelt and his research team published their most recent nationwide survey of physician burnout in the Mayo Clinic Proceedings this past July ("Changes in burnout and satisfaction with work-life integration in physicians and the general US working population between 2011 and 2023").  I've mentioned the burnout issue a few times in the past (see "Don't ask me to to take resilience training!"), and most studies still suggesting that approximately half of the physicians in the U.S. meet at least one of the three criteria for burnout in the Maslach Burnout Inventory (more on this point below).  Dr. Shanafelt has published extensively in this area, and his team has longitudinally measured the prevalence of burnout at 3-year intervals since 2011.  In addition, they conducted an off-cycle survey (about 15 months after the 2020 survey) to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on professional burnout.

Importantly, according to the MBI, which is the most commonly used scale to measure burnout today, an individual meets criteria for burnout when he or she meets threshold criteria in each of the three categories - emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and a sense of a loss of personal accomplishment.  The media has erroneously reported in the past that "nearly half of physicians in the U.S. are burned out."  Unfortunately, this statement is technically not correct, and it would be more accurate to state that "nearly half of the physicians in the U.S. meet at least one criteria for burnout."

Using both online and mailed surveys, Dr. Shanafelt and his team surveyed a diverse and representative sample of U.S. physicians.  The response rate was low (less than 10%, or just over 7,600 physicians), but they were able to measure burnout using two of the three metrics included in the MBI - they substituted a previously used survey of personal accomplishment that was more specific to physicians.  They found that burnout in US physicians peaked during the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic with the 2021 survey.  However, relative to 2021 and 2014 (the previous high water mark), burnout at the end of 2023 had decreased and was similar to levels reported in the 2017 survey.  Overall, 45% of physicians reported at least 1 symptom of burnout, compared to 62.8% in the 2021 survey.  When compared physicians to the general U.S. workforce, physicians remained at higher levels of burnout.

Dr. Shanafelt and his team also reported updated survey results of burnout in U.S. residents and fellows (physicians who have graduated from medical school and are training in a particular specialty).  Those survey results were published in the journal, Academic Medicine (see "Changes in Burnout and Satisfaction With Work-Life Integration Among U.S. Residents and Fellows and the General U.S. Working Population Between 2012 and 2023") in December 2025.  Again, burnout among U.S. trainees was lower in 2023 compared to results found in a survey conducted in 2012. Despite this improvement, trainees remain at higher risk for burnout than workers in other fields.

If these results hold up to further scrutiny and follow-up studies, then that is an encouraging development.  Burnout is a major issue that needs to be addressed, and many health care organizations have invested heavily in programs that have tried to address burnout in the entire health care workforce, not just physicians.  However, two results are important to acknowledge.  First, close to half of all physicians still report at least one symptom of burnout, and that is still too high of a percentage.  Second, burnout continues to be higher amongst physicians compared to the general workforce.  We have to do better.

So, back to my question.  Is "burnout" burning out?  Probably not, but perhaps we have reached (and hopefully passed) the peak - and that is progress.  As Winston Churchill once said, "Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."

"The only clue to what man can do is what man has done..."

My wife and I recently watched the 2025 film, "Nuremburg", starring Rami Malek, Russell Crowe, and Michael Shannon (among other notable stars).  The film is advertised as a psychological thriller and historical drama that tells the story of U.S. Army psychiatrist Douglas Kelley (played by Rami Malek) who was assigned to investigate the personalities and monitor the mental status of Hermann Göring (played by Russell Crowe) and other high-ranking Nazis in preparation for and during the Nuremberg trials, following the end of World War II.  The film is based on the 2013 book, The Nazi and the Psychiatrist by Jack El-Hai.  Both the film and the book are superb, and I highly recommend them.

The film ends with what I thought was an poignant and powerful quote by the English historian and philosopher, R. G. Collingwood, "The only clue to what man can do is what man has done."  The quote comes from Collingwood's posthumously published book, The Idea of History and makes the point that humans are capable of many things, both good and bad (in this particular story's case, very bad), and if you need to be convinced that this is so, all you have to do is look at history.

I really liked the quote, so after hearing it, I did what I frequently do - I wrote it down and looked it up.  As it turns out, the film's production team took the quote slightly out of context.  Here is the entire quote from Collingwood's book:

"Knowing yourself means knowing first, what it is to be a person; secondly, knowing what it is to be the kind of person you are; and thirdly, knowing what it is to be the person you are and nobody else is.  Knowing yourself means knowing what you can do; and since nobody knows what they can do until they try, the only clue to what man can do is what man has done.  The value of history, then, is that it teaches us what man has done and thus what man is."

Did you notice anything different?  The original quote, with the proper context, sounds much more positive.  Even though the shortened quote fit perfectly with the theme of  "Nuremburg", I'm not the meaning I took from the quote at the end of the movie fit with Collingwood's original meaning and intent.  And that is one of the main problems I have with using shortened quotes without providing any context.  Context matters.  Original meaning matters.  We should be more careful when we use shortened quotes from other sources.

Overall, my message today should not detract from how powerful the movie was in conveying what happened during a very difficult period of history.  It's a great movie that I would highly recommend.