Question

Can someone plsss help. I just need help with the body paragraphs if you don’t want to do all of it. I really need help someone!!

Answer 1

Here is a draft of the body paragraphs:

• To begin, van den Bergh was in a desperate position himself during Nazi occupation, like so many other Jews in hiding. However, there is no evidence that reveals he was directly threatened into giving up the annex location or that his family was in imminent danger if he did not provide this information. The Nazis were determined to find any remaining Jews in hiding, with or without van den Bergh's help. Betraying fellow Jews would not guarantee anyone's safety.
• Furthermore, if van den Bergh did disclose the annex location, this was an act of self-preservation over the greater good of his community. As Jews were systematic targets of discrimination, oppression and violence, they needed to band together for survival. Sacrificing eight innocent lives to potentially gain more time hiding was morally unjustified, especially considering there were no assurances of truly escaping the Nazis. While van den Bergh may have acted out of fear and a desire to protect himself and his family, his actions came at the expense of others in his community who were equally as fearful and desperate. There were no indications his family would be spared or that the annex inhabitants would have otherwise been found immediately. A selfish act of self-preservation at the expense of his own community members who needed solidarity was unwarranted.
• Betraying your own community during such a time of hardship is an unethical act. Though we can understand van den Bergh’s motives to protect his own family, we cannot justify his actions. His betrayal ultimately did not save his family and led to the demise of innocent lives. There is no evidence to suggest the annex inhabitants would have been found at that time without his involvement. And with no certainty of immunity by complying with the Nazis, disclosing critical information about Jews in hiding was not justified. His act reflects a more selfish choice of personal well-being over community allegiance and survival.