- Record: found
- Abstract: found
- Article: found
Questioning Fairness in Swedish Asylum Decisions
Abstract
This article examines Swedish asylum deliberations regarding families with children with severe apathy, a condition where the child gradually loses all bodily functions. The article outlines the political context and medical evidence that has evolved since the beginning of the 2000s. It uses case studies and frequencies drawing from a case-file inventory covering 24 families, many with minority belonging. The asylum process, case law and the decision makers' role in reiterating and interpreting the families' asylum narratives are explored, analysed and discussed using discourse analysis and interpreted using intersectional theory. Findings suggest that the asylum narratives are greatly reduced and reformulated in a way that seems detrimental to state obligations towards, for example, rape victims. Findings also suggest that political persecution should be taken more seriously by Swedish migration authorities. Finally, evidence indicates a need for a feminist perspective, and an overall strategy, at authority level that does not discriminate.
Content
Author and article information
Notes
According to the Council Directive ( 2003: 31), this includes “minors, unaccompanied minors, disabled people, elderly people, pregnant women, single parents with minor children and persons who have been subjected to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual violence”.
The Swedish Parliament is elected through Proportional Representation, whereby to gain representation, a party must receive a minimum of 4 per cent of all votes. Presently, pre-2014 election, there are eight parties in the Parliament, of which four form the ruling right-wing coalition.
Sweden was one of the first western countries to implement gender equity policies in employment and childcare; it has been touted as embracing the ideals of class, income and gender equality (Lundberg and Fritzell 2008).
As explained by Schön ( 2014), at the end of the 1980s different groups of right-wing extremists attempted to join up together. This resulted in the forming of the SD party in Malmö in 1988. Elected onto its board were several persons with clearly expressed Nazi and racist ideologies; one of them was a former SS-veteran and another was an active neo-Nazi. In 1991–4, a xenophobic populist party was voted into Parliament. The present SD leader joined the party in 1995 ( Schön 2014). During the 1990s, there were statements made by representatives of the right-wing extremist movement to change strategy to become mainstream. Schön ( 2014) highlights this matter with a reference to another SS-veteran who in 1998 in a Nazi magazine (“Wärendsbladet”) called for white supremacy beliefs to be supported more strategically. In the election in 2006, the SD party got 2.9 per cent of votes; in 2010 their support had increased to 5.7 per cent (Expo 2014). Violence and threats also persisted: In 2010, two SD Members of Parliament, the economy and the justice spokesmen, and a Stockholm SD politician, filmed themselves with a mobile phone armed with iron bars intending to attack a drunk man who they had racially abused ( Roström Andersson 2012; Svenska Dagbladet 2012).
With a far right party elected into Parliament, the risk of extreme right-wing ideologies' influence on state institutions also increases. However, research into far right ideology's influence on migration policy (e.g. through political propaganda) and practice (such as through technology/health technology), and impact on morbidity and mortality of vulnerable persons and groups is virtually non-existent.
That is, the “Geneva Convention” ( 1951), which Sweden ratified on 16 October 1954 (UN Treaty Collection; available online at treaties.un.org/). For more information, see Hathaway ( 2005).
5 Chapter. 6 § Swedish Aliens Act 2006. In Swedish: “Synnerligen eller särskilt” “ömmande omständigheter” (called “ particularly distressing circumstances” in Johansson Blight et al. 2012) replaced “humanitarian reasons” in 2006.
As explained by Envall ( 2013), the medical diagnosis is “Severe Depressive Episode with Psychotic Symptoms” in the International Classification of Diseases (ICD), version 2010 (ICD-10) code: F32.3 “A”. ICD is a standard diagnostic tool for clinical purposes, health management and epidemiology. Available online at www.who.int/classifications/icd/en/. “A” indicates that this is a subgroup to “F32.3”, which is a “… state of stupor of a severe grade” and can be used in connection with “Z65.8 A: problems in connection with refugees and those seeking asylum”. In the past in Sweden, the condition has also been referred to as “dissociate stupor” and “depressive devitalisation”.
Bodegård ( 2005b) suggests that an important component in treatment is to ensure that the families are not subject to stress above the families' stress thresholds.
This has been detected through stress-hormone analysis of saliva and blood tests ( Söndergaard et al. 2012). Söndergaard et al. showed associations between apathy and neurobiological markers, and that blood-level cortisol reduced the longer children with apathy needed naso-gastric tube feeding as well as that with treatment and recovery, cortisol levels started to fall into the matched comparison group values.
Migration Court of Appeal deliberations are precedent decisions. Estimates from 2012 suggest that very few cases are tried at the Migration Court of Appeal ( Johansson Blight et al. 2014).
Examples given include that policy guidance, SMB and the Migration Court of Appeal have been taking into account the economic consequences on the Swedish economy, which has led to rejections. Despite that this is not what the law states ( Hübinette, Lönqvist and Toll 2009). Further, that the migration authorities rely too much on “objective” measures of time to assess whether the children have become attached to Sweden or not, which also impacts on the outcome on permission to stay. Similarly, that patient journals are in general considered to be of less value as evidence than medical certificates, however, as is emphasized by Hübinette, Lönqvist and Toll ( 2009), the “the principle of free proof” also applies to the Migration Courts; it is the content of any evidence that is important and which should be assessed. Also, the report on “exceptionally distressing circumstances” states that the total economic costs of health care for some illnesses (it does not say which) can constitute grounds for rejection ( Lönqvist and Borén 2011).
Published research and anecdotal reports in Sweden include children from Balkan countries, former Soviet states, Northern African countries, Turkey and Bangladesh.
Despite agreed obligations such as under the Convention of the rights of people with disabilities (see, e.g., Shamilova 2012). Sweden ratified this Convention on 15 December 2008 (UN Treaty Collection; available online at treaties.un.org/).
Regarding minority belonging, in Johansson Blight et al. ( 2012) for children with severe apathy below 18 years of age, ten children were from eight Romani families from Serbia and Kosovo, four children were from four Uyghur families from Kazakhstan, and twelve children were from eleven families in Kazakhstan (ethnicity not known), Armenia, Azerbaijan, North Ossetia/Russia, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Turkey.
One example of this is the registering of Roma people in Sweden historically, but also presently in Swedish police registers ( Orrenius 2013a, 2013b). As reported in the media, the latter includes more than 1000 children and does not highlight if a person has a criminal record or not.
Cross-sectional data from various points in time suggest that the number of children with apathy has varied over the years. This may be due to changes in Swedish migration policy ( Söndergaard 2005; Hessle and Ahmadi 2006a; Svenonius 2006; Bodegård 2010). Routine data and follow-ups on persons with apathy who are deported, and not returned to Sweden, are lacking ( Envall 2013).
Since the intensified debate started in the beginning of the 2000s, there has been obstruction of medical scientific studies ( Bodegård 2013).
Underlying this broader anti-immigrant discourse is, as noted elsewhere, a wish to deter “bogus” refugees, that is, asylum-seekers whose “real” reasons are economic and not persecution ( Fekete 2001).Such attitudes are still present. For example, similar to the World Health Organization's (WHO) cartoon aimed at children to inform them about their right to health (WHO 2002), the SMB also produced a cartoon aimed at children (5–12 year olds; Borelius 2011). However, the SMB aims to inform children about what “the Swedish Law” states. The story reveals of a badger family who are deported as their reasons (forced unemployment due to their group membership in their country of origin) are assessed by the SMB to be economic and not for protection. The badger family are met at the airport by relatives and the story has a happy ending. The cartoon has been criticized for its stark contradiction to the reality that many rejected asylum seekers face ( Djampour 2011).
Apathy has been described in child psychiatry, catastrophe- and military psychiatry, and refugee mental health, and as similar to “pervasive refusal syndrome” ( Steel et al. 2001; Bodegård 2005a; Bodegård 2005b; Bodegård 2006; Söndergaard et al. 2012).
This is in line with the right to remedy and reparation (including rehabilitation) for victims of violations of international human rights and humanitarian law (UN, E/CN.4/2000/62; Sveaass 2013).
Case files were “snowball” sampled, i.e., advocates across Sweden were approached and asked to request families for consent to use anonymized text extracts of their files ( Johansson Blight et al. 2012). The case files include existing documents, decisions from (a) the SMB: initial decision and decision to inhibit deportation; (b) the Migration Court and (c) the Court of Appeal and finally, (d) supplementary information such as medical certificates. A questionnaire was composed together with key experts, including lawyers, human rights advocates, clinicians, and professors and used to map this information. To ensure anonymity, the case files were consecutively marked with “Questionnaire 1”, 2, 3, etc.
This information derives from the SMB or Migration Court documents or medical certificates.
Four working days in April and two working days in August 2012.
Advantages with analysing the existing texts is that the most vulnerable people, the children and their families, are not forced to become personally and/or negatively affected by the political nature of process scrutiny. In this way, potential researcher bias is also reduced ( Frankfort-Nachmias and Nachmias 1992), and other researchers can request the decisions from the migration authorities and validate them in their own analysis.
It is plausible that the threat of forced return can invoke serious distress ( Johansson Blight et al. 2014).
The four families arrived at Sweden/sought asylum between 2008 and 2010 and received residency between 2011 and 2012 after inhibition on deportation.
Group-level frequencies of gender and ethnicity based on names and work titles.
Three SMB decisions and four Migration Court decisions were not available on data collection.
Group-level frequencies of gender and ethnicity based on names and work titles.
The four families arrived at Sweden/sought asylum between 2008 and 2010 and received residency between 2011 and 2012 after inhibition on deportation.
Decisions from the Migration Court of Appeal and decisions on impediments to enforcement were not included due to the small number of documents available in the files.
The four families arrived at Sweden/sought asylum between 2008 and 2010 and received residency between 2011 and 2012 after inhibition on deportation.
Analyses of transcripts have some disadvantages, compared with, for example, an observational study, as influences on the interview such as how the interviewer and interviewee are sitting and speaking, their facial expressions, etc. are lost, thereby limiting claims of representation (Widdowson 2004).
About this institution: The SMB assesses all applications for residency in Sweden. In 2011, the SMB ( 2012a: 3) stated that it “should be a leading actor within the EU and internationally”.In this work, as the SMB ( 2013b) states, the authority “… is commissioned by parliament and government, who set the Swedish asylum and migration policy. We are thus commissioned by the Swedish people, through the politicians who make decisions on migration policy” (1). The SMB General Director (GD) was appointed in 2012, prior to this he was GD for the Swedish Secret Police.
The asylum narratives are often based on one or both the parents' situations. The children's situations are less often reiterated ( Johansson Blight et al. 2012).
In the Johansson Blight et al. 2012 case files, all 24 families had been rejected by the SMB in the first instance and all appeals to the Migration Courts were also rejected.
Equivalent to the DMO on the court decision.
Chapter 12, 18 § first paragraph 3 Aliens Act 2005: 716.
Oral procedure negotiations (in Swedish: “muntlig förhandling”, SveDom 2012), or “pre-judgement negotiations” ( Johansson Blight et al. 2012). In Johansson Blight et al.'s ( 2012) study, 7 of 24 families had requested negotiation but were not approved. In eleven families, no requests had been made. In two where negotiation was requested, it was also held (in four case files, it was unclear if a request had been made).
Sweden ratified the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1984) on 8 January 1986 (UN Treaty Collection; available online at treaties.un.org/).
The daughter showed clear signs of severe apathy prior to the rejection by the Migration Court.
There are indications of the presence of a reductionist approach also in the assessment of medical evidence in the asylum process ( Johansson Blight 2014). It is important to strongly caution against the testing of illnesses or disorders as a way of providing medical evidence in the asylum process; compulsory testing is a violation of the right to health and it is counterproductive to public health and social inclusion (United Nations (UN) 2013).