The Swedish Medical Association is sounding the alarm after a precedent-setting ruling by the Supreme Administrative Court regarding the Karolinska University Hospital’s obligation to disclose contact details for a man residing illegally in Sweden. The association fears that the verdict, combined with the new duty to inform that is now coming into force, will lead people to refrain from seeking care out of fear that their information will reach the police.
The ruling concerns a widely discussed case in which the Swedish Police Authority requested the phone number of a man with a legally binding deportation order who was being treated for a life-threatening and contagious disease. Karolinska University Hospital initially refused to provide the information, citing confidentiality and the patient’s need for care, but after a legal process, the Supreme Administrative Court ruled that the police had the right to access the information.
This ruling sets a precedent and means that similar cases in the future should be assessed in the same way.
In an interview with state television, Christofer Lindholm, chair of the Medical Association’s Ethics and Accountability Council, says that the medical profession has long been worried about this development. He warns that illegal immigrants might choose not to seek care, or delay care until they become significantly more ill, out of fear that their details will be handed over.
The Medical Association also criticizes the new obligation to inform, which came into effect at the same time. Even though health and medical care are not covered by the law, the association fears that patient data could indirectly reach authorities that are covered, for example through registration with the Swedish Tax Agency when a child is born.
According to the association, this risks both patients’ health and an increased risk of disease transmission.
Forssell: “This concerns people who do not have the right to be here”
Minister for Migration Johan Forssell (Moderates) tells SVT that the government takes the healthcare sector’s objections seriously but emphasizes that, ultimately, the issue concerns people who have already been ordered to leave Sweden.
– This concerns people who do not have the right to be in Sweden. They are here with deportation orders but do not want to go home. The alternative, to continue sweeping the problem under the rug, is far worse, he says.
The Tidö Agreement and Tougher Migration Policy
The case comes at the same time as several parts of the Tidö Agreement’s migration policies are being implemented. The new duty to inform – called the “informant law” by critics – means that six government agencies are required to provide information to both the Police Authority and the Migration Agency when they come into contact with illegal immigrants.
The government and the Sweden Democrats have justified the reforms by saying that the current system has made it possible for people with deportation orders to remain in Sweden for a long time and at the same time access public services.
According to the government, the aim is to restore respect for legally binding deportation orders, improve enforcement, and reduce the so-called shadow society. The government has also emphasized that health and medical care are not covered by the duty to inform.
Protests from Healthcare and Civil Society
The proposals have for years faced strong criticism from parts of the healthcare sector and civil society. The Swedish Medical Association has repeatedly warned that a system where patients risk being linked to migration controls can undermine confidence in healthcare and cause people to avoid seeking care.
Similar objections have been raised by the Swedish Association of Health Professionals, several labor unions, human rights organizations, the Swedish Red Cross, Amnesty International Sweden, Save the Children, and a substantial number of doctors and healthcare staff.
During the legislative process, there were demonstrations, petitions, and open letters in which critics claimed that the reforms threatened to violate medical ethics and children’s right to healthcare.
Proponents, on the other hand, have argued that Swedish welfare cannot function if authorities are expected to ignore individuals who, by law, are not entitled to reside in the country. The government and the Sweden Democrats have therefore described the reforms as necessary to strengthen the rule of law, increase the number of enforced deportations, and reduce the emergence of a permanent shadow society.
READ ALSO: Duty to inform now introduced – will not be followed by everyone