Other Measures

The documents do not address international adoption at all. The closest relevant principle is that the state has responsibility for making amends for injustices it has itself inflicted on people, together with the commitment to realise children's rights and a family law that reflects how people actually live. Based on that principle, the plan argues for investigating DNA testing, support, and compensation for adoptees.

• responsibility for state injusticesdecisive»Den svenska staten har genom historien utsatt urfolk och nationella« (party programme ↗)“The Swedish state has historically subjected indigenous peoples and national”
• stronger rights for children»Utvecklingen mot starkare rättigheter för barn är en av de progressiva« (party programme ↗)“Development towards stronger rights for children is one of the progressive”
• modern family law»Vi vill fortsätta att gå mot en lagstiftning som utgår« (party programme ↗)“We want to continue moving toward legislation that is based”

The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.

The plan does not address international adoption. The closest principle is a social policy that equalizes gaps and frees people and a social safety net throughout life, which speaks in favor of adoptees receiving support and the opportunity to have their origins investigated. The requirement for a national DNA database must, however, be weighed against the plan's requirement for protection of personal privacy.

• liberating social policydecisive»En socialpolitik som utjämnar klyftor och frigör människor.« (party programme ↗)“A social policy that equalizes gaps and frees people.”
• support throughout life»Socialt skyddsnät under hela livet, med robusta socialförsäkringar och stöd till dem« (party programme ↗)“Social safety net throughout life, with robust social insurance and support for”
• personal privacy»Skydd för den personliga integriteten.« (party programme ↗)“Protection of personal privacy.”

The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.

The plan does not address international adoption, DNA testing or compensation for adoptees. The nearest principle is that the best interests of the child shall always be decisive, that children have the right to all their parents and that society has a responsibility when children in its care have been subjected to abuse. Based on these principles requirements for support, origin seeking and redress lie closest to the plan.

• the best interests of the child decisivedecisive»Barnkonventionen är svensk lag och barnets bästa« (party programme ↗)“The Convention on the Rights of the Child is Swedish law and the best interests of the child”
• right to their parents»Barn ska ha rätt till alla sina föräldrar« (party programme ↗)“Children shall have the right to all their parents”
• responsibility for abuse in care»Barn som placeras i samhällets vård får inte alltid den omsorg« (party programme ↗)“Children placed in society's care do not always receive the care”

The plan does not address international adoption. The closest underlying principle is that those harmed should receive redress and better support and that everyone living in Sweden should be able to have their case heard, with short processing times and access to legal counsel. Requirements for DNA testing, continued support, and an investigation into damages align with that redress principle, but the support is weakly derived.

• redress for those affecteddecisive»Brottsofferperspektivet måste stärkas. Den som utsatts för brott ska få upprättelse och bättre stöd.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“The victim perspective must be strengthened. Those victimized by crime should receive redress and better support.”
• right to have one's case heard»Alla som bor i Sverige ska kunna få sin sak prövad.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Everyone living in Sweden should be able to have their case heard.”
• child's right protected»Särskilt viktigt är att värna varje barns rätt att bli respekterad och att bli sedd för den man är.« (party programme ↗)“Particularly important is to protect every child's right to be respected and to be seen for who they are.”

The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.

The party programme establishes that the right to compensation or damages for mistakes or abuses by public authorities needs to be improved and that individuals' opportunities to assert their rights against authorities must increase. This supports the counter-proposal's demand for an investigation into damages and continued support for adoptees. The plan however addresses neither DNA testing nor a national register, and the integrity principle counsels caution there.

• compensation for official errorsdecisive»Rätten till kompensation eller skadestånd vid myndigheters misstag eller övergrepp behöver förbättras.« (party programme ↗)“The right to compensation or damages for mistakes or abuses by public authorities needs to be improved.”
• individuals' right against authorities»Den enskildes möjligheter att hävda sina rättigheter gentemot myndigheterna måste öka.« (party programme ↗)“Individuals' opportunities to assert their rights against public authorities must increase.”
• children's rights as individuals»Barn och ungdomar har rätt att respekteras som individer och i takt med åldern få ta ett ökande ansvar för sin egen tillvaro.« (party programme ↗)“Children and young people have the right to be respected as individuals and to increasingly take responsibility for their own circumstances as they age.”
• integrity protection in registers»Åtgärder som påverkar den personliga integriteten negativt är endast berättigade om ett motstående intresse väger uppenbart tyngre och åtgärden är effektiv.« (party programme ↗)“Measures that negatively affect personal integrity are only justified if an opposing interest weighs manifestly heavier and the measure is effective.”

The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.

The plan establishes that every child has the right to knowledge of its origin and that the child perspective shall be placed foremost in adoption, which directly supports the requirement for DNA testing and continued support for adoptees. The plan also wishes adoption to be facilitated with public measures. The requirement for a national DNA database must, however, be weighed against the plan's demands for confidentiality protection for tissue samples as genetic personal registers.

• right to know one's origindecisive»Varje barn har rätt till kännedom om sitt« (party programme ↗)“Every child has the right to knowledge of its”
• child perspective in adoption»adoption är att sätta barnperspektivet i främsta rummet.« (party programme ↗)“adoption is to place the child perspective foremost.”
• public support for adoption»Adoption bör underlättas« (party programme ↗)“Adoption should be facilitated”
• confidentiality for genetic information»vävnadsprover från människor är att betrakta som genetiska personregister och ska« (party programme ↗)“tissue samples from people are to be regarded as genetic personal registers and shall”

The stance rests on the quoted commitment in the party's own documents; the actual vote deviated. Click the quote to verify it in the document.

The plan addresses neither international adoption, DNA testing nor compensation to adoptees. The nearest principles are that politics must prioritize and abandon things, that new commitments must fit within the surplus target, and that personal integrity should be protected – which argues against building a national DNA database. The counter-proposal's demands therefore do not follow from the plan.

• prioritize core tasksdecisive»Politiken har en viktig uppgift att prioritera och välja bort,« (party programme ↗)“Politics has an important task to prioritize and abandon,”
• protect personal integrity»Den personliga integriteten ska värnas, såväl från intrång« (party programme ↗)“Personal integrity should be protected, both from intrusion”
• financed reforms»Alla nya löften och reformer – som till exempel våra inkomstskattesänkningar – behöver finansieras eller rymmas inom överskottsmålet.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“All new promises and reforms – such as our income tax cuts – need to be financed or fit within the surplus target.”

The plan establishes that a child who cannot spend time with their biological parents should in any case have the right to information about who they are or where they are. Free DNA testing and a national database is a direct means for adoptees to realize exactly that right. The plan also requires quality and legal security in investigations concerning children. The question of damages is however not addressed.

• right to biological originsdecisive»skall ha rätt att umgås med båda sina biologiska föräldrar och i de fall detta inte är möjligt skall barnet i alla fall ha rätt att få information om vilka de biologiska föräldrarna är eller var.« (party programme ↗)“shall have the right to spend time with both their biological parents and in cases where this is not possible the child shall in any case have the right to information about who the biological parents are or where they are.”
• the child's best interests»Att barnets bästa alltid ska beaktas« (2022 manifesto ↗)“That the child's best interests shall always be considered”
• legal security in child matters»Öka kvalité och rättssäkerhet i utredningar om barn« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Increase quality and legal security in investigations concerning children”

The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.