No abstract

Several major pieces of legislation in Sweden have been developed and enacted during the twentieth century to enable people with disabilities to live as normal a life as possible. The legal instrument is not supposed to depend on political economic trends. Important changes in the new Act on Special Services for Developmentally Disabled Persons from 1986 include qualitative demands and the right to self‐determination for these individuals. The special services covered by the law are called social rights. The implementation of these rights is under the jurisdiction of politically appointed councils in counties or municipalities. The decisions made by these authorities can be appealed in administrative courts. Judicial review is supposed to be an instrument for the protection of citizens from the authorities responsible for services. In theory, at least, when one disabled person wins a case in court, the precedent should trickle down to all individuals in similar predicaments. But this does not always occur. One problem is that the law has no sanctions to force local authorities to follow the precedents or to execute court decisions. This article focuses on the Act and on the interplay between court cases and precedents and the decisions made by local authorities.

This article is a legal analysis of the Swedish welfare statute and its application to crime victims. Specifically, it addresses a legal reform from 2001, when a new provision concerning crime victims was introduced in the Swedish Social Services Act (2001:453). The article raises policy issues, relating both to the limitations on the rights bestowed and the relationship between the various types of statutory provisions incorporated in the legislation. In particular, it focuses on the dichotomy between those provisions bestowing rights and those outlining goals. The main conclusion of the study is that the legal guidance regarding crime victims in the Social Services Act is vague, indistinct and contradictory. Additionally, section 5:11 does not change the legal responsibility of the Social Services towards crime victims, nor does it lead to the strengthening of the social rights of this group. Even the preparatory material indicates that the reform does not effect any legal changes. In addition, just like many other legal reforms for crime victims, very little supervision or enforcement mechanisms exist to ensure the application of the law.

The aim of this article is to analyse the role of the legal representative in therapeutic law, specifically in Swedish administrative court hearings relating to compulsory care. Data are collected from three types of cases where a health or social welfare authority argues that it is necessary to apply coercion to a citizen: the Care of Young Persons (Special Provisions) Act, the Care of Alcohol and Drug Abusers (Special Provisions) Act and the Compulsory Psychiatric Care Act. The data consist of audio‐recordings from 39 hearings, supplemented by 28 interviews with participants in these hearings, and court documents. Three primary roles of the legal representatives are identified: defender, spokesperson and therapist. We show how the primary role of the attorney becomes that of the spokesperson, but also that the role of the therapist takes precedence over that of the defender.

No abstract

Flera kommuner konkurrensutsätter idag verksamheter inom socialtjänsten. I Socialtjänstlagen (SoL) regleras förutsättningar för att överlämna uppgifter på entreprenad. I artikeln tecknas en bakgrund till de ökade kraven på privatisering av offentliga verksamheter. Lagregelns innehåll analyseras. Genom ett konkret exempel redovisas några av de tolknings - och tillämpningsproblem som aktualiseras i fallet.

Independent experts serve a vital role in how the human rights of patients are protected in mental health law. This article investigates the contribution of court-appointed psychiatrists (APs) in civil commitment court hearings. Analysis is based on 12 court hearings that were audiotaped. Supplementary informal interviews with participants were also conducted. Data were analysed through a combination of rhetoric analysis and discourse analysis. Analysis of the hearings reveals that APs do not fulfil their function to critically investigate treating psychiatrists' (CPs) recommendations that patients meet commitment criteria. They typically do not ask any questions from CPs, and the few questions that are asked do not cast light on the legal issues at stake. To further understand the role of APs, their communication has been analyzed in terms of four interpretative repertoires: collegial, disclosing, therapeutic and mediating. In conclusion, the human rights of patients subjected to involuntary commitment might be at risk when therapeutic concerns are built into the process. The specific Swedish model where APs deliver their own assessment about whether commitment criteria are met may be counterproductive. This argument possibly extends to the role of medical members in mental health tribunals in the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand.

No abstract