Gellert Tamas, Dagens Nyheter, 29/10/2021
Translated by Fausto Giudice, Tlaxcala
The debate on apathetic refugee children has been raging for almost 20 years in Sweden. A new book by neurologist Suzanne O'Sullivan highlights mental, physical and environmental factors for the disorder - yet the Swedish media dismiss the apathetic children as malingerers, writes Gellert Tamas.
Could it be that the hotly debated question of apathetic refugee children affected by the resignation syndrome has finally been answered? It's not impossible, at least judging by the international reception of a new book on resignation syndrome by renowned neurologist and multi-award-winning author Suzanne O'Sullivan.
Neurologist and author Suzanne O'Sullivan. Photo: Guillem Lopez/TT
The debate has raged for nearly 20 years. Around the turn of 2005-2006, 10,000 people demonstrated to stop the ongoing deportations, while the media focus quickly changed. According to a survey by the Mid Sweden University, manipulation was the most common - 42% of articles - explanation for the children's condition. They were allegedly faking or being poisoned by their parents - all with the aim of obtaining a residence permit.
Then the debate turned. The first research findings were published in leading journals. Blood tests and tests of stress hormones, among other things, showed that neither malingering nor poisoning could explain the children's condition. In 2014, the National Board of Health and Welfare (Socialstyrelsen) introduced the resignation syndrome as a separate diagnosis code in the health care system. This seemed to settle the issue.
Although the research is still incomplete, all the research that does exist shows - despite differences of opinion on, for example, the view of hospital versus home care, the degree of parental involvement in the care process and the importance of residence permits for the recovery process - that manipulation cannot explain the condition itself, although there may be such individual cases. This is the same picture I have painted myself in both a book and in investigative television programmes.
In the autumn of 2019, the debate flared up once again, after two now-adults told me that as children they were forced to play apathetic by their parents. The focus once again fell on the issue of manipulation. Although there is no new research to overturn previous findings, or support the claim of mass manipulation, several commentators have argued that there is now compelling evidence; virtually all of the 1,000 cases of children diagnosed with symptoms resignation have in fact involved manipulation.
The tone has been heated and not without political undertones. PM Nilsson, political editor at Dagens Industri, in an interview on Radio Sweden, dismisses withdrawal symptoms as “this strange story of apathetic children who were exploited by their parents to simulate a condition that made them pitiful cases.”
In the tabloid Expressen, Peter Santesson, former director of Timbro publishers and editor-in-chief of the magazine Kvartal, calls for a “sorry-we-were-wrong” statement from all the doctors and researchers who have concluded that the hildren are really sick.
The list could go on and on.
