Child care: the statistics, the Al Jazeera controversy and the case of Malin

Placements under SoL and LVU, the control of family homes, the controversy surrounding Behind Closed Doors and Malin's case, in which an incorrect record entry followed an entry into the court.

Summary: In 2024, approximately 26,300 children and young people received round-the-clock care from social services. Just under two-thirds received voluntary care under the Social Services Act, while at some point during the year about a third had care under LVU or an immediate care order. At the same time, both the debate over Al Jazeera's documentary Behind Closed Doors and SVT's review of Malin's case show why two things must be said at the same time: misinformation that Sweden systematically “kidnaps children” must be addressed, and real errors in individual child cases must be able to be openly examined

What the statistics actually show

The register of the National Board of Health and Welfare covers round-the-clock operations under the Social Services Act, SoL, and the Act with special provisions on the care of young people, LVU. It is important to keep the steps apart. A statement of concern is a statement of concern. An investigation is the ordeal of social services. A placement can be done voluntarily according to the SoL or forcibly according to the LVU. Immediate disposal pursuant to Section 6 of the LVU is an urgent decision which must then

be reviewed in court.

For 2024, the National Board of Health and Welfare reports, among other things:

26,300 children and young people received round-the-clock care at some point during the year.
Just under two-thirds of the round-the-clock care was voluntary and about a third was for LVU or immediate care.
The number of people with care according to LVU increased from just over 9,000 in 2020 to just over 11,000 in 2024, an increase of 22 per cent.
Just under 19,000 were placed in family homes, 5,300 in HVB and 2,200 in supported accommodation. Just under 1,000 were placed in special youth homes under Section 12 LVU

The number of placement forms cannot be simply summed up into a unique total number, since the same child may have moved between placement forms during the year. The National Board of Health and Welfare also reports absences from six municipalities in the 24-hour statistics for 2024. The charts should therefore be read as national orders of magnitude, not as a complete count

of each individual decision. ! -- child-placement-charts -->

What happens in the family homes after placement?

Family homes are the most common form of placement. The municipality is responsible for investigating the general suitability of the home, assessing whether the home is suitable for the individual child and following the care through regular contact with the child. A private consultancy may recruit, recommend and support family homes, but may not take over the authority or investigative responsibilities

of the municipality. However

, there are no published national statistics that directly answer how many family homes are reported for neglect, how many placements are retrospectively judged incorrect or how many children are moved because the family home was unsuitable. That's a significant knowledge gap. IVO's lex Sarah statistics are a related but narrower measure: in 2024 decisions were made in 37 lex Sarah notifications categorised as family home care, compared with 23 in 2023 and 37 in 2022. A case can belong to several categories, and the figure includes only serious malfunctions or tangible risks reported by the company itself to IVO. Thus, it does not catch all complaints nor all misplacements

When control of the family home is lacking

SVT's review of Milla shows a concrete chain of control that can break. A previous municipality had banned the family from receiving children following details of filth, inappropriate clothing, abuse and conflicts, among other things. The family later enrolled in another municipality and was able to continue receiving placements through a consulting firm. According to SVT in Milla's documents, the placement municipality's investigation was largely based on the company's materials; notes on own reference checks and contact with the family home's former municipality were missing. Milla herself sounded the alarm and was moved after just over six months.

The case shows why liability cannot be outsourced. A label such as “quality-assured family home” is not a government decision. The municipality must check references, previous placements, finances, home environment and warning signs as well as document why this particular home is suitable for this particular

child.

The indictment against the family home couple in the Highlands

In May 2026, a family couple in the highlands of Småland were charged with, among other things, assault, violation of child peace, indecent threats and unlawful detention after five children were urgently removed from the home. SVT reports that the alarm was triggered when a child played a recording to a school counsellor. A total of six former family home children are plaintiffs. The home had had eight longer placements since 2011

The pair deny any offence. After the last day of trial on June 8, 2026, they were released from custody pending sentencing, and the defense has questioned the reliability of the evidence and the data. No judgment is therefore available when this text is updated on 9 June 2026. The vetting question is broader than the guilt issue in the criminal case: how could multiple children be placed over a long period of time, what follow-up calls were conducted without the family home parents present, and why was the child's own recording required

for the system to respond?

Neglect is also a matter of redress

Sveriges Radio has reported on Tina, who sued Nässjö Municipality for neglect in foster care but did not have the case heard by the Supreme Court. It illustrates how difficult it can be to prove much later the municipality's responsibility, causation and harm even when the sited

describes serious experiences.

The historic state replacement provides a larger but older picture. Of 5,285 claims for compensation for serious neglect in community care, only 46 per cent were granted. Researchers at Linköping University found inconsistent assessments and high standards of proof, while applicants often relied on old or incomplete archives. Historical cases cannot be used as a measure of today's family homes, but they show the consequence when the state is both responsible for the placement and later checks what documentation is

sufficient for redress.

Behind Closed Doors and the Swedish Controversy

Al Jazeera 360's documentary Behind Closed Doors is available on YouTube. The film depicts families whose children have been taken into care by authorities in several countries, including Sweden. The criticism in Sweden has been, among other things, that the reasons behind certain detentions are not always accounted for and that the narrative grip is reminiscent of messages from the previous LVU campaign

Aftonbladet described concerns about a new LVU campaign. Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson reportedly called the film dangerous for Sweden. Al Jazeera 360 rejected the criticism, highlighting that the film gave space to multiple perspectives. In an interview with SVT, Al Jazeera chief Awad Joumaa said that the company wanted to highlight social problems and that the link to the LVU campaign

discredited the film.

The controversy, then, concerns not just what happens in child cases, but how the stories are built. A film can highlight the experiences of families and at the same time omit evidence needed to assess the authority's decision. Similarly, Swedish authorities may be right that general kidnapping rhetoric is false, but still need to respond to documented errors in

a specific case.

The case of Malin: when a wrong task takes on a life of its own

Mission review and SVT Nyheter reported in January 2026 that the maternity hospital in Örebro had incorrectly written that Malin had an intellectual disability. According to SVT's first audit, the task was used in assessments of her parenting skills and was included in the data when her newborn son was placed and the care according to LVU was determined. The maternity ward later admitted that the task was incorrect and apologised

The case was not legally secured solely by the discovery of the error. A board member who had taken part in one trial later said she believed the decision to continue LVU care had been taken on the wrong grounds. SVT also reported that the Social Welfare Board had provided incorrect information and that opinions in Malin's favour had not been included in the court file. The representative of the Social Welfare Board has referred to confidentiality and the best interests of the child and, according to SVT, has previously said that the decisions were not made with reference to diagnoses

In April 2026, Malin gave birth to another child. According to SVT's follow-up, there was no concern about her care for the newborn baby, but the chamber court still decided that the older son should not move home. It's a concrete contradiction that deserves factual scrutiny: what current circumstances justify continued separation when the same parenting ability is judged differently for a sibling?

What the case shows and does not show

Malin's case does not prove that Swedish social services generally take children without reason. An individual media case cannot bear that conclusion. But the case demonstrates a mechanism central to the legal certainty debate: a misstatement can be reused by care, investigative homes, social services, council and court until it appears established, even when the source of origin backfires

The relevant control question is therefore not just whether social services had any concerns, but whether each crucial piece of information was accurate, timely, traceable and communicated to the parent. In the absence of evidence in the individual's favour or when corrected records do not take effect, the Court's precautionary principle risks reinforcing the first error

Three conclusions

The statistics give proportions. Most full-time placements are voluntary, but LVU care still affects more than 11,000 children and young people over the course of a year and has increased since 2020
Media criticism must be bidirectional. Films that omit decision-making grounds should be reviewed, but warnings for misinformation must not be used to dismiss verified errors
Corrections must have actual effect. It is not enough to delete an incorrect diagnosis in a journal if the same task continues to govern risk assessments, board decisions and court proceedings.
The placement needs to be scrutinised as closely as the disposal. When the state relocates a child, it assumes special responsibility for ensuring that the new home is investigated, safe and continuously checked