Compulsury intervension towards adult substance abusers and mentally disabled people in scandinavian social law

Compulsory interventions towards different social groups have a long history in the Scandinavian countries. Attitudes towards such controversial measures have changed during the last decades, and currently all three countries (Denmark, Norway and Sweden) emphasize individual autonomy and integrity as the basic principle in social law. This does not mean, however, that the use of coercive measures is removed from social law.
In this paper our focus is on two social groups who historically have been the target of comprehensive compulsory interventions – adult substance abusers and mentally disabled people. On both these fields the legal development has been quite different in the three countries.
One important duality in the Welfare State is related to the tension between liberal ideas of freedom and legal protection on the one hand, and the possible dangers of paternalism and coercion following from the allocation of welfare resources on the other. The Welfare State may be described both as a project of liberty based on solidarity and justice, and as a powerful state apparatus controlling the lives of the citizens according to its own judgements, thus limiting the opportunities of individual freedom and self-determination. This tension becomes particularly visible when state action is enforced against the will of the receivers of certain “social benefits”.
The paper discusses the legal foundation of compulsory measures in Scandinavian social law on the basis of three general principles of justice: The Liberal Principle of Autonomy, the Principle of Care and the Utilitarian Harm Principle. A critical approach towards the weighting of these principles in social law is elaborated.
Paper prepared for ESPRN Conference “Social Values, Social Policies. Normative foundations of changing social policies in European countries”.
Tilburg University, the Netherlands 29-31 August 2002.