Response to interpellation 2025/26:562 on admission to the special school for deaf students
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns the admission to the special school for deaf pupils and how equal education can be achieved. L agrees that more needs to be done for equal education 1 2 3 and argues that the government is implementing reforms to strengthen student health and provide earlier support measures 1 2 3. L believes that special education teachers should work directly with pupils in smaller groups 3 and that investments in TUFF, more training hours for parents, as well as an additional 100 hours of instruction for pupils who have difficulty reaching the goals, create a basis for equality 3. L emphasizes that the government is making a special investment in the special authority for sign language education with 5 million kronor annually from 2026 4. L also believes that it is important to strengthen student health and have more early support measures to restore the knowledge school 4. L argues that the best way to achieve equality is to give the special authority SPSM more resources to offer sign language education 3. S believes that the government misses the core of the issue as sign language is the child's language and identity, not a support measure 5. S believes that there is a difference between receiving instruction in sign language and having a sign-language-based educational environment 5 6. S believes that children should not have to fail in the regular school to gain access to their own language 6 7.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Utbildnings- och integrationsministern Simona Mohamsson (L)
Mr. Speaker! Jessica Rodén has asked me how I ensure that deaf students have their right to education met when the instruction in home school does not fully correspond to the students' needs. Jessica Rodén has also asked me if I intend to take any measures to strengthen deaf students' opportunities to access a sign language educational environment when needed so that they can achieve the goals of the education.
All children and pupils in all school forms shall, according to the Education Act (2010:800), be given the guidance and stimulation they need in their learning and personal development. The starting point shall be their own circumstances and that they shall develop as far as possible according to the goals of the education. Pupils who, as a result of a functional impairment, have difficulty fulfilling the various grading criteria or the criteria for assessment of knowledge shall be given support aimed at counteracting the consequences of the functional impairment as far as possible.
It is the responsibility of the headmasters to follow the Education Act as well as other regulations and provisions. Those who have a mother tongue other than Swedish or any of the minority languages, or who use sign language, shall be given the opportunity to develop and use this language. It is the public authority that is responsible for this (Sections 14–15 of the Language Act [2009:600]).
It appears from the Education Act, among other things, that children who, due to their disability or other special reasons, cannot attend primary school or adapted primary school shall be admitted to a special school if they are deaf or have a hearing impairment. The application for admission to a special school is examined by a special decision-making body at the Swedish National Agency for Special Pedagogy, SPSM. The decision on admission to a special school shall be preceded by an investigation comprising a pedagogical, psychological, medical, and social assessment (Chapter 7, Section 6). It is the guardian who applies to a special school, and an assessment is made based on the provisions of the Education Act.
I and the government agree that more needs to be done so that all students receive an equal education. The government has therefore tasked SPSM with offering sign language education for deaf or hard-of-hearing students in primary school. The government will add 5 million kronor annually for this task starting from the year 2026. The government is implementing extensive reforms of the school, including initiatives to strengthen student health and provide earlier support measures.
The Government has in the budget bill for 2026 (prop. 2025/26:1) allocated 200 million kronor for staffing reinforcements within school health during 2026 and estimates allocating 200 million kronor during 2027 and 2028. The initiative can contribute to students receiving improved access to school health's medical and psychological competence and to more being able to be offered health-promoting and preventive interventions.
Jessica Rodén (S)
Mr. Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer, but when I heard it, I actually became concerned.
I think the answer shows that the government is missing the very core of my question. I asked about deaf children's right to education and to a sign-language educational environment. The Minister responded with the provisions of the Education Act regarding support for students with disabilities. She spoke about investments in student health and about teaching in Swedish Sign Language.
For a deaf child, sign language is not a support measure but a language – it is the child's language and identity. A sign language educational environment is something completely different from extra support in a school where almost all communication takes place in spoken Swedish. It is about receiving instruction directly in the language that one fully understands. It is about being able to ask a spontaneous question to the teacher, follow the discussion in the classroom, understand what friends say at the lunch table, and keep up with the play during recess – things that hearing children can take for granted. It is simply about being able to be a student on the same terms as others.
The Minister referred to the Language Act and the right to develop and use Swedish sign language. Then we must also talk about what that right looks like in reality.
How is a deaf child to develop and use their sign language in a school where there might not be sign language teachers or sign language-using peers, and where the language is not used naturally during the school day? The government's initiative on teaching in Swedish sign language can absolutely be good, but there is a crucial difference here: It is not the same thing to receive instruction in sign language as it is to receive instruction in sign language and be part of a sign language-using environment.
Mr. Speaker! I find it difficult to understand why the Minister, in his response, highlighted the investment in school health. It can be important for many different reasons to have more counselors, psychologists, and school nurses and more employees within other professions, but that does not create a sign language educational environment. This is not a medical issue, but it is about language, knowledge, participation, identity and – above all – the right to education.
My question to the Minister is simple: If a deaf child attends a primary school where there is a lack of a sign language pedagogical and social environment, does the Minister then consider the child's right to education to be fully met?
Ewa Pihl Krabbe (S)
Mr. Speaker! I want to begin by saying that I completely agree with the interpellant's description of the school situation for deaf children. This view is also shared by Sveriges Dövas Riksförbund.
Until 1981, sign language was prohibited in the schools for the deaf – one was to use oral speech and learn to lip-read. Sign language survived, however, by people signing at home, in corridors, during breaks, and at deaf school boarding schools around the country. The deaf also created very strong associations where the older generations taught sign language to the younger.
In 1981, the deaf schools became bilingual. Sign language was allowed to be used in teaching thanks to researchers at Stockholm University proving that sign language is a language in its own right with its own grammar. Only then did deaf children get the right to their own language.
That children should have to fail in the regular school in order to gain access to their own language does not feel like 2026. Education constitutes a central part of society's responsibility to ensure equal living conditions and the opportunity for participation. For deaf children and students, this responsibility is closely linked to the right to speak Swedish Sign Language.
A few weeks ago, the municipality of Ystad decided that from and including the autumn term, mother tongue instruction in Swedish sign language shall be offered to every student who has a need for it, regardless of how large or small the class becomes. Previously, the limit has been five students. Apparently, that is the situation across the entire country, which one might think is unreasonable.
The conditions for children's language development are not provided solely within the education system but are largely established through the early interventions that take place within hearing care. When Swedish Sign Language is not introduced very early – actually as soon as deafness is identified, i.e., when the child is very small – or when families do not receive sufficient support to develop the hearing-impaired or deaf child's language, the child's opportunities to acquire a fully functioning language are affected even before the start of school.
It is quite common in preschool environments to use TSS, signs as support, or TAKK, signs as alternative and complementary communication. These forms of support are not languages in their own right, and they cannot replace access to Swedish Sign Language.
The education system today is largely organized based on an auditory norm where spoken and written Swedish constitute the starting point. Swedish Sign Language is therefore not given a guaranteed position as a language of instruction but often appears as a complement or an individual adaptation.
Access to teachers with sign language competence and knowledge of deafness, as well as access to teaching materials in Swedish Sign Language, naturally also affects the quality of the education and the possibility of using the language in different subjects. Therefore, the state must ensure that teachers are trained with sign language competence just as all other teachers are trained at universities and colleges.
Deaf children have the same right to their language as hearing children, and as the interpellator so wisely said in their opening remarks: "It is not the same thing to receive instruction in sign language as it is to receive instruction in sign language."
I ask therefore: How does the government ensure that deaf children have their educational needs met?
Utbildnings- och integrationsministern Simona Mohamsson (L)
Mr. Speaker! Nothing is more important than giving all children what they need to succeed in school, regardless of the circumstances they have. That is also why we are making major changes to the Swedish school system at its core. There should not be overcrowded classrooms, and there should be more special education teachers and clear support measures so that no child falls behind or is forgotten in the classroom. I and the government therefore agree that more needs to be done so that all students receive an equal education.
The members of the committee asked me why not all students who need sign language instruction receive it. In primary school, all students have the right to choose sign language. It can be taken either as a mother tongue, if the student has a need for it or has prior knowledge of the language, or within the framework of the language choice as a modern language for hearing students or as the school's choice. According to the School Ordinance, it is the head of the school's duty to arrange instruction in sign language if at least five students want to learn the language. The provision does not, however, imply any prohibition for the heads of schools to offer this instruction, but it is not certain that students attending primary school in a municipality where there are fewer than five students who need or want to learn Swedish sign language will receive such instruction.
That is why the government has tasked the special authority SPSM with offering sign language training to primary school students who are deaf or hard of hearing, and we are adding 5 million kronor annually to the authority from 2026 for this task.
Jessica Rodén (S)
Mr. Speaker! I am not talking about students who want to learn sign language. I am talking about students whose mother tongue is sign language.
The Minister says in his response that children who, due to their disability or other special reasons, cannot attend primary school or adapted primary school shall be admitted to the special school if they are deaf or hard of hearing.
Here I think we need to stop for a moment. What does it actually mean that a child "can attend" primary school? A deaf child can, of course, go to a municipal primary school every morning. The child can sit in the classroom and be there for the entire school day. But that does not automatically mean that the child actually has access to the education. Can the child communicate directly with the teacher? Can the child follow the discussions in the classroom? Can the child participate on equal terms in group work? Can the child speak spontaneously with their classmates? Is the child given the opportunity to develop their sign language together with other children and adults who use the language, as the Language Act says? There is a difference between "being able to attend" a school and actually having access to the education.
Mr. Speaker! For me, this is not just a principled school policy issue. I have my own experiences as a parent of children with hearing impairment and deafness, so I know how much responsibility falls on the parents when the school does not function as it should. One needs to explain things that one thinks should be obvious, keep track of whether the communication works, remind, ask, and push – all so that one's child can get what all other children get without any parent having to fight for it.
Furthermore, many deaf children grow up with hearing parents. For the family, deafness, hearing impairment, and Swedish Sign Language can be a completely new world. In that case, we cannot have a system where parents are expected to understand exactly what linguistic and pedagogical environment their children need and then have to struggle and push themselves until it can be shown that the school is not functioning.
And while the adult world investigates, tests support measures and waits to see how it goes, the child's schooling continues. The child only has one school time. Language development happens now, knowledge is built now, friendships are created now. We cannot give these years back to the children.
That is why I am turning against a system where one risks waiting until the child has started to fall behind before another school environment can become an option. A child should not have to fail in order to receive the right education. The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities also highlights sign language, the linguistic identity of the deaf, and the importance of an educational environment that provides the opportunity for the greatest possible cognitive and social development.
We perhaps need to ask a different question than whether the child "can go" to primary school. Instead, we should ask: Where does this specific child get the best conditions to learn, develop their language, and be fully included?
Therefore, I ask the minister: Should not the child's need for a sign language educational environment carry significantly more weight when decisions are made regarding placement in a special school?
Utbildnings- och integrationsministern Simona Mohamsson (L)
Mr. Speaker! I thank the member for the commitment to creating equality in Swedish schools. There is probably nothing more important than creating this equality.
A large part of the problem is that Sweden has 290 municipalities. Sometimes there can be challenges regarding cooperation in order to be able to offer education in, for example, sign language, and the municipalities do not always take their responsibility for the education children have a right to because they use the school as a way to save money.
That is exactly why we have made specific investments in our special authority. We believe that the best way to achieve equality is to give the special authority additional muscles so that these children can be given exactly the education they need.
A large part of the school is also about what culture we have. Do we have enough special education teachers who work directly with students? Do we have a school that implements measures early, or do parents, as the member describes, have to fight tooth and nail to get the measures that are required? We make that change in legislation precisely so that one does not have to wait for weeks, months, and perhaps years to get measures.
An even greater change that we are making concerns special teachers. It should not be special educators who are consultants to the teachers, but rather it should be special teachers who work directly with the students, preferably in smaller groups or individually. All of this is a prerequisite for being able to build what I perceive that I and the member are in agreement on: equality regardless of where one lives and equality in conditions regardless of what starting values the children have when they begin.
We have made many different initiatives. I want to mention, among other things, our initiative on TUFF, where we have given parents more education hours so that they can learn to communicate. I believe that is an important part. We have also ensured that those who have particular difficulty reaching the goals in school shall be able to receive an additional 100 hours of instruction.
I am in no way saying that this is enough or that we are finished, but it is a foundation to stand on. Especially the investments we are making in our special authority provide the conditions for more students to receive the support and the education that they are entitled to.
Jessica Rodén (S)
Mr. Speaker! I note that the Minister did not answer the questions that I asked in my previous speeches.
We are approaching the end of this parliamentary term. Therefore, I do not want to conclude the debate with another description of what the rules look like today, but I want to know what the minister intends to do moving forward. There is a fundamental question that the government needs to address: Is it sufficient that a deaf child can attend primary school, or should we demand that the child actually receives access to the education on equal terms?
For me, the answer is obvious. The right to education must be real and not just exist on paper. A child should not have to fail first because the system requires it. And sign language should not be treated as a support measure that we implement when something has already gone wrong. We shall give all children the right conditions from the beginning.
That is why I want to know if the minister, if she receives renewed confidence after the election, is prepared to review the rules for admission to the special school so that deaf children's right to Swedish sign language and the need for a sign language educational environment receive a stronger position.
Utbildnings- och integrationsministern Simona Mohamsson (L)
Mr. Speaker! I may need to repeat myself in order to be able to answer the questions again. I and the government agree with the member that more needs to be done so that all students receive an equal education. For that very reason, the government has made a special investment in our special authority to offer sign language training for deaf and hard-of-hearing students. This is being implemented after a thorough investigation.
I do not know if it is the case that the member does not think that such an investigation should be carried out. The government has allocated 5 million kronor annually from and including 2026 for precisely that task. In addition to that, we are making extensive changes to Swedish schools to re-establish the knowledge school by, among other things, investing in strengthening student health, having more early support measures, and ensuring that we focus on learning.
All of this is also a part of helping students, regardless of functional variation. I do not think one can forget that in this debate. Just as important as making special investments is also ensuring that the conditions are right for all students, completely regardless. Then we must make these cultural changes in Swedish school.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.