Welfare technology in elderly care

Mona Olin (SD)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating SoU3 on welfare technology within elderly care. I would like to begin by moving to approve the committee's proposal in the report.

That Sweden's elderly receive a secure and dignified old age is for us in the Sverigedemokraterna one of the highest priority issues. The elderly shall have the opportunity to live a rich life characterized by independence and autonomy, under secure conditions and with respect for self-determination and privacy. They shall feel participation and community and be treated with respect.

Everyone should feel safe in Sweden. The vast majority want to be independent and be able to stay in their own home for as long as possible. New opportunities, which are to the benefit of everyone, have been offered to us through welfare technology. According to the government, an increased use of welfare technology in care can contribute to flexibility in the design and implementation of interventions with maintained or increased quality.

With the help of technology, a monitoring intervention can be carried out at specific times without disturbing the care recipient, who may be sleeping, while at the same time the staff can complete other care interventions in peace. The technical solution can also, unlike staff, be constantly present with the individual to quickly alarm if needed.

Overall, the technology can increase the individual's self-determination and increase the perceived safety. One feels better if one is safe. The requirements for care are ensured without anyone encroaching on privacy or freedom.

Madam Speaker! It is important that the staff have the right competence to be able to provide good care and support to elderly people. Welfare technology is intended to benefit both care staff and elderly people by ensuring that new technical solutions can meet the elderly people's needs in other ways while more time can be freed up, for example, for daily activities and a meaningful existence.

According to the government, the technology provides reduced stress and increased opportunities for staff to focus on individuals with greater care needs. The use of welfare technology also means that staff are relieved of routine work tasks, and in this way, elderly care can be made more efficient.

Madam Speaker! I am pleased that the Committee on Social Affairs, in its report, supports the government's proposals for changes to the Social Services Act, the Act on the Processing of Personal Data within the Social Services Act, and the Act on Unified Health and Care Documentation. The proposals have been developed to achieve – and will also entail – improved care and increased independence for elderly persons, as well as an improved working environment for the country's health and medical personnel, who in turn can meet the elderly persons' needs in other areas, for example through daily activities and outdoor stays.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Mikael Dahlqvist (S)

Madam Speaker! We are debating, as stated, that the introduction of welfare technology should be enabled in a clearer way by changing the law.

For those listening to the debate, we should perhaps define what we mean by welfare technology. Welfare technology is digital technology that primarily aims to maintain or increase the safety, activity, participation, and independence for persons who have a need for support and help due to some form of functional impairment.

Many of us certainly know the most common technology used today, namely so-called safety alarms. One puts on a wristwatch and has a watch that one presses when they need help, for example if they have fallen. The second most common are various passive alarms that sense if one enters or leaves through the door or falls out of bed. The third most common technology in Sweden today is digital night supervision with a night camera that makes it possibly possible to avoid visits during the night when the person is sleeping.

This is good and important. I consider, however, that the starting point for using the technology should always be people's needs and the utility of the technology as well as the right to privacy and dignity. These value words should always be included in the decisions.

Madam Speaker! The report is therefore about the government's proposal for an amendment to the Social Services Act, which clarifies the possibility of using digital technology when services are provided in the form of home care or housing in special housing forms for the elderly. Certain data protection measures are also proposed, as well as that the individual or a relative shall consent to the use of personal data.

Even though it is not legally incorrect to use digital technology today, many municipalities do not feel quite secure that it is correct and right. In that sense, the proposals in this bill are very good for clearing up the legal ambiguities, primarily for our municipalities.

We Social Democrats consider the government's proposals to be good and necessary, but we believe they are insufficient. In our motion, Madam Speaker, we highlight that the need for digital interventions needs to be further clarified. We believe that there are still many conflicting objectives within the municipalities.

How can welfare technology contribute to older people's opportunities to be independent, to facilitate communication between residents and relatives, and to increase the elderly's safety and participation? These are important issues that should be given more space. The very purpose of utilizing the technology is to increase the elderly's safety and participation, as I mentioned earlier.

Madam Speaker! The Government has in its proposition chosen to limit the legislation for digital interventions, which we question. It has been chosen to limit the whole to home care and elderly care homes. The entire LSS area with daily activities remains, as does other social services legislation.

We have had quite a few views on this. We now note, however, that the government has taken the initiative for an investigation that is to review the regulation for the use of welfare technology in a broader way within the relevant legislation. We are pleased that the government has listened to the criticism, and we look forward to complete proposals.

Something else that I react a bit to, Madam Speaker, is that one has not chosen to constitutionally regulate measures for persons who have impaired decision-making capacity. Several heavy referral bodies, such as Ivo and SKR, have considered it important that legislation is also enacted in this area. Here we propose a motion for a declaration that the government should take another look and investigate the issue of measures for persons with impaired capacity. We note, however, that the government has also listened to the criticism here and will investigate the issue. We will, of course, follow the matter when sharp changes are made.

Madam Speaker! We all agree that welfare technology should be used more within health and social care. Just as the government states in its bill, elderly care faces great challenges, and our demographic development shows that we are reaching increasingly older ages. There are figures showing that the number of people over 80 years of age will increase by 50 percent in the future, and we know that the need for support and service from society increases at an advanced age. There are also major deficiencies within the competence supply.

The government places its trust in that increased use of digital technology will meet some of the challenges. For us Social Democrats, however, more money for welfare is still important to achieve higher staffing levels and more competence. Less stressed and better-educated staff lead to better use of new technology.

In conclusion, we Social Democrats are clear about our future priority: Investments must be made in welfare. We believe that Sweden is becoming poorer with the current government with the support of the Sweden Democrats.

I vote in favor of reservation 1.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Malin Höglund (M)

Madam Speaker! We are now debating the Social Committee's Report 3 concerning welfare technology in elderly care, and I move for the approval of the committee's proposal.

The bill contains a clear legal basis for the use of digital technology within home care and special housing. It also contains enhanced privacy protection within social services and a correction of a reference in the Act on Integrated Health and Care Documentation.

Madam Speaker! This proposal from the government implies a clarification of the possibility of using digital technology when services are provided in the form of home care or to those living in special housing for the elderly. Services in the form of welfare technology shall be of good quality for the elderly. The government also proposes certain provisions on data protection measures when using digital technology with functions that involve, for example, monitoring or sensing, as well as that the person who has been granted a service carried out with digital technology shall consent to the processing of personal data. The government also proposes provisions on conditions for authorization and access control. Finally, a correction of an incorrect reference in the Act on Unified Health and Care Documentation is proposed.

Madam Speaker! Welfare technology is here to stay. We are getting more and more elderly people in Sweden while fewer choose to work in health and social care. If more people use welfare technology, it can contribute to flexibility in the design and implementation of interventions and also to increased quality of life. Welfare technology should not be used because there might be a shortage of competence; instead, it should benefit the elderly and, to some extent, also the staff. Welfare technology's technical solutions can meet the elderly person's needs and at the same time provide more time for the staff. This results in reduced stress for the staff and increased quality for the elderly.

Madam Speaker! Welfare technology in elderly care is an important and current issue to discuss. It is about using technology to improve the quality of life, independence, and security of the elderly. There are many different types of welfare technology, for example sensors, monitoring systems, communication tools, and medication robots. One of the advantages of welfare technology is that it can contribute to elderly people being able to stay at home longer, as many want, instead of moving to a nursing home. The technology can be helpful for monitoring health status, managing medication, and providing rapid access to help and support when needed. It can also be a tool to prevent accidents and reduce the risk of falls.

Madam Speaker! At the same time, it is important to be aware that technology does not replace the human presence and care of home care services. It is important that elderly people still receive the personal and empathetic care they need and that technology is used as a complement to this. Another aspect to take into account is that elderly people may be unfamiliar with and insecure about using technology. It is therefore important that the technology is user-friendly and that elderly people receive support and help to be able to use it in a safe and independent way.

Madam Speaker! The debate surrounding welfare technology in elderly care is also about privacy and ethics. It is important to ensure that the technology is used in a way that respects the elderly's right to privacy and self-determination.

As in all debates, there are different opinions and perspectives, and it is important that we evaluate the use of welfare technology in elderly care to find the solutions that best benefit the elderly and their well-being.

In summary, welfare technology gives us an exciting opportunity to improve elderly care, but it is important to have a balanced discussion that takes into account both the advantages and the challenges of the use of technology.

(Applause)

In this speech, Jesper Skalberg Karlsson (M) concurred.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Mikael Dahlqvist (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank Malin Höglund for the speech and agree that we must respect privacy and that welfare technology should contribute to freedom and be of benefit to those who need help. What I find lacking in the member's speech is the need for more resources within elderly care. More staffing and better competence is often a resource issue, and this can often be linked to the use of digital technology. We know that stressed staff find it easier to make mistakes when they handle technical aids such as digital equipment. We also know that there are great challenges within elderly care, just as the government describes in the bill.

How does the government view the issue of resources linked to elderly care? SKR has produced a clear staffing forecast indicating that approximately 100,000 more employees are needed by 2031. I lack a reasoning on this in the bill and therefore ask the government representative Malin Höglund: How do you view the need for economic resources for elderly care moving forward?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Malin Höglund (M)

Madam Speaker! Questions from the Social Democrats are usually about more resources solving the problems. I know that the municipalities are quite inventive when it comes to solving these problems. Welfare technology is not to replace the competence that was needed, and as I said, human warmth, care, and so on were needed. The municipalities have started introducing welfare technology, and they are working well on recruiting the competence that is needed. Then the previous and the current government have looked at state grants with targeted interventions or general state grants, but the question lies largely with the municipalities, I believe.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Mikael Dahlqvist (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member Malin Höglund, for the answer!

We know that elderly care is facing a ticking bomb. In my previous remark, I detailed SKR's report on staffing, but I can also account for another report showing that the level of competence within elderly care has dropped significantly over the last ten years and that today we have an ever-increasing workforce that completely lacks adequate education.

One can link this to today's theme, welfare technology, which we are fundamentally positive about. But it becomes more difficult to maintain and manage such equipment. I believe, Member Malin Höglund, that there is also a risk that the municipalities have an over-reliance on technology and believe that they will be able to replace labor with the help of certain solutions.

It is interesting that the member considers that the municipalities manage on their own and have their own ability. It is clear that the municipalities are good at handling economic crises and so on, but I do not believe that the municipal chairmen in Sweden really agree with the member about the situation right now, as it is an enormously high inflation and a high pension debt that makes them go to their knees.

Therefore, I want to ask once again: Does the member consider that no more money is needed for welfare in the future, specifically for elderly care?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Malin Höglund (M)

Madam Speaker! When it comes to competence within health and social care and elderly care, one has previously stared oneself blind at the idea that one should only have assistant nurses within care, but there are actually more who can work. We have healthcare assistants, who do not need to have the education that the assistant nurses have and who can do simpler jobs. We know that nurses, for example, delegate medications to the assistant nurses. One does not therefore only need to have assistant nurses, but it is exactly as in preschool, where not everyone needs to be a preschool teacher.

Since then, the municipalities themselves have a responsibility to attract and ensure a good working environment, decent schedules and such things. The municipalities need to handle this, because the state cannot do it.

One should, as I mentioned earlier, not think that welfare technology is going to replace what people do, but when the home care service arrives, they might not need to spend a huge amount of time setting out medicines for Mrs. Malin, for example, since the robot can do that. If a person does not take their medicine, the robot swallows them, and then they go back into the system. Instead, a small alarm goes off that the person has not taken the medicine. There are therefore many smart solutions that free up more time for the staff who come.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Nadja Awad (V)

Madam Speaker! According to the national value base for elderly care, elderly persons shall be allowed to live a dignified life and feel well-being. Elderly care shall safeguard and respect each individual's right to privacy, bodily integrity, self-determination, participation and individual adaptation.

Therefore, I am astonished by the government, which obviously went to the election last year to create cuts in elderly care and compensate for the cuts with the help of camera surveillance, motion detectors, and GPS. That is what we can discern from reality. Is the feeling of self-determination, safety, and care created by grandmother and grandfather being monitored? Or is an elderly care required that follows the law and has enough staff to meet everyone's needs?

In the proposition, the government proposes, among other things, an amendment to the Social Services Act which shall clarify the possibility of using digital technology when services are provided in the form of home care or elderly care homes. Examples of digital technology are, as I just mentioned, camera surveillance, motion detectors and alarms with GPS functions.

The reasons for the assessment are described as being that there are challenges regarding the supply of competence within elderly care, against the background of demographic development. To meet these challenges, the government argues that a structural change of elderly care is needed, which includes, among other things, increased use of digital technology to streamline elderly care.

Madam Speaker! The Left Party agrees for once with the government regarding the problem picture within elderly care concerning the lack of competence supply, but we do not agree with the government's proposal on welfare technology as an acute solution.

It is all the more important to ensure that there is sufficient staff within elderly care. It has been acute for a long time, but today the need is more pressing than ever. To achieve an equitable elderly care, the municipalities need to be provided with sufficient state grants, and the working conditions and work environment for elderly care staff must be improved so that the municipal sector can succeed with its staffing. Central to this context are higher wages, full-time as the norm, increased staffing density, and professional development. It is urgent.

For decades, the Swedish welfare has had to take a backseat, and with the current cost crisis, the situation is acute. SKR's assessment for 2024 is that municipalities and regions will face a deficit of a total of 28 billion kronor, of which 22 billion kronor are for the regions and 6 billion kronor are for the municipalities. At least 28 billion are therefore needed to avoid cuts.

In the budget bill for 2023, the government chose not to compensate the municipal sector for the rising costs. This has resulted in large-scale savings measures all over the country. The government now risks repeating the mistake from last year by, in at least one proposal, providing only a fraction of the money that is missing for 2024. The government and Sverigedemokraterna are only injecting 10 billion in general state grants.

Vänsterpartiet wants to invest 30 billion in general state grants to not only maintain today's quality but also increase it.

It is not because of a lack of technical equipment or that the staff lack competence in digital technology that elderly care is in a crisis where care staff leave their positions or where our elderly do not receive the care they are entitled to by law, but it is because of cuts.

Welfare technology shall be used in cases where it improves care for the individual, not to compensate for staff shortages or the staff's lack of competence. Staff can, however, be supplemented with digital technology if it improves and strengthens care and if it is something that the individual welcomes.

The fundamental difference between these two principles – to compensate or to complement – must therefore be ensured, and the latter is given precedence. Technical equipment can absolutely be used to help existing staff, but there must, therefore, be staff.

Staff in elderly care are quitting due to the cuts crisis, the poor working conditions, and the work environment. Furthermore, there is a lack of evidence that welfare technology solutions are the best intervention. On the other hand, there is evidence for having access to trained, present staff.

I want to highlight a particular group that will be very vulnerable to the government's legislative proposal, namely elderly people with cognitive impairment, for example dementia, and impaired decision-making capacity. They have a great need for personal relationships, care and nursing with high continuity and an interpersonal approach.

Determining when a person completely lacks decision-making capacity and cannot give consent is a complex situation, and it is impossible to clarify during a single or a few occasions. This applies in particular to those individuals whose perception of reality is under constant change. For them, care and support must be extremely adaptable and situation-dependent. The need for security through human relationships is therefore great.

Technology will not be the solution to the group's health problems. It could even lead to a dangerous development where welfare technology replaces human relationships based on economic incentives and without individual needs assessments.

According to this proposal, there is also no possibility to review and appeal decisions. This could lead to a situation of legal uncertainty equivalent to the declaration of legal incompetence that Sweden, thank God, no longer applies.

After over a year in power, the government's and the Sweden Democrats' priorities are clear. They prioritize tax cuts for and subsidies to the wealthy. Digital technology and efficiencies shall replace staff within the welfare sector. They tell the municipalities and regions that they must take their own responsibility and raise municipal and regional taxes or use the reserves to compensate for this. Strange inflation-driving proposals such as cheaper plastic bags and reduced tax on snus they also want to prioritize.

This is what the government does while they blame the so-called immigrant for having caused social problems that the government has actually created through cuts, privatizations, and political deprioritizations of society's most marginalized.

Madam Speaker! Vänsterpartiet believes that Swedish elderly care needs to return to being governed based on the portal paragraph of the Health and Medical Services Act regarding care and services based on need. The neoliberal dogmas must be dismantled.

Vänsterpartiet further considers that resources must follow the increasing needs. It is time for the government to do its homework, roll up its sleeves and work as hard as our nursing assistants, healthcare assistants, meal staff and local cleaners do every day and evening and as our elderly who live in elderly care homes or receive home care have done throughout their entire working age.

I therefore move for approval of reservation 2 from Vänsterpartiet. There, we state that the government should return with proposals that ensure that increased use of welfare technology shall not be used to compensate for deficiencies in staffing or the staff's competence.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating welfare technology within elderly care. It is about time. Not entirely surprising, the Riksdag is several steps behind the reality that the municipalities are already in. What we are doing now is simply adapting the map to the terrain.

Over the last ten years, more and more technical and digital solutions have begun to be used within Swedish elderly care. It facilitates work for the staff, it increases the individual's self-determination, and in many cases, it strengthens personal privacy. At the same time, it is of course a matter of keeping track of the development and monitoring the individual's rights in that context.

What is the technology we are talking about then? Well, it includes a number of different things. It can be about digital keys or digital key cabinets which, especially at night, facilitate work for home care staff who make home visits to care recipients. In many places, staff use their mobile phones to unlock a key cabinet at the door. In that way, they can easily enter the residence. That form of technology facilitates work for home care staff but also increases the security for the individual, who knows that the keys to the residence are not circulating around in different places with the risk of being lost or copied.

Furthermore, it could involve security cameras in the home of an individual care recipient where an agreement has been reached in advance on when and how the staff may use the camera. It could involve supervision during the night one or a few times without anyone needing to unlock the door and enter the residence, with the risk of disturbing the individual and making an even greater intrusion into the individual's privacy. At the same time, the staff will have more time available for those who truly need help during the night, perhaps with turning or going to the toilet.

In an elderly care home, it is more likely that safety sensors are used rather than cameras. Depending on how one has chosen to use the sensors, it can mean that the staff receive indications if someone has stepped out of their bed in the middle of the night or if someone has remained inside the toilet for too long. Instead of disturbing the individual continuously, the technology makes it possible to enter and disturb only when an indication is received that something is wrong.

Just this matter of staff not disturbing the individual during the night has been shown to lead to better sleep. This, in turn, can lead to less medication for sleep problems, which is otherwise common among many elderly. It simply becomes a win for both the staff and the individual. As the technology becomes increasingly developed, there will also be the possibility for increasingly precise and qualified conclusions about what an individual may have experienced and whether someone has a need for staff.

Further examples of smart technology are digital medication dispensers, which help the individual take their medication at the right time and in the right dose. This is also something that can make life safer for the individual and their relatives, while staff resources can be used where they are better needed. It can also be about the possibility of digital communication between the individual and the care staff. For example, a municipal nurse can perform digital home visits when it works.

Madam Speaker! Sometimes welfare technology is described as being about replacing staff with cameras, sensors, and computers. But that is a very skewed perspective on what the technology is actually about. The technology is instead about enabling staff to spend their time on the right things. By reducing monotonous and routine elements in the work, one instead increases the possibility of spending more time on care and activities. This will lead to it becoming more attractive to work within elderly care and will likely facilitate the recruitment of new staff in the future.

Welfare technology has also been well received by many elderly people and their relatives. The acceptance of modern technology and digital solutions being used is great, but there are naturally also those who feel concern when it comes to personal privacy. For that very reason, it is important to have updated legislation that more clearly regulates the area.

Welfare technology is permitted to be used and is used, as everyone understands, fully even today. But now it is also clarified in the legislation, and at the same time, it is specified how the individual's personal data may be used. This means in practice that one may not collect more data than necessary and nor store them for longer than necessary.

Madam Speaker! Welfare technology has come to stay. Furthermore, it is desirable that it is expanded during the coming years, as it contributes to the safety of both the individual care recipient, their relatives, and the staff. The purpose of welfare technology shall not be to save on staff but to utilize the staff in the best possible way, that is, for care and activities. And naturally, the technology shall be used with great consideration for personal integrity.

Swedish elderly care is in great need of improvements. There is no doubt about that. This was shown by both the Corona Commission's report after the pandemic and the Swedish National Audit Office's report on the handling of lex Sarah and lex Maria cases. There is much that needs to be addressed within Swedish elderly care. But one of the parts that can actually help to make it better is welfare technology. We must take advantage of it so that it contributes to even better elderly care in the future.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Ulrika Westerlund (MP)

Madam Speaker! In its referral response to the investigation that forms the basis for the proposal we are debating today, PRO writes, among other things:

The investigation states that the proposals aim to 'promote the use of welfare technology which can streamline operations by reducing the number of working hours' (p. 563). PRO's position is that welfare technology should be used where it improves care for the individual. If it also frees up personnel resources that can instead be used for work tasks where it is required that staff are on-site, then that is excellent.

We do not, however, share the investigation's assessment that welfare technology should generally be a way to reduce the need for staff. The investments that have been made so far in the area of welfare technology also do not really provide any support for this. Supervision via cameras or sensors certainly leads to that one can have somewhat fewer employees in special housing and home care during the night, but the staff must always have a certain level of readiness - not least for malfunctioning technology. Trust in the technology must never be taken for granted to reduce the staff density in elderly care or deprive the user of the social contact that care also entails for many. The use of welfare technology must always be based on the elderly person's self-determination, well-being, and integrity.

Taking care of the elderly is not an easy job.

The PRO's report describes much of what we have tried to capture in our motion. Welfare technology implies many opportunities for improvement for elderly people in need of care, but also for staff, and we are, of course, very positive about this. But the technology must not be used to reduce staff where it is actually not possible or to reduce social contacts for the person receiving care. The use of technology must be based on the needs of the elderly.

Madam Speaker! Digital development can be used to improve care, strengthening both the security and the freedom of the individual and successively offering new smart solutions that improve the individual's situation. We want to emphasize, however, the importance of that improvements for the individual human must be at the center, just as PRO highlights in its referral statement.

Ivo also opposes the use of digital technology to compensate for staffing shortages. Given both the rapid development in the field and the importance of keeping the elderly at the center, views from organizations representing the elderly should be continuously sought to ensure that the technology is used in a positive way.

Miljöpartiet believes that if technology is introduced and time is freed up for staff, issues such as reduced loneliness, social activities, and joy of movement should be prioritized - areas that are often neglected despite the values of the Social Services Act. The government should clarify this in an appropriate manner.

In this context, I also want to mention that Miljöpartiet still hopes that Sweden will receive an elderly care act within the near future in order to further emphasize the rights and quality perspective for the individual. Since it was recently mentioned in passing during a hearing for the Committee on Social Affairs that the government does not intend to proceed with the proposal for an elderly care act, I have submitted a question on this to the responsible Minister Anna Tenje and hope for an answer as soon as possible.

Madam Speaker! When it comes to welfare technology, it is also important that the individual has a real choice. One example can be supervision at night, where a possible choice for the individual can be whether they want supervision by a person who is present or by a camera with a person at a screen. For the choice to exist in practice, it is required that the elderly person feels that it is a real choice. If the staff appear to be short on time and are stressed, it can be difficult to assert that one wants supervision by a person for those who prefer it. It can be difficult to stand one's ground when one is in a position of dependency.

PRO highlights the concern that the individual may experience a risk of being left completely without intervention if a person were to oppose the digital tool. Kommunal points out in its referral response that they do not believe the question of consent is sufficiently investigated and that the individual cannot be considered to have a voluntary choice if there are no other equivalent alternatives to digital technology. Therefore, they want a regulation of the law.

The Government points to the basic principles of the Social Services Act regarding the implementation of assistance measures and reasons why they do not believe regulations are needed. We do not agree, but argue that the concern raised is adequate and that the law would therefore need to be supplemented in an appropriate manner to ensure that the risk being raised does not become a reality.

Of course, some may initially feel concern, but see great advantages after having tried it. It is however important that the individual's choice to receive digital technology or a personally performed intervention must be real. We believe that the government should to a greater extent meet the concern that is raised and make a clarification in the law or the preparatory works in an appropriate manner.

I vote in favor of reservation 4.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Dan Hovskär (KD)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by moving for the approval of the proposals in the committee's report.

We Christian Democrats want to build a society where people can age in security and with dignity. The elderly should be able to live an active life and have influence over their everyday lives with maintained independence, be met with respect, and have access to good care and support. It is important to see the elderly as a resource to be valued. Having a well-functioning interaction between the generations is also an important component, we Christian Democrats believe.

Digital solutions are one of the keys to meeting future demographic challenges within healthcare and elderly care. The elderly have a right to a good quality of life, and employees within the sector shall be able to maintain sustainable ways of working. Therefore, the government proposes an amendment to the Social Services Act, which clarifies the possibility of using digital technology when interventions are provided in home care or housing in special housing forms for the elderly.

Digital technology shall only be allowed to be used outside the human body. Examples of digital technology are safety alarms with GPS functions and cameras for supervision in the home.

The Government proposes, among other things, amendments to the Act on the Processing of Personal Data within Social Services in order to strengthen the protection of personal data. This concerns provisions on data protection measures when using digital technology with functions involving monitoring, sensing, or positioning. The person who has been granted an intervention carried out with digital technology shall consent to the processing of personal data. If the intervention involves processing of personal data concerning relatives, they shall also approve this.

Madam Speaker! Finding the right competence is the welfare system's greatest challenge. Due to retirements and the predicted population development, Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner, SKR, estimates that 410,000 people need to be recruited by 2031. The forecast shows that the number of people over 80 years of age will increase by almost 50 percent over the next eight years. This means that elderly care during the same period needs to increase the number of employees by more than 30 percent. It is difficult to solve in a traditional way, as the number of people of working age simultaneously increases by only 4 percent. One must also remember that it is an average for the country. In some municipalities, the base is even decreasing.

It is obvious that new ways of thinking must be introduced. Within elderly care, one has long worked with this issue and known that there will be a shortage of staff. This means that one must start working in other ways.

Welfare technology does not solve everything, but it is an important part of the solution. For example, a medicine robot provides conditions for increased independence and security for the elderly user. It frees up time for the staff and also has positive effects on the environment through, for example, reduced travel if it concerns home healthcare. A medicine robot contributes to user and operational benefit. The right dose at the right time gives increased security and independence for the individual.

If we optimize the use of resources within the home care service, it becomes an automated function that saves approximately 400 hours per care recipient per year. Then, personnel can be utilized in the best way and focus can be placed on the right things. One can, for example, relieve a strained health and care service with supervision and monitoring in the home.

Madam Speaker! Welfare technology in elderly care must not completely replace human contact, but we must find ways to ensure that loneliness does not increase. Community-promoting measures in care are important, we in the Christian Democrats believe. The social content in elderly care needs to be developed so that the elderly's need for community can be met while we simultaneously expand welfare technology within elderly care.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Malin Danielsson (L)

Madam Speaker! "It is so nice to be able to sleep through the whole night, to avoid being woken up when the night patrol comes to check on you."

The quote comes from a person who was allowed to test night supervision with the help of a camera. Instead of the home care staff traveling to the person in question, the supervision took place via camera. The person and the staff agreed on when, how, and how often the supervision would occur.

As one grows older, one should be able to live life throughout one's entire life, but unfortunately, the body and the mind do not always function as one wants. In that case, it is important that one receives the support one needs. Home care and assisted living are two services that are offered. All services shall be based on respect for people's integrity and self-determination, and with the help of technology, one can actually increase both integrity and self-determination.

For it is actually the case that however good the staff within the home care service and at the special housing are, it is difficult to maintain integrity completely when one is no longer able to manage one's toilet visits alone and if one needs help. And even if one does not need help but just someone who waits outside the door if anything should happen, it obviously affects one's sense of independence.

With the help of technology, one can regain some of this independence. Camera technology has developed so much that those who choose to have a camera in their apartment at the special housing can have it set up according to their specific wishes and needs. For example, it can be set up so that it notes when you enter the toilet, and if you have not come out within a given number of minutes, you can have agreed with the staff that they should receive a small ping on their mobile so that they can come and check on you and see that everything is alright. This means increased independence and security for the elderly, and instead of waiting outside the toilet door, the staff can spend time on things that create a golden edge, such as sitting down and talking, playing a game, or taking someone out for a walk.

Madam Speaker! Welfare technology does not only mean the possibility of increased independence and privacy. It also leads to increased safety. Yesterday at lunchtime, the police in my local area posted a message on social media. A woman in her 80s was wanted. At 21:00, the post was updated stating that the woman had been found. She was somewhat cold but was doing well under the circumstances.

This type of post is unfortunately not uncommon. For those with dementia who want a safety alarm with GPS, it can actually be the difference between life and death if they have ventured out into the cold and cannot find their way home. Of course, it should be voluntary, but that the possibility exists is very important.

Medicine dispensers also increase safety within elderly care and help stressed staff ensure the correct amount of medicine reaches the right person so that errors are prevented.

Development is also moving very quickly in this area. There is already research and development of technology that can capture early signs of dementia. For example, with the help of the technology, one can see if and how refrigerators and stoves are used and get help with a reminder if one has missed eating during the day.

Madam Speaker! That is why it is good that the regulatory framework surrounding welfare technology is now being clarified in the legislation. Certainly, it can be part of meeting the staffing challenges of the future, but to an equally large extent, it is about creating opportunities for those who need elderly care to control the support they receive and take part in technology that allows them to extend their healthy years and live life throughout their entire lives. Technology solves far from everything but must be allowed to be part of the solution, which must always be on the elderly person's own terms.

I also welcome that the regulatory framework is being investigated for the area of disabilities and LSS. Today, many benefit from, for example, digital support for physical training or activation. However, the question of how persons with impaired decision-making capacity can be offered interventions with welfare technology on equal terms as other persons needs to be thoroughly highlighted. It is important that people are neither deprived of opportunities nor forced into measures.

I vote in favor of the committee's proposal in the report.

(Applause)

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 29 November.)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)