Sweden's historical child abuse victims continue to seek justice decades later. Mikael Nordström was 13 years old when he was sent to the Eolshäll boys' home. His memories of the abuse he suffered there remain vivid.
'It's as if it could have happened yesterday,' Nordström said about the memories from that time.
His home life was not working. His mother could not manage alone. Nordström had what would today be called ADHD and did not attend school. His home municipality of Uppsala, however, could not approve Eolshäll as a foster home, according to preserved documents.
Instead, he was registered as a 'boarder' at Eolshäll. This was the place where hundreds of young boys were sent to meet a man who, according to many testimonies and a 1952 court ruling, subjected boys to rape.
'You found out almost immediately that he liked little boys,' Nordström recounted.
A Systemic Failure Uncovered
A state inquiry into malpractice, appointed in 2006, confirmed that abuse of children in care in Swedish foster homes and orphanages was extensive throughout the 20th century. This led to the state publicly apologizing and compensating some of those subjected to abuse and neglect between 1920 and 1980.
However, the process was criticized for legal complications and perceived unfairness. In Nordström's case, the compensation board referred in its rejection decision to the fact he had been registered at Eolshäll as a boarder, and not as 'foster home placed.'
With that designation, he was also prevented from testifying about what he had experienced. This legal distinction blocked his path to both recognition and financial redress.
The Search for Accountability
For Mikael Nordström, it seems most straightforward that the City of Stockholm should acknowledge a responsibility for allowing the abuse to continue. The Red Cross previously did so after an independent investigation the organization commissioned.
'Everyone who played a role should want to clarify their part to provide redress, even if it is difficult after so many years,' said Lisa Danling, press secretary at the Red Cross.
Social Affairs Councilor Alexander Ojanne (S) declined to be interviewed about demands for an investigation into the municipal responsibility for the maltreatment at Eolshäll. In a written response in June 2024, Ojanne stated he believed apologies should be handled by the state.
'A comprehensive approach needs to be taken swiftly. Those who have been subjected to maltreatment and abuse have the right to obtain redress from the state,' Ojanne wrote.
'They refuse to touch this,' said Mikael Nordström in response.
Institutional Complicity
Between 1978 and 1979, support from the Red Cross began, providing both money and prestige to Göthe Ohlsson and his resource home for boys at Eolshäll. This support connected a major humanitarian organization to the institution, despite the existing rumors and legal history concerning its founder.
The independent investigation commissioned by the Red Cross itself later forced the organization to confront this legacy and issue its own apology. This stands in contrast to the position currently taken by Stockholm city officials.
The case highlights the lingering gaps in Sweden's attempt to address historical abuse in state and municipal care. While a national apology and compensation scheme were created, the implementation has left victims like Nordström behind due to bureaucratic classifications.
The distinction between 'boarder' and 'foster home placed,' which seems technical and administrative forty years later, was the sole reason for denying his claim. This has fueled criticism that the process was designed more to limit liability than to deliver justice.
A Life Marked by the Past
Now, decades after the abuse began, Nordström's fight is not for money but for acknowledgment. He seeks an admission that the system failed him twice: first by placing him in a dangerous environment, and second by refusing to hear his testimony when official scrutiny finally arrived.
The refusal of Stockholm's current political leadership to engage with the question of municipal responsibility perpetuates that second failure. It leaves victims grappling with a fragmented state response where responsibility is passed between different levels of government.
Other organizations, like the Red Cross, have shown it is possible to re-examine one's own historical role, however uncomfortable. This path has not yet been followed by the municipal authorities implicated in the Eolshäll case.
For Nordström, the message from officials feels familiar. It echoes the neglect he experienced as a child, translated into the language of municipal jurisdiction and state-level primacy. The result is the same: his experience is sidelined, and his voice is not heard in the official reckoning.
An Unfinished Reckoning
Sweden's national apology was meant to close a dark chapter. Yet for those excluded on technical grounds, it underscored how systems can continue to fail the vulnerable. The state's inquiry confirmed widespread abuse, but the subsequent compensation mechanism created its own barriers.
The case of Eolshäll and Göthe Ohlsson was known within the system, evidenced by the 1952 conviction. Yet operations continued, and support from major institutions flowed. This points to a deeper societal and institutional failure that extended beyond any single perpetrator.
Addressing this fully requires all involved entities to examine their roles. The refusal to do so leaves the historical record incomplete and denies victims a full measure of justice.
Mikael Nordström's 40-year wait continues. His story is a testament to the long shadows cast by childhood trauma and the enduring struggle for official recognition when the systems designed to protect you become the walls that silence you. The question remains: who will take responsibility for the part they played?