Sweden has implemented some of the toughest migration policies in Europe in recent years. A particularly controversial aspect involves young people who arrived as children, grew up in the country, learned Swedish, attended school, and built lives there—only to receive deportation orders upon turning 18.
A recent DW documentary, “Meet the young people who face deportation in Sweden,” part of the “Focus on Europe” series, highlights several such cases. It features individuals like 21-year-old Isa from Iran, who faces return as a single woman without family support; 21-year-old Nardin, scheduled for deportation to Egypt; 19-year-old Romana, rejected by immigration authorities shortly after turning 18; and others including Batis from Iran.
Stories of Integration and Separation
Many of these young adults arrived with their families seeking asylum or through other migration channels. They received temporary residence permits tied to their parents’ applications. While their families often secured longer-term status, the young people “age out” of family-based protections at 18.
Notable examples include:
- Ilya (Iliya) Taheraki, 19, who came to Sweden at age 8 when his family fled Iran. He has lived most of his life there, works in his mother’s hairdressing salon in Stockholm, speaks fluent Swedish, and identifies as Swedish. However, he struggles with Persian and received a deportation notice shortly after turning 18.
- Jomana Gad, 18, arrived in Sweden at age 4. She has stated that her entire life is in Sweden and expressed hopes of pursuing education and work there, yet faces deportation to Egypt alone.
- Ayla Rostami, 21, arrived at age 15 and viewed Sweden as a place of freedom. She too has been ordered to leave.
These cases often involve individuals from countries such as Iran and Egypt. The young people typically speak Swedish better than their parents’ native languages and have limited connections or language skills in their countries of origin.
The Policy Behind the Deportations
Under Swedish rules, children on temporary permits are generally included in family applications. Once they turn 18, they are treated as independent adults. Residency based on family ties is granted only in exceptional cases of “special dependency”—a standard parent-child relationship does not qualify.
This framework tightened further after the 2015 migrant influx, with the current center-right government (supported by the Sweden Democrats) introducing stricter family reunification rules, higher income requirements, and limits on humanitarian protections like “particularly distressing circumstances.”
Critics, including Human Rights Watch, argue that bureaucratic delays in processing applications leave children on temporary status for years. When they reach adulthood, they lose protections despite deep integration into Swedish society, leading to family separations that harm individuals, families, and potentially Sweden’s future workforce.
Supporters of the policy maintain that temporary permits were never guarantees of permanent stay. Adults must qualify independently—through work, studies, or strong asylum grounds. Enforcing rules consistently upholds the integrity of the migration system and helps manage public resources and integration challenges.
Recent Developments
The cases sparked significant public debate and criticism. In early March 2026, the government announced a temporary pause on certain deportations of young adults while preparing reforms to family immigration rules. The Swedish Migration Agency suspended processing in relevant cases during this period.
Discussions have also included proposals to widen grounds for family visas in some situations. At the same time, the government has advanced other measures, such as a new “honest living” requirement that could allow revocation of residence permits for those not complying with laws, paying taxes, or avoiding certain behaviors.
Migration policies in Sweden continue to evolve amid political negotiations, court rulings, and public opinion. The situation reflects broader European debates over balancing humanitarian concerns, family unity, integration, and control of migration flows.
These stories raise difficult questions: How should societies weigh the integration of young people raised within their borders against the need for clear, consistent immigration rules? As reforms proceed, the outcomes for affected individuals remain uncertain.
About The Author
