I'm dismissing nothing. Illegal immigration does place a financial burden on all 'host' states. Sweden is different. The overwhelming majority of illegal immigrants are either refugees or economic migrants; very few are 'medical services' migrants. If Sweden decides that individuals are not fleeing persecution, war, etc and are therefore not refugees but economic migrants then they are justified in denying such individuals residency. However, I would contend that the likes of Joyce Thomas are among the small number of individuals who do not fall into either category and could therefore be treated differently. I don't think that anyone here is trying to underplay the problem of illegal immigration as you imply. 'Bending the law' was an inappropriate phrase to use. However, the law can be interpreted in different ways. The Swedish courts, to date, have adopted a strict interpretation of the laws in question but Thomas' lawyers have appealed her case and escalated it to a higher court. In any event, the Swedish government are obviously aware of the negative publicity generated by these types of cases and have indicated that there may be a change to the laws governing British nationals and late submissions under the Brexit Agreement. Imo this is going too far. but if it helps the likes of Thomas then I'm pleased.
