A recently introduced work obligation law—originally designed to target immigrants on cash assistance (kontanthjælp)—has inadvertently included internationally adopted Danes. The fallout has led to widespread controversy, with many affected citizens rallying under the hashtag #ErJegStadigDansk (#AmIStillDanish) and prompting an official apology from Denmark’s Employment Minister, Ane Halsboe-Jørgensen (S).
The new work obligation
In a sweeping reform initiated on 1 July, the Danish Government implemented a mandatory work requirement aimed at immigrants receiving cash assistance. The measure was part of a political agreement forged with parties such as Danmarksdemokraterne and Dansk Folkeparti in October 2023, later debated in the Folketing in October 2024 and ultimately passed in December 2024. Although the law was intended to encourage employment among new arrivals, it soon emerged that its criteria—based on objective factors such as the date of entry into the country—also classified internationally adopted Danes as “indrejst” (arrived) immigrants.
This broad interpretation of eligibility has raised serious concerns. Critics argue that the policy not only misclassifies adopted Danes but also undermines their rights as citizens, creating a sense of alienation in a country they consider home.
Government response, political oversight, and Minister apology
Facing mounting criticism from both the public and advocacy groups, Minister Ane Halsboe-Jørgensen (S) has taken steps to rectify the error. Despite her initial reluctance to issue a full apology, the pressure from affected communities and political opponents has compelled her to take responsibility and promise swift corrective action.
Further scrutiny has revealed significant administrative oversights in the law’s implementation. On 15 January, the association Adoption & Samfund issued a press release titled “Cash Assistance Reform Discriminates Against Adoptees” (Kontanthjælpsreform diskriminerer adopterede), warning that the new cash assistance reform would discriminate against adopted Danes. However, several politicians admitted that they had not reviewed the material.
Charlotte Munch of the Denmark Democrats (Danmarksdemokraterne), a member of the Folketing’s Employment Committee, acknowledged the oversight, explaining:
“I really try to go through my emails, but it does not always succeed.”
Moreover, internal documents from the Styrelsen for Arbejdsmarked og Rekruttering (STAR) confirmed that officials had known for months that the revised criteria would inadvertently include adopted individuals. Despite these warnings, no specific measures were taken to exclude them—highlighting a broader issue of political oversight.
Community reaction and call for equality
The unintended inclusion of adopted Danes in the work obligation law has struck a deep chord among the affected population. Many have taken to social media under the hashtag #ErJegStadigDansk (#AmIStillDanish) to express feelings of alienation and injustice. Lill Srima Møller Jørgensen, who was adopted from Sri Lanka, shared her personal anguish:
“I experience in no way that it is a fair way to treat me.”
Advocacy groups, including Adoption & Samfund, have vocally demanded that the government guarantee equal rights for all Danish citizens. In response to another controversial law from 2018—which similarly equated the rights of adopted Danes with those of immigrants—Sanne Vindahl Nyvang, the association’s vice-chair, stated:
“We want it in black and white that adopted individuals are completely equal to all other Danish-born youths. That is what we want to ensure. We must not go through this again.”
Such statements underscore the community’s demand for not only an immediate amendment of the law but also a broader reevaluation of policies that inadvertently marginalize adopted citizens.
Implications for Future Legislation and Reforms
In light of the controversy, Minister Ane Halsboe-Jørgensen has now signaled her intention to amend the law, ensuring that adopted Danes are excluded from the work obligation mandate. This corrective step is seen as essential for restoring trust among affected communities and for reaffirming the principle of equal rights for all citizens.
The incident has sparked a wider debate over the criteria used in welfare and labor policies. Critics argue that relying solely on objective measures—such as the date of arrival in Denmark—can lead to unjust outcomes, particularly for citizens with complex personal histories like international adoption. As policymakers work to amend the current law, there is growing pressure to review and revise other related regulations to prevent similar oversights in the future.
Furthermore, the administrative missteps—ranging from overlooked warning emails to confirmed internal documentation—have raised questions about the efficacy of communication channels between government agencies and the public. With hundreds of emails reportedly received daily, some politicians, like Charlotte Munch, admit that vital warnings may be missed, potentially leading to policy blunders with far-reaching consequences.
The broader impact of the work obligation controversy
The controversy over the work obligation law serves as a stark reminder of the complexities inherent in designing social policies that accommodate diverse citizen backgrounds. As the Danish Government moves to rectify the situation, the voices of affected adopted Danes and their advocates underscore the need for a more nuanced and inclusive approach. The coming weeks will reveal whether the promised legislative amendments will effectively restore confidence and ensure that all Danish citizens, regardless of their origins, are treated equally.
This episode not only highlights a significant administrative oversight but also sets the stage for an important national conversation about identity, rights, and the responsibilities of government in safeguarding the interests of every citizen.
