The residents of Kærshovedgård and other departure centers should not have free dental care. That is my clear stance. After a call from Berlingske, where the journalist questioned me for over 30 minutes in every conceivable way, I feel we should lay the facts on the table. I had a clear impression that a political narrative had been set up in advance, into which my answers were to be forced: that my stance was to be portrayed as both inhumane and heartless. But the matter is actually quite simple. The residents of, among other places, Kærshovedgård should leave Denmark. They should not be here. Either because they are rejected asylum seekers or because they have been convicted of serious crimes and expelled from Denmark. Most of them repeatedly. They can roam freely in society. I do not believe they should have free dental care. I believe they should go home. And in light of the fact that since 2016 we have spent over 4.7 million kroner on dental treatment for residents, it is reasonable to examine how that money is used. I must simply refer to reading the Aliens Act § 42 a, section 2. Here, the key word is: "necessary." According to the law, it is indeed expenses for necessary health services that are covered. Dental treatment may be included, but that does not mean that every conceivable service at the dentist is necessary. Therefore, I have asked the minister whether public funds have been used for unnecessary expenses such as anesthesia. For one treatment, anesthesia may be unnecessary, while for another, it may be painful or irresponsible to forego it. So this is not about whether the residents may or may not receive anesthesia. It is simply about whether the Aliens Act § 42 a, section 2, is actually being complied with. Thus, it is entirely legitimate to investigate whether public funds have been used for something that was not necessary, including whether anesthesia is routinely offered to patients without reservation and without regard to the rules. Fundamentally, this is NOT about whether residents in departure centers may receive anesthesia. It is also NOT about whether anyone may go to the dentist. The question is who should pay the bill. It is absurd that Danes are paying dental bills for people who are to go home. It should not be controversial to think so. After all, there is no one preventing voluntary organizations or others from raising funds for dental treatment for the residents if they cannot pay themselves. For example, the Red Cross offers swimming pool trips to the residents of Kærshovedgård. Perhaps dental assistance could be something one chooses to prioritize instead. #Udlændingepolitik #Sundhedspolitik #Tandlægehjælp (translated)
