Intra-minority welfare in the post-war period: new expertise on private and public solutions to Finland-Swedish population and welfare problems

ABSTRACT This article introduces the concept of intra-minority welfare and investigates the formation of intra-minority welfare in the post-war period by focusing on the Swedish-speaking minority in Finland, the Finland-Swedes. The post-war era saw a rapid decline in both the percentage of Swedish speakers in Finland and their political influence. To tackle these issues, new organizations were formed to boost the birth rate and secure the welfare of the Finland-Swedish minority. With the expansion of the welfare state, a new generation of Finland-Swedish experts within the fields of social work and demographics also played a prominent role in the intra-minority debate on how public welfare could cater to different segments of the minority. In the article the authors focus on the work conducted in connection to the organizations Svenska Befolkningsförbundet i Finland (The Swedish Population Federation in Finland) and Kårkulla vårdanstalt för sinnesslöa (Kårkulla Care Institution for the Mentally Deficient). By analysing material produced by or about the organizations and experts who worked within them from the 1940s to 1960, they demonstrate how ideas and practices around intra-minority welfare, in particular the demographic future of the Finland-Swedes and care for vulnerable members of the minority, were conceptualized and framed in the post-war period.


Introduction
The development of the welfare state in the twentieth century and the reconfiguration of private and public solutions to social needs affected minority positions in relation to welfare.In Finland, Finland-Swedes (finlandssvenskar, currently the most common designation of the Swedish-speaking minority in Swedish), are not formally recognized as a minority due to the historically dominant position of the Swedish language in Finland.Until the turn of the twentieth century, Swedish was the main educational and administrative language in Finland.After independence in 1917, the 1919 constitution of Finland recognized two national languages and placed Finnish and Swedish speakers on an equal footing regarding their right to their mother tongue.The two groups were nevertheless numerically unequal, and the Swedish speakers decreased from 14% to 6% of the population between 1880 and 1980. 1 As a response to changing language dynamics and the rise of Finnish ethno-nationalism, a Finland-Swedish minority nationalist movement emerged in the latter part of the nineteenth century.This movement maintained, especially in the 1910s and 1920s, that the Swedish speakers in Finland possessed distinct ethnic and racial characteristics as well as a 'homeland', Svensk-Finland (Swedish Finland), that is, the regions in Western and Southern Finland as well as the Åland Islands where the Finland-Swedes predominantly lived and that should be protected from Fennicisation. 2 The outcome of the movement's minority nationalist mobilization of the Swedish speakers was the formation of the Finland-Swedes as an ethnic group. 3nother product was the nongovernmental organizations that were formed in the inter-war period with the purpose of strengthening the future position of Finland-Swedes by providing them with social welfare and to inform them on matters of health care, often underscored by eugenic ideologies. 4As the welfare state developed after the Second World War, social legislation transferred responsibilities to the municipalities and the state, but the role of the Finland-Swedish nongovernmental organizations continued to be important in the post-war period, tackling new perceived threats during a period that can be characterized as the most ethno-Finnish in Finland's history. 5hile previous research has examined the eugenic ambitions of these organizations in the inter-war era, particularly within Samfundet Folkhälsan (The Public Health Association, hereafter Folkhälsan) founded in 1921, 6 we here turn our gaze towards the interconnections between welfare and ethno-politics in the post-war period and how the expansion of the welfare state in the 1940s and 1950s affected different segments of the Finland-Swedish minority.Because of the position of the Swedish language as a national language, universal welfare in Finland included Swedish speakers on all levels and compared to other linguistic and ethnic minorities in Finland, welfare was provided for the Finland-Swedes in their mother tongue.Furthermore, the Finland-Swedes differed from many other national/historic minorities in Europe in terms of power, mobilization and resources due to the high proportion of Swedish speakers in the upper social classes of Finnish society.
The ethnic-based and secular welfare of the Finland-Swedes seems to constitute a unique case in the historiography on minorities and social welfare, which has been dominated by research on how welfare measures have been enacted by the state in order to either assimilate minority groups or to exclude them from society. 7Here, we instead concentrate on what we call intra-minority welfare, that is, how a minority produces welfare for its own group or tries to ensure that particular solutions are taken by the state to provide care and social welfare/social services for the minority.Intra-minority welfare is a new analytical concept conceived by us, and by implementing it to investigate Finland-Swedish responses to changing social circumstances and challenges, we contribute both theoretically and empirically to an under-researched area in welfare as well as minority history.In the article we focus on the period 1944-60, as it was transformative both regarding 'the language question' (or 'nationality question' as it was also called) and 'the population question' (securing the regrowth and quality of the population).
We focus on two issues crucial to the Finland-Swedish minority during the post-war period: (1) preventing the demographic downturn of the minority; and (2) expanding welfare to social minorities within the Finland-Swedish minority.These issues expose two layers of welfare state development in relation to the Finland-Swedish minority, both prominent during the period under study: the continued reliance on non-governmental organizations to promote minority welfare and the demand for state-financed social welfare for all Swedish-speaking citizens of Finland.Thus, the article answers the call made by the historians Fabio Giomi, Célia Keren and Morgane Labbé in their reappraisal of the history of the mixed economy of welfare, that negotiations and interactions between public and private solutions to welfare be studied on the micro level. 8e divide our analysis into two sections centred on the issues mentioned above, and the organizations and persons who worked to solve them.The first analytical section focuses on the demographic challenge facing the Finland-Swedes after the Second World War and how these were dealt with within Svenska befolkningsförbundet i Finland (the Swedish Population Federation in Finland, henceforth Befolkningsförbundet). 9In the second analytical section, we study the uphill battle to develop care and establish institutions for so-called mentally deficient 10 children from Swedish-speaking homes.In 1960, Kårkulla vårdanstalt för sinnesslöa (Kårkulla Care Institution for the Mentally Deficient) opened in Pargas in South-Western Finland, as the only institution for children with severe intellectual disabilities operating in Swedish.In the section, we focus on the decade-long plans to establish the institution, which reveals changing conceptualizations of care and eugenics as well as the role of the state in providing welfare for the Finland-Swedish minority.As we demonstrate in the article, the two issues that we focus on expose different aspects to the intra-minority welfare of the Finland-Swedish population.By combing our two cases, we display how different perceived problems were dealt with in different ways while they, at the same time, were underpinned by the minority nationalist goal to preserve and protect the Finland-Swedish minority nation.
In the two sections, we also highlight the importance of experts in the formation of intra-minority welfare.Previous research on the historical dimensions of the Nordic model of welfare has emphasized the role of experts and social scientific expertise in welfare state development. 11Regarding the welfare and demographics of Finland-Swedes, specific individuals dominated public discussions.Gunnar Fougstedt (1908-86), the fourth chairperson of Befolkningsförbundet and Margit Törnudd (1905-93), the second chair of the board of Kårkulla, were part of a new generation of social scientists involved in shaping the direction of welfare in Finland, and especially that of the Swedish-speaking minority, whose intra-minority welfare ideology and policies had previously been the domain of physicians and eugenicists.
By studying these issues, organizations and experts, we ask the following questions: how were ideas and practices around minority welfare, the Finland-Swedish family, and the future of the Finland-Swedes conceptualized and framed in the post-war era?Who were deemed responsible for the welfare of the Finland-Swedish minority?In which ways did gender and disability affect the formation of minority welfare for a group considered to be under constant threat?To answer these questions, we utilize mainly printed material, such as newspaper and magazine articles, pamphlets and studies produced by or about the organizations and their representatives from the 1940s to 1960.This material was meant to be read by others, often with the intention of persuading the reader of the urgency in the author's message.Therefore, we analyse the source material contextually and politically, that is, we highlight the contemporary context in which the material was produced and the ways in which historical actors employed ideas in actual political and social contexts and activities. 12

Reproducing the Swedish tribe: minority pronatalism in Befolkningsförbundet
The establishment of Befolkningsförbundet can be traced to the situation caused by the Second World War.The peace treaties of both the Winter and the Continuation War forced Finland to cede large parts of Finnish Karelia to the Soviet Union.The settlement of the Karelian refugees, most of whom were Finnish speaking, caused concern among Finland-Swedes, who feared that the Karelians would swamp and Fennicise Swedish Finland.Svenska Finlands folkting (The Swedish Assembly of Finland), a minority nationalist institution founded in 1919, was convened in 1941 to tackle the threat of Karelian settlement on the ethno-territory of the Finland-Swedish minority.The Assembly also dealt with other issues concerning the Swedish minority in Finland, for example, the statistical makeup of 'Finland's Swedish tribe'.The Assembly recognized the need for comprehensive statistics on the Finland-Swedes in order to serve the demographic interests of the group. 13This led to the founding of Befolkningsförbundet in 1942.The publicly stated aim of Befolkningsförbundet was to raise awareness of the importance of the population question for the future of 'Finland's Swedish tribe' and to facilitate the demographic development of 'the tribe' in a positive direction. 14The start of the organization's work was delayed due to the war, but when Befolkningsförbundet became active in earnest after the war, the demographic alarm bells were rung in the first publication of the organization, Vår folkstams öde: tankar kring befolkningsfrågan i svenska Finland (The Fate of Our Tribe: Thoughts on the Population Question in Swedish Finland). 15Finland had survived the war, but would the Finland-Swedish minority survive its looming post-war population crisis?
Befolkningsförbundet was also a strand of the widespread pronatalist aims in Europe in the inter-war era and the 1940s.Declining birth rates prompted the foundation of nongovernmental organizations focused on pronatalism and family welfare and encouraged states to introduce social political measures to alleviate the economic burden of child rearing.Although the development of social legislation was slow in Finland in a Nordic comparison, the area of population policy followed tightly the general trend of the Nordic countries with, for example, the maternity grant introduced in 1937 and the child benefit in 1948.The child benefit was the first universal benefit introduced in Finland, granting every family economic compensation irrespective of their incomes, and has therefore been viewed as a milestone in Finnish welfare state development. 16he introduction of social benefits for families did, however, not reduce the work by different organizations, which in various ways worked to boost the birth rate and secure the welfare of mothers and children.As historians Sophy Bergenheim and My Klockar Linder have pointed out, Befolkningsförbundet in many ways started as a Finland-Swedish minority version of the Finnish population federation Väestöliitto (The Family Federation), which was founded in 1941.
Both Befolkningsförbundet and Väestöliitto were centred on their respective population questions and initially employed a highly moralistic message of pronatalist propaganda while at the same time emphasizing structural factors such as urbanization as detrimental to family formation.Bergenheim and Klockar Linder also note that the chairpersons of Befolkningsförbundet in the first post-war decades, Gunnar Modeen and Gunnar Fougstedt, were statisticians at the Finnish Central Bureau of Statistics and underscore the 'professional profile' of the pronatalist organizations that were founded in Finland and Sweden in the early 1940s. 17Befolkningsförbundet was able to engage nationally prominent Finland-Swedish experts in the struggle to secure a demographically sound future for the 'Swedish tribe', but as the organization (in addition to counting the proportionally declining number of Finland-Swedes) wanted to support Finland-Swedish families and affect societal change, it also conducted information campaigns and welfare work.The financial resources of the non-governmental organization were, however, limited, and it had to rely on the existing networks of the minority and intra-ethnic solidarity.
Befolkningsförbundet employed one professional ombudsman, who together with a network of pro bono ombudsmen across Swedish Finland worked towards tackling the population problems of the Finland-Swedes.The fact that Befolkningsförbundet was able to engage seven regional ombudsmen to coordinate a further 88 local ombudsmen (on the municipal level) on a voluntary basis is evidence of an intra-ethnic willingness to work towards a common pronatalist goal.Most ombudsmen and board members belonged to the bourgeois ethnoparty the Swedish People's Party, but Finland-Swedish social democrats were also involved.Botanist Ole Eklund, the main ombudsman of Befolkningsförbundet  (1942-44) and the author of the purposely doomsaying pamphlet Vår folkstams öde, was an active social democrat. 18hough the organizational structure looked good on paper it was of course dependent on the commitment and activity of the voluntary ombudsmen.The annual reports of Befolkningsförbundet show only a handful of the ombudsmen taking an active part at the local level.One of the active ombudsmen was the physician Johan Wickström, who together with his wife Kristina Wickström and Gösta Cavonius, a doctor of pedagogy and the professional ombudsman of Befolkningsförbundet  (1944-48), organized a 'population day' in the small rural Swedish-speaking municipality of Snappertuna in Western Uusimaa on 15 October 1944. 19 This event shows both the ambitions of the activists as well as the improvised mixing of minority nationalist propaganda and practical family support in the early activities of Befolkningsförbundet.
Before the actual programme of the population day began, Johan Wickström spent four hours examining around 30 local children and providing advice on childcare, which tangibly framed the event as family-friendly and beneficial.Thereafter followed speeches.Ombudsman Cavonius delivered a pronatalist talk with a focus on the future of the Finland-Swedes.He listed birth rates of Swedish-speaking municipalities in Western Uusimaa, including Snappertuna, compared them to the much higher national average, that is primarily the birth rate of the Finnish-speaking Finns, and came to the following Cassandran conclusions: The consequence [of this] will be that our holy Swedish soil will fall into Finnish hands, the [Finland-Swedish] schools will suffer the so-called 'school-death', the elderly will be many in proportion to those that are able to work, [local] taxes will rise. 20vonius also warned of the lure of the city, a classic theme in nationalist discourse in general and in Finland-Swedish minority nationalism, where the city, primarily Helsinki, was seen as Fennicization trap.Or, as Cavonius' predecessor Ole Eklund put it in Vår folkstams öde: 'The cities become a kind of killing machine that in an ever-increasing pace work towards the destruction of our Swedish tribe.' 21 Cavonius emphasized the need to improve economic conditions in the countryside so that young rural women would not want to choose the smell of perfume over the smell of manure.Cavonius argued that this could be done as the development in Sweden had shown.Dr Wickström gave a speech which was less moralizing and minority nationalist and more focused on private and public welfare that could support large families, in particular the mothers who were overburdened with work.He called for the establishment of public institutions that could provide both care and rest for mothers.Kristina Wickström, daughter of the famous child psychologist and professor in pedagogics Albert Lilius, in turn talked about child rearing in large families and argued, among other things, that rural children had greater options when it came to play and activities than urban children. 22he main event of the population day was an award ceremony for seven local mothers with at least seven children.Four of the mothers were awarded with a sheep each; the mothers who already had sheep received potatoes or firewood and, in one case, children's clothes. 23Finland was plagued by wartime shortages, so the awards were probably welcomed.Johan Wickström told the press that Befolkningsförbundet hoped to arrange a similar awards ceremony in another part of Swedish Finland.There was no talk about fathers or fatherhood at the event, where the experts exclusively educated and rewarded rural mothers. 24The crucial importance of women in the biological reproduction of the nation, which is prevalent in nationalist discourse as Nira Yuval-Davies has pointed out, was clearly displayed at the population day and in the early propaganda of Befolkningsförbundet. 25 The population day in Snappertuna in many ways followed the paternalistic practices of the inter-war period of Folkhälsan's and the women's organization Finland's Swedish Martha Federation's programme on positive eugenics, where Finland-Swedish mothers who had given birth to healthy and well brought up children were awarded. 26One of the instigators of systematically rewarding fit and fecund Finland-Swedish mothers in the inter-war period was Harry Federley (1879-1951), an internationally renowned professor in genetics and one of Finland's leading eugenicists.Historian Markku Mattila has shown that Federley regarded the practice as racial hygiene and called it 'Propagandaarbeit' when presenting it in the German journal Archiv für Rassen-und Gesellschafts-Biologie in 1930. 27The status and position of Federley also made him the natural choice to head Befolkningsförbundet when it was established, and although he resigned in the spring of 1944, before the actual operations of the organization commenced, the conservative ideals and policies of Federely and his generation of bioscientific population experts still lingered in the early activities and public education efforts of Befolkningsförbundet. 28 The agrarian and pronatalist population day was, however, a one-off event.Befolkningsförbundet was based in Helsinki and did not have the resources to uphold a presence in the rural parts of Swedish-speaking Finland.The organization began concentrating on pronatalist public outreach through pamphlets and articles in the press on the Finland-Swedish population question, with one major exception: the home care sisters of Befolkningsförbundet, that is, trained household professionals that could step into a home and the role of a housewife and assist a family in need.The home care sister employed by Befolkningsförbundet was very much an initiative that reflected both current ideas on welfare services as well as the traditional Finland-Swedish emphasis on private or semi-public minority nationalist welfare solutions.The profession/vocation of home care sister was a Christian welfare innovation by women for women that spread to Finland from Sweden in the 1920s. 29In 1939, a Swedish-speaking home-care-sister school was established in Eastern Uusimaa. 30n 1946, Befolkningsförbundet employed its first home care sister, whose services were offered to Finland-Swedish families in Helsinki with many children for a small fee or free of charge if the need could be confirmed. 31In 1947, Befolkningsförbundet's second home care sister was featured on the first page of the daily Nya Pressen, where she was presented as a 'blonde and glad' saviour for a Finland-Swedish family where the mother had fallen ill with influenza. 32The home care sister-service was managed by the women on Befolkningsförbundet's board.Ombudsman Cavonius did not even take bookings as Edit Stolt, one of the female and social democratic board members, handled them. 33The gendered work-division of Befolkningsförbundet was also evident in its publications: the statistical and political pamphlets were written by men, whereas texts on family, housework and relationships were mostly written by women.
At the end of the 1940s, Befolkningsförbundet had two home care sisters in its employment, but in the beginning of the 1950s the organization abandoned its home care sister-service to focus on what it called 'propaganda'.The motivation for this was that public social support for families had become available in a more comprehensive way than before. 34This reorganization of the operation of Befolkningsförbundet was accompanied by an ideological reconfiguration of said propaganda.In 1951, statistician and demographer Gunnar Fougstedt, the new chairperson of Befolkningsförbundet, openly stated that 'we', that is, the Finland-Swedish establishment, had to work from the premise that the desire of the Finland-Swedish population, that is the common folk, to raise their standard of living was 'natural'.Breaking with the agrarianism that had been vehemently promoted by Befolkningsförbundet just a few years earlier, Fougstedt argued that the establishment should not seek to keep people in the countryside, nor should it shame people who left the countryside in search of work.Instead of trying to stop the inevitable, Finland-Swedish migration from rural areas could perhaps be directed to more urban and industrialized Swedish-speaking areas in Finland, Fougstedt proposed. 35ere, he alluded to emigration to Sweden, which was gaining pace and had already been publicly stressed as another serious population predicament by Befolkningsförbundet in 1948. 36By what means migration flows could be channelled in a direction that was demographically beneficial for the Finland-Swedish collective was, however, something that required research according to Fougstedt. 37The ideal of knowledge-based, progressive social-scientific policy-making now also featured in the intra-minority discussions on the Finland-Swedish population question.
Fougstedt was also pessimistic about the Finland-Swedish prospects of keeping up with the fertility rate of the Finnish speakers and argued that the aim of at least growing the Finland-Swedish population was realistic and worthwhile.Maintaining the current demographic proportionality to the Finns (8.6% of the total population in Finland was registered as Swedish-speaking in 1950) was a pipe dream, but Fougstedt believed Finland-Swedish survival was still possible.To achieve this aim public welfare measures were pivotal according to Fougstedt, who clearly did not believe that the Finland-Swedes could cope with current demographic challenges on a private intra-minority welfare basis or by opposing a state-led expansion of social policy. 38The particularist aims of Finland-Swedish minority nationalism remained essential for Fougstedt and Befolkningsförbundet, but the minority had to embrace the universalism of welfare reforms and move forward with the times if it wished to have a future.
Three years later, in 1954, Fougstedt publicly painted an even bleaker picture of the demographic future of the Finland-Swedes in the face of continuing emigration to Sweden and the growing threat of assimilatory intermarriages between Swedish and Finnish speakers. 39Emigration and intermarriages, which had been preoccupations of Befolkningsförbundet since its inception, would increase rapidly in the following decades. 40As the population policy of the state was universal, the only real opportunity for targeted Finland-Swedish population policy-making could be found at the level of local politics, which had not been up to the task according to Fougstedt, who apparently became more candid as he grew into his role as demographer-in-chief for the Finland-Swedish minority.He, for example, disparaged 'local government bigwigs' (most if not all of whom were men at the time) in the Swedish-speaking municipalities (most of which were small and agrarian at this time) for disregarding family policy. 41he rationally radical Fougstedt essentially discarded the traditional agrarian aims and conservative norms of mainstream Finland-Swedish minority nationalism and politics as futile and prepared the Finland-Swedes for a future in which their proportion of the population of Finland would predictably fall.For Fougstedt, who was markedly part of a post-war generation of social scientific experts, the crises in the Finland-Swedish population question were primarily social and political, not biological or moral.Nevertheless, even if Fougstedt framed the Finland-Swedish population question in the stark terms of statistics and ongoing, and in his view inevitable, social change in post-war Finland, the question remained existential and debated among Finland-Swedes, who also faced challenges in implementing welfare for vulnerable groups within the minority.

Enlarging the Finland-Swedish family: care for social minorities within the minority
In the case of Befolkningsförbundet, caring for the population meant promoting childbirth among segments of the minority who fit the ideal model of a citizen.However, after the end of the Second World War focus was also directed to how disadvantaged groups within the minority should be cared for, such as children with intellectual disabilities.As stated in the introduction, previous research has studied the eugenic ambitions of Finland-Swedish institutions in the inter-war period and the fact that members of the Finland-Swedish elite were among the most enthusiastic proponents of racial hygiene in Finland. 42However, at the same time as eugenic measures such as the Marriage Act of 1929 and the Sterilization Act of 1935 were implemented, measures improving the care of and education for people with disabilities were also discussed, an issue which became more acute after the end of the Second World War, with almost 100,000 veterans permanently disabled. 43As Heli Leppälä has shown in her study on the conceptualization of disability in Finnish welfare state development, there was a strict separation between physically and intellectually disabled people in both the general discussions and in legislation, and different solutions were suggested for these groups in the laws enacted in 1946 (physical disabilities) and 1958 (intellectual disabilities).While the state worked to provide people with physical disabilities with medical care and education, the discussions on the so-called mentally deficient centred on minimizing the conceived social problems caused by intellectual disabilities.Furthermore, people with intellectual disabilities were categorized in three different groups according to intelligence and social abilities, for whom different forms of care were deemed appropriate.While 'imbeciles' (intelligence of a 6-9-year-old) and 'morons' (intelligence of a 9-12-year-old) could manage to some extent in society if they received proper education, 'idiots' (intelligence of a 0-6-year-old) were seen as unfit for life outside of institutional or family care. 44he 1940s and 1950s can thus be seen as a transitional period, and Finland-Swedes as a (minority) nation responsible for the welfare of its members broadened in the period under study to include people, especially children, with disabilities.Although Befolkningsförbundet's population day in Snappertuna in 1944 can be interpreted as an echo of the eugenic reward events organized in the inter-war period, these activities generally ended with the war.Furthermore, as historian Julia Dahlberg has shown in her study of Folkhälsan, the organization changed its policy during the 1940s from only promoting health and preventing illness among abled-bodied Finland-Swedes to also working for the wellbeing of physically and intellectually disabled children. 45onetheless, the need to protect society from the supposed threats of inferior hereditary genes and the social unrest caused by the people who carried these genes continued to be voiced throughout the 1940s and 1950s.In 1950, the Sterilization Act was reformed, and thereafter the number of sterilizations, including eugenic sterilizations, increased markedly. 46In her study of Folkhälsan's mental hygienic guidance centres in the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s, Sophy Bergenheim has shown how ideas of racial and mental hygiene were merged into the work of these centres to secure the future of the Finland-Swedes. 47he work by Folkhälsan centred on children with physical disabilities or who were deemed feebleminded, while so-called uneducable mentally deficient children were outside of their realm of work.The Mental Deficiency Act of 1958 stipulated that care for mentally deficient children should primarily be provided through state-financed central institutions, because this was seen as too costly and burdensome for private organizations or individual municipalities to manage. 48The act has been seen as a watershed in the conceptualization of intellectual disability (from fear to care) and the organization of care for intellectual disabled children (from voluntary to state-financed). 49When studying the discussions surrounding intellectual disabilities among the Finland-Swedish minority in the Swedish-language press in the 1940s and 1950s, the push for state-financed and communally led care is evident, albeit not breaking completely with eugenic rhetoric and ideas of the dangers of the hereditary character of mental deficiency.
While Befolkningsförbundet managed to engage several leading Finland-Swedish social scientists, the issue of intellectual disability among Finland-Swedes was mainly discussed among a select group of people.On this matter, the work of Margit Törnudd stands out.Törnudd was an expert within the field of child welfare, and thereby also the welfare of children with disabilities.Between 1948 and 1968, Törnudd worked as  inspector of child welfare in Helsinki, and between 1959 and 1969 she was the chair of the board for Kårkulla, the institution that provided care in Swedish for intellectually disabled children.In 1956, she finished a doctoral thesis on public care of so-called deprived children, and the doctoral degree further strengthened her position as a leading figure of social policy and social work, especially concerning the welfare of children. 50lthough she specialized in child welfare, she participated broadly in discussions on the direction of Finnish social policy in the post-war period, writing also for the Finnish press and participating in several state and municipal committees. 51Most notably she participated in the committee that prepared the Mental Deficiency Act of 1958.Among her peers she became known as a representative of 'profane' humanism, and she herself proclaimed in the 1940s that humanism, not technology, would save the world. 52örnudd's vision for the future of Finnish social policy can be found in an essay from 1945 published in the national newspaper Hufvudstadsbladet on the path of the world and Finnish society in the decades following the Second World War.In the essay, Törnudd foresaw a rapid expansion of social policy, leading to state-led care for all citizens, 'from the cradle to the grave', in the near future.Although she did not use the word 'welfare state', Törnudd's vision for the future was that of a state-financed, allencompassing welfare for all citizens. 53örnudd had already taken an active stance on the welfare of children in the 1930s, and her public engagement for intellectually disabled children started immediately after the war.As the chair of Finlands svenska vårdfunktionärers förening (Association for Swedish Care Functionaries in Finland), Törnudd set out to investigate the situation for people with intellectual disabilities in Swedish and bilingual municipalities in Finland.There existed no Swedish institutions for people with intellectual disabilities in Finland, and, in any case, the number of institutions specifically catering to children with intellectual disabilities far underscored the need.The conclusion of the investigation was that 300 children from Swedish-speaking families were in need of acute care, while over 400 children needed supplementary care.However, the numbers were most likely gravely underestimated, and the real need was much larger. 54he issue of the absence of sufficient care in Swedish for children with intellectual disabilities was not new.It had been raised in the 1920s and in the late 1930s, and the issue was extensively discussed within Finlands svenska vårdfunktionärers förening.A committee set up in 1938 by Finlands Svenska landskommuners förbund (The Federation of Finland's Swedish Rural Municipalities) and led by Sven Donner, one of Finland's leading psychiatrists and neurologists, recommended that two institutions catering for the Swedish-speaking population in Southern and Western Finland be built.In the absence of such an institution, the children were either cared for at home or in Finnish institutions. 55The number of recommended Swedish institutions was later reduced to one, in charge of caring for all Finland-Swedes across a vast geographical area.
In the 1940s and 1950s, Margit Törnudd would repeatedly ask the rhetorical question: 'Is it different to be mentally deficient in Swedish than in Finnish?' 56 In her writing, Törnudd did not engage in racial rhetoric when writing about the situation of Finland-Swedish children with intellectual disabilities, that is, contrary to the eugenicist notions of the inter-war period especially, intellectual disability was not seen as a threat to the racial makeup of the 'Finland-Swedish tribe'.Furthermore, she continuously criticized the use of sterilizations to prevent hereditary intellectual disabilities. 57She did state that feebleminded people were overrepresented among the criminals, not on account of poor genes that destined them to a life of criminality, but rather as a consequence of society not taking responsibility for these people.Instead 'care' and 'institutionalization' were leading words in Törnudd's writings, and here she was by no means alone, as previously stated.However, different commentators proposed different reasons for why there was an acute need for institutionalization.In 1945, Sven Donner did not see institutionalization as a necessity on the account of mentally deficient children being maltreated in their homes.On the contrary, they were often better cared for than their healthy siblings, as mothers tended to neglect all other responsibilities to care for the weakest child.Institutionalization of mentally deficient children was thus first and foremost for the mother and the family, and in extension for the whole of society. 58In 1948, Törnudd agreed that a mentally deficient child was a burden to the family, but also stated that institutionalization was a necessity because of the continued maltreatment of mentally deficient children in homes.Especially in the countryside, children were still locked in barns and pigsties or bound by their hands and feet, according to Törnudd. 59hile Befolkningsförbundet tried to tackle demographic problems that were seen as specific to the Finland-Swedish minority, the issue of intellectual disability was framed in a different way.Intellectual disabilities were not seen as more commonly occurring among Finland-Swedes than Finns or as an exclusively Finland-Swedish issue.However, as a minority, Finland-Swedes faced graver obstacles in implementing the same welfare structures as the majority, and consequently the vulnerable members of the minority suffered.In the case of intellectual disability, the work for intra-minority welfare was about safeguarding the Finland-Swedish population's right to equal treatment.Törnudd stressed that mentally deficient children from Swedish-speaking families could not be properly cared for in a Finnish environment.According to Törnudd, it was detrimental to the wellbeing and development of a child with a mental deficiency to be placed in a foreign language environment. 60Other commentators differed to some extent from Törnudd's view.In 1948, an article in Hufvudstadsbladet argued that one exception to this rule could be made.The 'idiot children' were the only ones who were unaffected by the language of their surroundings, as they completely lacked chances to develop intellectually.Furthermore, if they were placed in Finnish institutions, it would free up space for 'imbeciles', who were in need of some form of education and therefore also of the Swedish language.For 'morons', that is feebleminded children, a care institution was not necessarily needed.Instead, their needs could be provided for in so-called help schools.In 1948, there were only two schools for feebleminded children operating in Swedish. 61n the following years, Törnudd wrote actively on the same issues in the Swedishlanguage press.In an article in Hufvustadsbladet in 1952, Törnudd expressed a growing sense of frustration at the slow progression of institutional care for Finland-Swedish children with intellectual disabilities.Although the Ministry of Social Affairs had urged Finland-Swedes to take initiative in improving the care of mentally deficient children, neither municipalities nor non-governmental welfare organizations had shown any interest, according to Törnudd.Törnudd wondered if care of mentally deficient people was generally not seen as a Swedish question, that is, not at the heart of Finland-Swedish identity and core responsibilities.Törnudd was right in the sense that Finland-Swedish organizations, like Befolkningsförbundet, worked to promote able-bodied, healthy children.Törnudd stressed that the importance of care in a Swedish environment was not only about the child itself.The whole family was in need of care in Swedish, so that communication between the family members and the caregivers could run smoothly. 62According to Heli Leppälä, the protection of the family as an argument for institutionalization gained prominence in the Finnish-language press and expert literature in the 1950s. 63As demonstrated above, these arguments were strong already in the 1940s, but became more prominent in Törnudd's writing in the 1950s.At the centre was the whole Finland-Swedish family and not the intellectually disabled child alone.In fact, Törnudd took her argument one step further and claimed that the whole Finland-Swedish minority gained from proper care for mentally deficient children, as it would increase the general wellbeing of the minority and slow down emigration to Sweden.Thus, Törnudd linked care for mentally deficient children to the issue of demographic downturn of the Finland-Swedes. 64örnudd was often critical of the way Finland-Swedes cared for their weakest members and the way social welfare was organized within Swedish Finland.In 1954 she wrote about the blind spots in Finnish social policy, and she criticized both the organization of social welfare and the lack of sufficient knowledge about social conditions within Finland-Swedish municipalities.Although Finland-Swedish politicians were proposing social political measures to curb emigration to Sweden and to boost birth rates, that is the issues Befolkningsförbundet was engaged in, Finland-Swedes in general were less interested than their Finnish-speaking countrymen in utilizing the fruits of social legislation.According to Törnudd, the reason was social-psychological, but also a consequence of the amateurism that characterized much of the field of social welfare in Swedish municipalities, a view that she had in common with Gunnar Fougstedt. 65Thus, a crucial aspect of the intra-minority welfare work conducted by Törnudd and Fougstedt was making the minority itself aware of its rights and responsibilities.
Törnudd further criticized the heavy reliance on non-governmental welfare organizations -albeit not naming any organization by name -who through private donations capitalized on the social distress of Finnish citizens.This system created grave inequalities in access to welfare and care.Thus, Törnudd propagated for state-led social policy and, moreover, for the cultivation of knowledge among Finland-Swedes of the need for social welfare.According to Törnudd, in line with the sentiments of Fougstedt, this knowledge should be acquired through (social) scientific research on the conditions of the Finland-Swedes, and the research should in turn be spread in schools and universities to those who would work in the field in the future. 66he idea that Finland-Swedes were lazy in conforming to legislative changes was also brought forth in discussions on sterilizations.In 1958, C.A. Borgström, a physician who specialized in neurological and mental illnesses, published a doctoral thesis on the application of the Sterilization Act.Borgström had studied with Harry Federley and was involved in the preparations for the act of 1935. 67One of Borgström's main conclusions was that the Sterilization Act was not used sufficiently, and its potential to prevent mental deficiency was therefore hampered, as, according to Borgström, the majority of cases of mental deficiency could be prevented if sterilizations were used more effectively.Moreover, Borgström's study also showed that Finland-Swedish municipalities showed far less interest in enacting sterilizations than Finnish municipalities.For example, on the Åland Islands, the autonomous, monolingually Swedish-speaking island region, not a single permit for sterilization had been issued between 1935 and 1955. 68orgström also presented his findings in the Swedish-language press, which gave rise to a heated debate in 1959 and 1960 about the purpose and outcomes of the sterilizations of mentally deficient people, once again involving Margit Törnudd, who strongly opposed Borgström's claim that sterilization would be the best way to prevent mental deficiency.Instead, Törnudd repeated that institutional care was the best option available for treating people with mental deficiencies and preventing the continuation of inferior genes through sterilizations was a redundant measure.69 'The fact that Dr Borgström has "sounded the hunting horn" at the same time as the hunt is being cancelled in other countries [. ..] is unfortunate [. ..],' wrote Törnudd.70 Basing her argument on British research that refuted sterilizations as a measure for preventing mental deficiency, she thus emphasized how late eugenic measures were being discussed in Finland compared to other countries.She also put her finger on how the treatment of people with intellectual disabilities had evolved over the previous decades, from eradication to care.In the late 1950s, the Kårkulla care facility was built; on 1 August 1960, 15 boys and 15 girls between the ages of 7 and 12 moved into the new institution located in rural Pargas.71 Thereby, discussions on whether or not providing care for people with intellectual disabilities was a Finland-Swedish question also ended.However, while Finland had been on par with other Nordic countries in the introduction of family policy, policies directed towards people with intellectual disabilities were late and lagged behind in their design.Shortly after large central institutions like Kårkulla were built, these structures started to be heavily criticized in other Nordic countries leading to a new era in disability policy.72

Conclusion
In this article we have used the concept of intra-minority welfare to study how welfare and ethno-politics were interlinked and the ways in which a minority responded to changing social circumstances and an expanding welfare state.Compared to many other minorities in Europe, Finland-Swedes were institutionally and territorially well established.Moreover, due to the fact that Swedish was a national language in Finland, the state operated in two languages.However, the large-scale economic and social changes in post-war Finland, which was a predominantly agrarian country until the 1950s, challenged, and conceivably threatened, the Finland-Swedish minority nation, especially conservative notions of what constituted and reproduced the nation.
We have focused on two intra-minority welfare issues with two organizational structures related to them: preventing the demographic decline of the Finland-Swedish minority and expanding the realm of welfare to vulnerable members of the minority.The two contemporary problems expose different ways in which welfare and care were produced and negotiated for the Finland-Swedish minority in the post-war era, however, with a common goal to care for the welfare and future of the Finland-Swedes.Although discussions on both issues intensified after the Second World War, they were also a continuation of inter-war discussions on ways to counteract population decline and to provide care for children with intellectual disabilities.Furthermore, in discussions on both problems echoes of eugenic practices and ideologies of the inter-war period were prevalent.The gendered nationalist logic and responsibilities for reproducing the minority nation of the pre-war period also continued to underpin intra-minority welfare efforts in the post-war period, with children and family as the primary concern of women, including the new female experts.
After the war, the responsibility for expertise shifted from the medical sphere to the social sciences.However, the issue of demography and the future of the Finland-Swedish 'tribe' engaged a much larger group of Finland-Swedish experts than that of intellectual disabilities.Attached to Befolkningsförbundet were some of Finland's leading sociologists and demographers, while the issue of providing care in Swedish for children with intellectual disabilities engaged very specific individuals, a fact that clearly frustrated Margit Törnudd.
Another aspect of both issues that has similarities as well as clear differences is whether or not they were exclusively Finland-Swedish issues, a question that Törnudd raised.Intermarriages, for example, always also involved a member of the majority, but the issue was firmly conceptualized as a Finland-Swedish problem, as the minority was statistically proven to be the loser of the constellation.And while the proportion of children with intellectual disabilities was not larger among the Finland-Swedes, finding a solution that was sensitive to the special needs of the minority gave rise to graver concerns among the Finland-Swedes.
As stated in the introduction, by focusing on Finland-Swedish negotiations about care and welfare we can study the historical micro-level workings of the mixed economy of welfare.The gradual development of the welfare state in the decades following the Second World War diminished on the one hand the need for private intra-minority practices of welfare, while on the other pushed Finland-Swedish welfare organizations to readdress their work.New experts such as Fougstedt and Törnudd did not hesitate to criticize Finland-Swedish decision-makers and institutions for not embracing public welfare for all as the only way to reproduce and care for the particular, that is, the Swedish-speaking minority.Intra-minority welfare could and should be produced through the welfare state, and the Finland-Swedes had the collective means to channel public welfare for the benefit of their minority and all its members was the message of the social scientists.Still, the new arguments and solutions rested on the old doctrine that the welfare and fate of the Finland-Swedes depended on their own actions.The Finland-Swedish case shows the heuristic and analytical value of the concept of intra-minority welfare, which can deepen our understanding of the complex interrelations between welfare and minority positions in the history of the mixed economy of welfare as well as in welfare and minority history in general.

Notes
1. Sandlund, "Suomenruotsalaiset," 272. 2. The movement was ideologically underpinned by the tenet that the people of Finland (demos) were constituted by two nationalities or nations (ethnoses), the Finnish speakers (Finns) and the Swedish speakers (Swedes in Finland, or Finland-Swedes as the minority