We've received feedback from various people who have questioned the merits of this story. Some people believe Social Services must have had good cause to remove Domenic from the care of his parents. Many of us supporting the Johanssons today had the exact same doubts and suspicions. While Friends of Domenic Johansson does not have access to legal papers and court documents of this case, there are several compelling reasons why we've linked arms with the Johansson family. 

To begin, much of the story is available on the web, in Swedish and in English. Tools such as the internet and Google Translate have made the world a much smaller place in terms of communication between people and organizations across the globe.

Even so, what is available on the net leaves us wanting more, which brings us back to the legal papers and court documents. While we cannot review them, there are people who have access to the legal documentation in this case, and their response to what they've read is telling!

Our first evidence of validity in the Johansson's position as victims of grave human rights violations can be found in the recent response of attorney Ruby Harrold-Claesson, Chair of the Nordic Committee on Human Rights (NCHR).  After reviewing all pertinent documents, Attorney Harrold-Claesson has agreed to defend the Johansson family and is now acting as their legal counsel. She will be present at the May 12, 2010 Social Services Board hearing of the case. We do not believe the NCHR, and Attorney Harrold-Claesson, would risk their professional reputation on a case that does not rise to the level of fundamental human rights violations.

Another evidence of validity in the Johansson case comes from the public support of other defenders of human rights, family rights and home school rights. Namely, highly respected organizations such as Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) and The Alliance Defense Fund (AFD) have spoken publicly in defense of the Johanssons and are working to advise the family.  The Home School Legal Defense Association states in their "Court Report" that Domenic was taken "without a warrant—or even any accusation of crime,"  and that the intervention was, according to local officials, "intended to guarantee Domenic's right to an education." (Remember that homeschooling is still legal in Sweden, and that Domenic's parents had made every attempt to work with and comply with officials).  It seems obvious that if the Swedish officials had any other reasons to put forth, they would certainly have publicized them, in order to make their case appear stronger. 

In conclusion, while we do not have access to all the documents of the case, the response of professionals whose lives and careers are dedicated to the defense of individual human rights should be evidence enough of the truth of the Johanssons' story. For details of their story, please read BECAUSE THEY LOVED...