Compulsory social service: Cheers to occupational therapy

Enlarge image

Young people take care of seniors in social services - a contribution to society or »occupational therapy«?

Photo: Klaus Vedfelt/Getty Images

We young people should work for society, demanded Federal President Steinmeier in an interview.

A compulsory social period could make people more open to other opinions and help other citizens.

The next Federal Minister of Justice, Marco Buschmann, from the FDP, promptly reported and heated up the debate: he described the compulsory service on Twitter as occupational therapy.

It may be that compulsory service would often be more occupational therapy than contribution to society.

But that's not bad at all.

Compulsory social service is the best thing that can happen to young people.

Not for social reasons, but above all for self-interest.

Nursing instead of physics

The first weeks of my voluntary service in a community for people with disabilities was tough.

Before that, I sat at my desk most of the time, learning everything from the process of photosynthesis to stochastics for my Abitur.

So things that I have forgotten again today, almost ten years later.

Then I suddenly peeled potatoes for a large family, entertained seniors in an evening round and helped with the care.

The first time I had a hard time washing a stranger.

The second time too.

But soon it became part of my day like peeling potatoes.

During my social year, I often had to think of a platitude from my Abitur: "We don't learn for life, but for school," wrote the philosopher Seneca in a letter to a student.

He complained that philosophy did not deal enough with real problems.

It probably took him a while to come to that conclusion as well.

I don't know whether I ended up being a good temporary nurse.

Above all, the voluntary service benefited one person: me.

He toughened me up for my future and earned me a lot of respect for professions I would never have come close to again later.

Should I ever have children or look after relatives, all the excrements won't frighten me anymore.

And along the way, I also earned the money to later relax on the beach in a Thai coastal town.

But what's the point of singing about social services if they end up taking the same ones: those who have long flirted with social work or who have been involved before.

Compulsory service, on the other hand, attached to schooling, is more than just service to society and the accumulation of life experience - it forces experiences outside of one's own comfort zone.

And decelerate before you get sucked into the pull of working life.

Because final exams also force you to make decisions about what happens afterwards.

With a compulsory one-year break for everyone, no one would have to force themselves to work immediately for fear of a gap in their CV, or fear financial losses.

Young people with less wealthy parents could also afford orientation – provided the service is paid fairly.

Because measuring blood pressure in the hospital or swaying a seated dance with senior citizens is also a question of money.

But Steinmeier ignored that of all things in the whole debate.

It's nice when politicians make speeches.

But thinking about such a duty without talking about money is like heating up the grill without sausages or eggplant.

A compulsory period is only possible with a good salary - anything else means exploiting young people who are often underpaid anyway.

If there is money for a tank discount or the 9 € ticket, then please also for a social obligation - with minimum wage.

We young people could really use the money: to travel, put it into the semester fee, make a donation, or invest it in crazy activities like bungee jumping.

And before that, we briefly saved society – at least a little bit.