A public issue

What happens when health suddenly fails? And what if not only bodies were affected, but also social behaviors? A recent study published in the American Economic Journal: Applied Economics sheds light on a dynamic as disturbing as it is overlooked: a serious health event, such as a cancer diagnosis, can significantly increase the likelihood that a person will commit a crime.

Based on comprehensive administrative data on the Danish population, researchers observed more than 368,000 people who received a cancer diagnosis between 1980 and 2018. Using a very accurate statistical approach, which takes into account individual characteristics and the timing of the disease discovery, the study shows that the probability of committing crimes increases by 14% in the ten years following diagnosis. An increase that involves both first-time offenders and those with prior records.

But why does all this happen? The causes are multiple. The most intuitive one is economic in nature: those who fall ill often lose their jobs, see their income reduced, and may struggle to meet daily expenses. In the absence of family networks or savings, illegality can tragically become the only means of survival. In fact, the study shows a more marked increase in crimes among those who do not own a home, live alone, or have a low level of education. And this also applies to people who, before the illness, had never had contact with the justice system.

However, it is not only need-related crimes. The researchers also found a strong increase in “non-economic” crimes, such as small acts of violence, assaults, or vandalism, highlighting that psychological distress also plays an important role. The diagnosis of a serious illness is a traumatic event that can generate anxiety, depression, and a loss of a sense of the future. The awareness of having a reduced life expectancy can alter the perception of risk and the weight attributed to the long-term consequences of one’s actions, such as punishment for a crime.

Another key element concerns the institutional context. The study shows that the effect of illness on crime is even stronger in Danish municipalities where, following an administrative reform, subsidies for the sick were cut. Conversely, where welfare remained more generous, the link between illness and crime was weakened.

This is an extremely important result from the perspective of public policy: economic and social support measures can act as a “cushion” against deviant behaviors, offering alternatives and hope even in the darkest moments. Public policies that go in this direction, reducing the propensity for crime, can also limit the additional costs and time burdens on the justice system and the police. In other words, preventing deviance through care benefits everyone – humanly, socially, economically.

Freedom, therefore, is not a given, but a condition that needs to be protected and made concrete, especially in moments of vulnerability. When economic resources run out, when a diagnosis undermines not only health but also dignity, the risk is that individual freedom will be compromised. Not by choice, but by necessity.

Guaranteeing a real, inclusive, and dignified system of public support, which includes health, social, economic, and psychological assistance, also means defending people’s freedom to remain within the law, not to break the social contract, not to give in to despair.
Fragility is not only a private matter, it is a public one. When a person falls ill, a mechanism is set in motion that, directly or indirectly, ends up involving the whole of society.

Pierluigi Conzo
NP June/July 2025