A 13-year-old girl stabbed her caregiver with a kitchen knife in a Paderborn psychiatric hospital. Shortly thereafter, it emerged that the police had warned of such an act and insisted that the girl not be allowed into the kitchen. The teenager is classified by the authorities as a potential Islamist threat. Nevertheless, Thomas Mücke of the Violence Prevention Network does not believe the hospital acted negligently. Rather, the facility was in dire straits, he said in an interview with ntv.de. The Islamism expert also explains why the teenagers’ Islamist ideology may have played only a minor role in the brutal act – and why it is much more difficult for parents today to detect a radicalization in their children than it used to be.
The 13-year-old girl who stabbed her caregiver in a Paderborn psychiatric hospital is suspected of terrorism, according to police. Officers reportedly warned her not to allow her into the facility’s kitchen. Did the hospital act negligently?
Thomas Mücke: It’s difficult to judge from a distance. Fundamentally, however, such an institution is always in a certain predicament. Because while the police, who actually warned of such an incident, have the sole responsibility to ensure security, the clinic has to strike a balance between security and their responsibility to treat the girl. To do this, they need to establish access to her and involve her in activities. Only in this way can a perspective for change be established. Of course, there is always a certain risk with people who pose a danger. We can reduce this risk, and I assume that the clinic in Paderborn has a security concept for precisely this reason. But the fact remains: we cannot completely eliminate the risk in our work. For that to happen, the girl would have had to be completely isolated and locked away. But that would not have improved or changed her situation. We see how challenging this balancing act is.
This case is particularly brutal: According to reports, the girl had threatened to kill someone in the past and ultimately stabbed her caregiver, a close friend. Are these violent fantasies a result of radicalization?
I wouldn’t necessarily say that. Especially among younger people, the extremists’ ideology is rarely already firmly entrenched. Often, it’s the other way around: They pick out something from the ideology to justify their violent fantasies. These, in turn, can have various reasons. In the case of the girl in Paderborn, we therefore don’t know whether ideology played a real role in the crime. However, she wasn’t a typical case of juvenile radicalization.
In what way?
Firstly, it is very rare for girls or young women to directly carry out acts of violence or terrorist attacks. They may be involved in the planning, but their actions during the actual execution are very atypical. Secondly, you already mentioned the 13-year-old’s repeated threats of violence before the crime. So we are obviously dealing with someone who was genuinely waiting for the opportunity to hurt another person. As I said, we don’t know the motive, but I believe it was more about establishing a kind of control through violent fantasies. The violent acts may have been an attempt to balance one’s own inner psychological state.
Regardless of her motive for the crime, the police are treating the girl as a terror suspect. What motivates a 13-year-old to join the Islamist scene?
Possibly for a similar reason. First of all, we don’t have any knowledge of this in this specific case. But no one becomes radicalized simply because they encounter extremist content. Before any radicalization, there is emotional pain resulting from major problems and social conflicts. Extremists—in every form of extremism—appeal precisely to these emotional needs. They serve the desire for harmony, for a certain importance. For the children and young people, a sudden feeling of appreciation arises: They are seen, they are part of a group.
Extremists are apparently succeeding in this much more frequently than they were ten years ago. According to authorities, the radicalization of children and young people is increasing significantly. Why is this?
Children and young people are the focus of Islamists—as well as right-wing extremists. On the one hand, they also know that young people are easier to manipulate, and on the other, extremists also need new recruits. If we look at the attempted attacks from October 2023 to October 2024 alone, two-thirds of the suspects were actually between 13 and 19 years old. The rejuvenation now seems to be working. However, this is less due to a change in tactics on the part of the extremists than simply to the fact that they are now better able to reach children and young people.
Keyword social networks?
Exactly. Almost all of the terror suspects just mentioned became radicalized online. However, it’s simply a different way of addressing people – the filter bubble the young people are drawn into is the same as before. In the past, it mainly worked like this: A young person is approached and invited by a peer. In the group, they then experience community and the recognition and harmony they seek. Subsequently, the young person is alienated from society, being told, for example, “Islam and democracy are contradictory.” Then there’s the pressure to proselytize: The young people try to convince their families to convert to the “real Islam” and, of course, encounter resistance. In the end, the group tells them: You have to review your social contacts and no longer associate with impure, unbelieving people. The young person now lives in a filter bubble. Their only peer group is the extremists.
How are things going today?
Similar, only in the digital world. But there, too, a group full of appreciation is created. There, too, manipulation and isolation follow. The only advantage for extremists is that they reach many more people—especially young people—at the same time. After all, the internet is the place for young people. The method has hardly changed. However, we are noticing a difference in how radicalization is handled.
In what way?
In the past, parents and those close to them often noticed their children’s radicalization, but not anymore. In the past, radicalization often involved a change in daily routines or clothing. There were more obvious signals. Today, people who become radicalized often behave completely normally in their analog lives, while engaging with extremist narratives in the digital world. Parents usually only become aware of this when they have access to their children’s digital channels. They barely notice the change in their everyday behavior. To recognize warning signs, we therefore need to pay much more attention to young people’s digital usage. Because one thing is also clear: young people aren’t just knocking on the door of counseling centers. They need outside help.
You once said it’s much easier to “bring back” children and young people than adults. Why?
The degree of ideological consolidation is nowhere near as pronounced as it is among 40- or 50-year-olds. Once you manage to build trust and a working relationship, it’s much easier to shake up that ideological worldview. This is precisely what we’re seeing in our work with returnees from Syria: They were often described as a group of people who would be difficult to reintegrate into society. However, these were mostly young people who left for the combat zones at the age of 14, 15, or 16. So, even after their return, they’re still very young. Among the people we and the nationwide counseling centers work with, there hasn’t been a single relapse so far. On the contrary: They’ve reintegrated relatively well into society.
The radicalization of children and young people is increasing, while it’s harder for those around them to perceive this change. Given this, do you expect more cases like the one in Paderborn?
The case from Paderborn is very specific, and I stand by that view. However, I expect more cases of radicalization. Fundamentally, we are better positioned than before: We have built a very good network of counseling services, including psychologists, security authorities, and child and youth services. This is nowhere near comparable to the situation 13 years ago. And this service is being utilized: Counseling requests have increased fivefold in recent years. So we can do something to counteract the rising number of cases. However, we are working with limited resources. If the radicalization cases continue to develop in this way, we absolutely must invest more in resources.
