Objective: After the Nazi occupation, there was a determination to deal with collaborators, coming to the fore with the trial of the traitor Vidkun Quisling. This became as much a contest between psychiatrists as a legal tussle. Norwegian psychiatrists supported the public opinion that collaborationists were mentally ill or intellectually handicapped, and this was evident in the reports they prepared.
Conclusion: Norwegian psychiatry, their distinguished stand during the war notwithstanding, was caught up in the emotion and controversy of the Quisling trial and the treatment of collaborators. Later, there was tacit agreement that their stand had been less than objective, sharing the public repulsion towards collaborators and influenced by still-prevailing eugenic views.