Skydda vem, från vad? - Socionomers syn på socialtjänstens legitima förutsättningar att arbeta med unga som begått brott

Sammanfattning: The aim of this study is to analyze the attitudes of social workers in Sweden in regard to the Social Services prerequisites and resources to work with youths who are at risk of falling into or who are already living a criminal lifestyle. We conducted this study from a qualitative research approach, with the collection of empirical data consisting of 8 semi-structured interviews, 6 of them in physical meetings and the remaining 2 via Zoom. We then decided to analyze the gathered data using new institutional theory as our main theoretical framework, using several keywords within this framework to deepen our analysis such as legitimacy, isomorphism, competing logics, as well as myths and ceremonies. The results show that, on a general basis, social workers experience that the resources they have at their disposal are enough, in an economical manner as well as in a timely manner. However the social workers seem to believe that the use of these resources need to be legitimized in relation to the general public, other organizations as well as governing bodies such as politicians, and their head of departments in order for the work they conduct to be allowed to continue. The cooperative aspect of the work they conduct is also something they speak about as something positive, as well as something necessary. Despite that, it seems there still are issues, mainly in the form of their respective organizational logics competing with one another. These competing logics have shown to be a factor that, combined with split frameworks surrounding confidentiality, can be an obstacle in the cooperative aspect of their work. Lastly, the crime prevention aspect of their work is something that the social workers themselves consider something that needs to be legitimized. This is in regard to both the general public and governing bodies such as politicians to keep their roles within the organization. They are heavily relying on institutional isomorphism to help provide legitimacy based on normative patterns that help form organizational structures.