SammendragDen mest brukte midlertidige trygdeytelsen i Norge i aldersgruppen 18-29 år er arbeidsavklaringspenger. Dette er en helserelatert ytelse, som kan gis til de som følge av sykdom eller skade har fått nedsatt arbeidsevnen sin med minimum 50 prosent. I denne artikkelen undersøkes naermere hva som gjør at så mange unge kanaliseres inn i akkurat denne ordningen framfor andre trygdeytelser -og hvilken rolle regelverket spiller. Dette undersøkes gjennom kvalitative intervjuer med 19 unge mottakere av arbeidsavklaringspenger og 30 NAV-veiledere, ledere og rådgivende overleger. Resultatene viser at de unge mottakerne har sammensatte problemer som fører til utstøting fra eller manglende inngang til arbeidslivet. Ettersom de ikke har vaert i arbeid, og dermed ikke har fått opparbeidet seg rettigheter til andre langvarige ytelser, kan en medisinsk diagnose fungere som inngangsbillett til den langvarige oppfølgingen og økonomiske tryggheten som arbeidsavklaringspenger innebaerer. Med bakgrunn i funnene reiser artikkelen spørsmål om det å medikalisere de unges problemer leder til at velferdsapparatet fokuserer på individuelle framfor strukturelle årsaker til unges problemer og at unge føler seg stemplet som avvikere. Analysen bygger på teorier om utstøting, attraksjon, medikalisering og stempling. AbstractWork assessment allowance is the most widely used temporary benefit in Norway in the age group 18-29. This is a health-related benefit aimed at people with work ability reduced by at least 50 per cent due to illness or injury. This article examines why so many young people receive Work assessment allowance instead of benefits that are not health related. The empirical evidence consists of qualitative interviews with 19 young Work assessment allowance clients and 30 NAV frontline workers, NAV office managers and medical advisors. This study shows that the young Work assessment allowance clients have complex problems that constitute barriers to entering the labour market. With no former employment, these young clients are not eligible for other long-term benefits, and a medical diagnosis can serve as an entrance ticket to the long-term follow-up and financial security provided by the Work assessment allowance scheme. Based on these findings, this article raises the question of whether the medicalization of young people's problems leads to too strong a focus on individual rather than structural causes for young people's problems and the labelling of the young Work assessment allowance clients as deviant. The analysis draws on theories on push and pull factors, medicalization and labelling.

Activation policies have increasingly targeted new and ‘hard‐to‐serve’ clients with complex needs, often deprived of the labour market experience, health, skills, and competencies that employers look for. The role of the health sector as a partner for welfare services has thus become more important. Cross‐sectoral frontline delivery of activation is seen as crucial in succeeding with activation and labour market integration in general and especially for young adults with complex needs. The current study aims at contributing new insights on such cross‐sectoral coordination by investigating how various actors within the welfare and health services experience interagency collaboration in the context of activating young welfare clients in the Norwegian Work Assessment Allowance scheme (WAA). Our data consist of 33 interviews with frontline workers in the two sectors in six different municipalities. Our data suggest that cross‐sectoral work in Norway directed at young WAA‐clients is hampered by a lack of coordination and communication between frontline workers in the two sectors, leading to tension and inefficiency in activating these young clients. We do, however, find that in‐house medical advisers in the welfare services have a potential to act as boundary spanners, but that seem to be an underused asset in this regard. We conclude that frontline workers' opportunities for cross‐sectoral coordination seem to be constrained by narrow and insufficient spaces for integration and collaboration, possibly due to organisational and administrative barriers.