Deciding about priority cases in waiting lists is a controversial activity. However, it is a well-known challenge for many social workers. This article addresses two questions related to this problem: how do social workers, as moral agents, experience the policy context in which they must prioritise cases, and what stance do they take towards it? Building on a previous study where a practice of case prioritisation was observed, semi-structured interviews were conducted (n = 11) to explore these questions. The data were analysed through an inductive process of deepening interpretation. The findings paint a picture of ambivalence: the professionals adhere to the policy guidelines of neutrality, priority for the worst-off and equal application of criteria, which are at the same time contradicted by their lived experience. The decision-making process appears to be much more contextual, particularistic and interpretative than the policy guidelines suggest. Questions are raised as to why this reality remains hidden after a discourse of simple rule-following.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.