Uppsatsen riktar fokus på socionomers bild av ansvarsfördelning kring samverkan mellan välfärdssamhällets aktörer, inom det sociala trygghetssystemet. För att minska risken att klienter faller mellan stolarna. Studiens material grundas i ett fiktivt fall där individen blir slussad mellan olika aktörer och riskerar att falla mellan stolarna. Materialet samlades in med hjälp av vinjettmetodik inom ramen för ett enkätutskick. Resultatet av studien kopplades till teorier om samverkan och copingstrategier som beskriver socionomernas bemästringsförmåga. Slutsatsen av studien var att socionomerna ansåg att klienter som hänvisas mellan välfärdssamhällets aktörer var vanligt förekommande. På grund av hög arbetsbörda och stress hade socionomerna problem med att stötta individerna. Det resulterade i att individerna som befann sig i gränslandet mellan olika aktörer inte fick det stöd som de behövde. Detta kunde på sikt leda till att en redan utsatt individ som befann sig i gränslandet mellan olika aktörer drabbades av en dubbel utsatthet, då den riskerade att falla mellan stolarna i det svenska trygghetssystemet.

This thesis’s purpose was to study differences between the Scandinavian countries’ crisis management during the coronavirus pandemic based on theories of responsibilization and individualization. The thesis investigates how Sweden, Denmark, and Norway communicated individual and state responsibility during the pandemic and see if the discourse has changed from spring to fall in 2020. The design is comparative, where the method consists of a qualitative text analysis that is used to analyze the Scandinavian countries’ prime ministers’ introductory speech at press conferences regarding the pandemic. The thesis conclusions are that there are noticeable differences in the countries' communication. Sweden communicates a significant state responsibility throughout, but what is characteristic is the extensive individual responsibility. Denmark communicates extensive state responsibility with significant and partly mandatory measures throughout 2020. The individual responsibility is also significant but not as extensive. Norway also communicates a significant state responsibility, but the individual responsibility is communicated primarily in a collective way where everyone together must get through the crisis. There has also been a shift of responsibility from the state to the individual from spring to fall during 2020 in Norway and Sweden where the individual's responsibility increases over time, whereas the same shift cannot be discerned in Denmark. In Sweden the individual responsibility is thus more comprehensive than Denmark and Norway who show more state responsibility.