This study is aimed to increase the knowledge about the Swedish immigration authorities’ assessment of the asylum applications based on particularly distressing circumstances, submitted by disabled undocumented migrants. Making an attempt to explain the reasons of asylum-seekers’ health deterioration during the asylum process, this study determines the factors in migration authorities proceedings affecting such deterioration. Documents in five personal files concerning six disabled asylum-seekers, whose applications were declined, were studied by applying two observational methods: content analysis of the documents in the personal files and non-participant observations made during receptions of undocumented migrants at the Swedish Asylum Committee. The results of the study have shown that migration authorities' way of applying the principle of child’s best interests have a declarative character, while the disability perspective is completely ignored. The migrations authorities make free interpretations of the information on the countries of asylum-seekers' origin, while adaptation to Swedish conditions does not work at all as cause for residence permit. Advocates, who neglect their prior duties, have also a negative influence on the asylum process. Analyzed from the perspective of appropriate sociological concepts, the results of this study have shown that the above mentioned observations cause disabled undocumented migrants health deterioration.

This study focuses on the proposed legislative amendment regarding mandatory reporting. The purpose of the study is to investigate how social workers within social services perceive the legislative proposal on mandatory reporting, identify ethical dilemmas that social workers associate with the mandatory reporting law, and explore how they reason about handling these dilemmas. Consequently, three research questions have been formulated and answered using a qualitative interview method. We interviewed six social workers and within social services from different areas. Lipsky's theory of Street-level bureaucrats (1980) and previous research in this area were used as theoretical frameworks.  Our results indicate that social workers attitudes toward the legislative proposal vary; some remain critical, while others consider it similar to any other legislative proposal that regulates their work. Regarding the question of ethical dilemmas, they agree that such dilemmas can arise, but it does not necessarily affect all social workers. Concerning the management of role conflict and ethical dilemmas arising from mandatory reporting, there are different responses answers range from adapting the law to social workers' varied choices in handling this situation. Some argue that they want to align with the client's side, finding support in the organization's guidelines. On the other hand, there are those who believe it is best to follow the law to avoid potential consequences that may arise and conflict with the organization's mission and requirements. Some even choose to leave the workplace if they cannot align with the client within the organization's framework.