Abstract
The focus of this study is on the organisations, who represent adults with physical or mentally disability and/or social problem and Dansk Socialrådgiverforeningens responses to the bill from the Ministry of Children, Equality, Integration and Social Conditions. The bill is a permission to change the law on social service, the law on legal certainty and administration on the social province, law on social supervision and various other laws, which the Ministry was introduced December 9th, 2014. The bill from the Ministry specially has its focus on, how to allocate services to adults with physical or mentally disability and/or social problem. The Ministry of Children, Equality, Integration and Social Conditions decided just after the hearing to withdraw the bill because of the many critical responses they have received.

The goal of this project is to examine, how the responses from the organisations have contributed to the decision of the Ministry of Children, Equality, Integration and Social Conditions to withdraw the bill about permission to changing the law on social service, the law on legal certainty and administration on the social province, law on social supervision and various other laws before it was sent to processing in the parliament.

The examination is based on Spector and Kitsuses claims-making theory, which is the framework for the project. The modified version of Spector and Kitsuses first two claims-making stages by Randall and Shorts, steer the understanding of the Ministry claims-making process. Further, I use Spector and Kitsuses claims-making theory to steer the document analysis on the responses from the organisations and Dansk Socialrådgiverforening. This is to analyse, which ‘claims’ against the Ministry’s bill the organisations and Dansk Socialrådgiverforening raise in their responses to this bill. In addition, I use Spector and Kitsuses claims-making theory to analyse why the organisations and Dansk Socialrådgiverforening raise these ‘claims’ against the bill. Further, I use Losekes model of claims-making strategies to examine, which strategies the organisations and Dansk Socialrådgiverforening uses in their claims-making process to clarify the consequences of the outcome of the bill.

Even though the responses come from very different organisations, my result is that their responses to the Ministry’s bill is very similar. This study clarify that the organisations and Dansk Socialrådgiverforening respond, because they the bill from their point of view is unsuitable and an unreliable, because it does not solve the putative problematic conditions in the laws, the bill I about. Furthermore, this study shows, that the organisations and Dansk Socialrådgiverforening uses claims-making strategies to clarify the problematic conditions the bill contains from their point of view.