The article provides empirical evidence on Romanians’ concerns over the effectiveness of their social work system in correctly evaluating social needs and preventing welfare frauds. Based on a national survey conducted in 2022, we found that 59 percent of the respondents believe that too many people receive social benefits without needing help. We analyze the profile of this category of respondents by taking into account vulnerabilities of the individual/household, opinions about social workers, attitudes toward increasing public funds for social protection, households’ economic well-being and various socio-demographics (age, gender, and education). The article’s conclusions can inform research and policies in this field.
AmoahPA (2020) Examining attitudes towards welfare in an in/security regime: Evidence from Ghana. Social Policy and Society19: 661–676.
4.
AnghelI-M (2015) Contesting neoliberal governance: The case of Romanian Roma. Social Change Review13: 85–109.
5.
AnghelI-M (2019) Politici publice adresate minorităt,ii rome în perioada postsocialistă: între europenizare s,i deresponsabilizare. Sociologie Românească17: 92–117.
6.
AnghelRGBotezatACosciugA, et al. (2016) International migration, return migration, and their effects: A comprehensive review on the Romanian case. IZA Discussion Papers, Institute of Labor Economics, Bonn, December.
7.
BaptistaIMarlierE (2022) Social Protection for People with Disabilities in Europe. An Analysis of Policies in 35 Countries. Brussels: European Social Policy Network (ESPN).
8.
BaumbergB (2016) The stigma of claiming benefits: A quantitative study. Journal of Social Policy45: 181–199.
9.
BolandTDouyleKGriffinR (2022) Passing stigma: Negotiations of welfare categories as street level governmentality. Social Policy & Society21: 657–667.
10.
CalhounMLightfootEOkamotoK, et al. (2020) Contemporary perceptions of social work: Macro practice in the profession. Journal of Community Practice28: 374–391.
11.
CarejaRHarrisE (2022) Thirty years of welfare chauvinism research: Findings and challenges. Journal of European Social Policy32: 212–224.
12.
ChelceaLDrut,ăO (2016) Zombie socialism and the rise of neoliberalism in post-socialist Central and Eastern Europe. Eurasian Geography and Economics57: 521–544.
13.
CimpoeruSRomanMRos,caVI, et al. (2023) Two-speed integration? A comparative analysis of barriers and resilience strategies of young migrants in vulnerable conditions in Romania. Social Sciences12: 1–23.
14.
DevereuxEPowerMJ (2019) Fake news? A critical analysis of the ‘Welfare Cheats, Cheat Us All’ campaign in Ireland. Critical Discourse Studies16: 347–362.
15.
DražanováLGeddesA (2023) Attitudes towards Ukrainian refugees and governmental responses in 8 European countries. In: CarreraSIneli-CigerM (eds) EU Responses to the Large-Scale Refugee Displacement from Ukraine: An Analysis on the Temporary Protection Directive and Its Implications for the Future EU Asylum Policy. Florence: European University Institute, 135–147.
16.
DuboisV (2020) Cuando las élites políticas transforman la vida de la población precaria: la construcción política del fraude social como problema público en Francia. Miríada: Investigación en Ciencias Sociales12: 13–28.
17.
DukelowFWhelanJBoltonR (2022) Introduction: Interrogating welfare stigma. Social Policy and Society21: 627–631.
18.
European Commission (2008) A Renewed Commitment to Social Europe: Reinforcing the Open Method of Coordination for Social Protection and Social Inclusion. Brussels: Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions.
GaffneySMillarM (2019) Rational skivers or desperate strivers? The problematisation of fraud in the Irish social protection system. Critical Social Policy40: 69–88.
22.
HallaertJ-J (2020) Inequality, poverty, and social protection in Bulgaria. Working Paper WP/20/147, 31 July. Bretton Woods, NH: International Monetary Fund.
23.
HeadworthS (2019) Getting to know you: Welfare fraud investigation and the appropriation of social ties. American Sociological Review84: 171–196.
HobbsEKEvansN (2017) Social work perceptions and identity: How social workers perceive public and professional attitudes towards their vocation and discipline. Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work29: 19–31.
26.
KaganMKachlonYSE (2022) Public perception of social workers as a source for providing help during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Social Work22: 1412–1430.
KostrzyńskaMLittlechildB (2024) How ‘helping’ can sustain the stigmatization of homeless people. Journal of Social Work. Epub ahead of print 15 October. DOI: 10.1177/14680173241279524.
29.
LavinasL (2015) Latin America: Anti-poverty schemes instead of social protection. Contemporary Readings in Law and Social Justice7: 112–171.
OsmanagaF (2019) Public perception about social work profession. European Journal of Sustainable Development8: 177–190.
41.
PenhaleBYoungJ (2015) A Review of the Literature Concerning What the Public and Users of Social Work Services in England Think About the Conduct and Competence of Social Workers. Norwich: UEA Consulting Ltd Norwich: University of East Anglia.
42.
PopL (2013) The decoupling of social policy reforms in Romania. Social Policy & Administration47: 161–181.
43.
PowerMJDevereuxERyanM (2022) Framing and shaming: The 2017 Welfare Cheats, Cheat Us All Campaign. Social Policy and Society21: 646–656.
RehejehF (2020) To come or not to come: A content analysis of the refugee crisis in the Romanian mass media. Saeculum50: 159–173.
46.
RuchGTurneyDWardA (2018) Relationship-Based Social Work, Second Edition: Getting to the Heart of Practice. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
47.
StrandellHWolfP (2019) Ageing Europe – Looking at the Lives of Older People. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
48.
TassevaIV (2016) Evaluating the performance of means-tested benefits in Bulgaria. Journal of Comparative Economics44: 919–935.
49.
T,ocSBuligescuB (2020) The impact of the guaranteed minimum income on reducing poverty in Romania. Sociologie Românească18: 63–88.
50.
TulebayevNN (2021) Practices of public perception of social work and social workers. Case of Kazakhstan. Public Policy and Administration20: 715–726.
51.
TylerI (2020) Stigma: The Machinery of Inequality. London: Zed Books.
52.
UN (2018) Promoting Inclusion through Social Protection. Report on the World Social Situation 2018. New York: United Nations – Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
53.
Van OorschotWRoosmaFMeulemanB, et al. (2017) The Social Legitimacy of Targeted Welfare: Attitudes to Welfare Deservingness. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
54.
VargaM (2014) Worker Protests in Post-Communist Romania and Ukraine: Striking with Tied Hands. Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press.
55.
VeigelR (2009) Community Perceptions of Social Workers. Arlington: The University of Texas.
56.
WelbournePDixonJ (2016) Child protection and welfare: Cultures, policies, and practices. European Journal of Social Work19: 827–840.
57.
YilmazVGurbuzturkA (2023) No common ground? Public knowledge about welfare spending in Turkey and its social divisions. Social Policy and Society22(3): 426–440.
