In the profession of social work grief can be pathologized, medicalized, and manualized. Such is the case with diagnostic manuals such ICD11's "Prolonged Grief Disorder" and DSM 5's "Persistent Complex Bereavement Disorder." However, what should be the response and the practice when the world is under assault by a virus? Particularly since the illness, death, and disruption this virus has caused are the rightful subjects of sadness and suffering? Not to mention the fact that the consequences of those hardships have been continuously felt for nearly one full year. The pandemic has caused many different forms, and many layers of loss from personal to professional. They include the obvious and direct ones like the death and illness of loved ones to the less readily evident, such as the loss of traditional classroom spaces or the loss of the sense of community. The layers include the inability to grieve according to custom, to participate in rituals, travel, hug or touch, as well as being robbed of graduations, birthdays, and wedding, or just meeting mates at a pub or sporting event. The authors in this section take up the issue of documenting the compound losses and complex nature of grief, mourning, and bereavement and how social workers creatively negotiate it, personally and professionally. Complex grief requires an array of responses. Although all the essays in this section are written from a western geographical position, they offer different cultural perspectives on the phenomenon of grief. They describe wrestling with personal grief, collective grief, and disenfranchised grief. By relating to the larger aspects of the person in its environment, like culture, religion and spirituality, social workers are well

There is a need for more knowledge on how people with substance use problems (SUPs) understand and experience user involvement when receiving care. In this systematic review, we identify and reanalyse the existing qualitative research that explores how people with lived experiences of substance use understand user involvement, and their experiences of key practices for achieving user involvement. We systematically searched seven electronic databases. We applied Noblit and Hare’s meta-ethnography, revised by Malterud, to identify, translate, and summarise the studies. The electronic search resulted in 2065 articles. We conducted a full-text evaluation of 63 articles, of which 12 articles met the inclusion criteria. The primary studies’ synthesis reveals three different understandings of user involvement: user involvement as joint meaning production, points of view represented, and user representation in welfare services. Key practices for achieving user involvement involved seeing and respecting the service user as a unique person, the quality of the interactional process, and the scope of action for people with SUPs, as well as professionals, including issues of stigma, power, and fatalism. The metasynthesis recognises the ambiguity of the concept of user involvement concept and the importance of including the service user’s perspective when defining user involvement. The analysis of key practices emphasises the importance of relational processes and contextual aspects when developing user involvement concepts.

The World Health Organization (WHO) starts its timeline of events associated with the Covid-19 global pandemic with an entry on 31 December 2019. It references a statement issued by the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission (located in the Hubei Province in the People's Republic of China) which merely observed an uptick in "viral pneumonia." Less than two weeks later, on 11 January 2020, the Chinese media reported "the first death from the novel coronavirus." On 23 January 2020, Chinese officials imposed a lockdown in Wuhan and surrounding areas in a desperate attempt to control the growing epidemic. While global attention was fixated on the tsunami of illness and death in Wuhan, WHO's timeline notes the ominous trickle of first new infections elsewhere. A case in Japan on 16 January; in the United States on 21 January; in France on 24 January; and in the United Arab Emirates on 29 January. The world began watching warily as the rhythm of initial cases and first deaths swelled into clusters, inundating health systems which buckled under the weight despite heroic efforts of their personnel.

As neoliberalisation and other global disruptions change the understanding of human rights and social justice for social workers, how are protests organised by marginalised groups against social welfare and public health regimes understood and participated, or even resisted, by social workers? Although there is a vast literature on protest and community organising in the social work tradition, there is less exploration of marginalised groups organising against the systems in which social workers are employed, thereby leading to dilemmas for social workers. Hence, more knowledge is necessary about social workers' capability to respond to such protests. Using collective action and social movement theories, this paper introduces a conceptual framework in order to identify key factors and variables when marginalised groups organise against social welfare and public health regimes and social workers are involved. The conceptual framework concerns social workers' value negotiation of human rights and social justice principles, collective action framing, ethical decision-making, and ultimately, the thought process behind a social worker's response to collective actions against social welfare and public health regimes. SAMMENDRAG Nyliberalisme og andre globale utfordringer endrer forståelsen av menneskerettigheter og sosial rettferdighet for sosialarbeidere. Hvordan blir protest fra marginaliserte grupper mot velferds-eller folkehelseregimer forstått og deltatt i-eller også motarbeidet-av sosialarbeidere? Tross omfattende litteratur om protest og samfunnsarbeid i sosialt arbeid, er marginaliserte grupper som organiserer seg mot systemene sosialarbeidere er ansatt iog dilemmaene dette fører til for sosialarbeiderelite utforsket. Derfor er det behov for mer kunnskap om sosialarbeideres muligheter til å svare på slike protester. Artikkelen bygger på teorier om sosiale bevegelser og kollektiv handling, og introduserer et begrepsmessig rammeverk for å identifisere sentrale faktorer