Feeling rules in child protection practice: navigating emotional complexities in cases of suspected child abuse

This research article draws on Norwegian child welfare workers’ memories from a specific day working with instances of suspected child abuse. Guided by Hochschild’s theory of feeling rules and emotion work, collective memory work methods were used to explore how social workers’ emotions are socially regulated and shaped by institutional contexts. Analysis of the data showed how feeling rules shaped three inter-connected dynamics: institutional demands that rendered the work experienced as an ‘impossible task’; expectations of urgency in situations framed as potentially dangerous and moral condemnation of child abuse that could extend into the condemnation of parents. Across these dynamics, ambivalence emerged as a marker of tension between ‘felt’ and ‘expected’ emotions, generating emotional strain and privileging procedural compliance over reflective and relational engagement. The study argues for ambivalence to be recognised as a legitimate and valuable professional response and for organisational conditions to be created that support reflective, relationally oriented practice.