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.