This paper explores the practice of evidence-based policy in a Swedish healthcare context. The study focused on how policymakers in the specific working group, the Priority-Setting Group (PSG), handled the various forms of evidence and values and their competing rationalities, when producing the Swedish National Guidelines for heart diseases that are based on both clinical and economic evidence and are established to support explicit priority-setting in healthcare. The study contributes to the theoretical and practical debate on evidence-based policy (EBP) by illustrating how the practical tensions of coming to agreement were managed, to a large extent, through deliberation and by creativity.

This paper contributes to the knowledge on the governing of healthcare in a democratic context in times of austerity. Resource allocation in healthcare is a highly political issue but the political nature of healthcare is not always made clear and the role of politicians is often obscure. The absence of politicians in rationing/disinvestment arrangements is usually explained with blame-shifting arguments; they prefer to delegate "the burden of responsibility" to administrative agencies or professionals. Drawing on a case where Swedish regional politicians involved themselves in setting priorities at a more detailed level than previously, the findings suggest that the subject of "blame avoidance" is more complicated than usually assumed. A qualitative case study was designed, involving semi-structured interviews with 14 regionally elected politicians in one Swedish health authority, conducted in June 2011. The interviews were analysed through a thematic analysis in accordance with the "framework approach" by Ritchie and Lewis. Findings show that an overarching strategy among the politicians was to appear united and to suppress conflict, which served to underpin the vital strategy of bringing the medical profession into the process. A key finding is the importance that politicians, when appearing "backstage", attach to the prevention of blame from the medical profession. This case illustrates that one has to take into account that priority settings requires various types of skills and knowledges - not only technical but also political and social. Another important lesson points toward the need to broaden the political leadership repertoire, as leadership in the case of priority setting is not about politicians being all in or all out. The results suggest that in a priority-setting process it is of importance to have politics on-board at an early stage to secure loyalty to the process, although not necessarily being involved in all details.

I detta kapitel kopplas den internationella diskussionen kring medborgarskap och demenssjukdom och hur denna kan hjälpa till att förstå den svenska situationen för personer demenssjukdom till frågan kring ställföreträdarskap vad gäller beslutsfattande och personer med demenssjukdom.

Since living with dementia implies increasing difficulties in taking charge of rights due to cognitive as well as communicative impairments, many people with dementia are vulnerable and in need of support in order to realize full citizenship. In Sweden, all adults right to self-determination is strongly emphasized in law, regulations, and policies. Further, and in contrast to the situation in many other countries, people living with dementia cannot be declared as incompetent of making decisions concerning social care and their right to self-determination cannot legally be taken away. The article shows that in the Swedish welfare system, the focus is more on protecting the self-determination of citizens than on supporting people in making decisions and exercising citizenship. Subsequently, this causes legally constructed zones of inclusion and exclusion. This article examines and problematizes how different institutional contexts, legal constructions, norms, and practices in Sweden affect the management of issues concerning guardianship, supported decision-making and self-determination, and outline the implications for people living with dementia.

In Sweden, every citizen has equal right to social-care. The purpose of this session is to investigate how social support is distributed for people with dementia and to compare this distribution in an ethnicity perspective. A statistical analysis will be presented based on data in progress.