Analysis: Asylum seekers' age under scrutiny

But the immigration authorities are keen to explore other options, including the use of dental x-rays, reports Sue Learner.

More than 40 per cent of unaccompanied children seeking asylum in the UK have their age disputed and are processed as adults, according to Home Office figures.

If they are children, they are entitled to local authority care. But if they are processed as adults, it is another story. They get little or no social work support or education and are housed in hostel accommodation with adults. In some cases, they can be held for weeks in adult detention centres.

Determining a young person's age can be difficult but it is vital to get it right, says Lisa Nandy, policy adviser for the Children's Society and chair of the Refugee Children's Consortium: "It is a child protection issue. The last thing we want is adults in the children's system and vice versa."

Currently, if a child has no documentary evidence, immigration officers will interview the child and make a judgment.

A report by the Children's Commissioner for England, Sir Al Aynsley-Green, calls for the stated government policy of giving applicants the benefit of the doubt to be implemented (CYP Now, 5-11 March). In Claiming Asylum at a Screening Unit as an Unaccompanied Child, based on his witnessing of a screening unit in Croydon, he says: "Immigration officers should not have the authority to dispute their age".

If the applicant disagrees with the immigration officer's decision, the Home Office will accept a local authority age assessment. But many also view this assessment procedure with suspicion.

"We are concerned that local authority has a vested interest, because it is responsible if the young person is under 18 and it has to provide care," says Nandy.

Court responsibility

A recent ruling, uncovered last week by CYP Now, declared local authorities can be challenged over the age and identity of unaccompanied children arriving in the UK. In a case brought by the Children's Legal Centre, the Court of Appeal ruled that decisions on a young person's age and identity rest with the court (CYP Now, 5-11 March).

Aynsley-Green says the ruling brings independence into the assessment process. The ruling was also welcomed by Nandy. But, she adds: "We don't want the court to become the default position, with children having to go through a long legal process."

She advocates an alternative method to determine their age, which was proposed in a report by the Immigration Law Practitioners' Association (ILPA) last year.

The report When is a Child not a Child? Asylum, Age Disputes and the Process of Age Assessment called for independently funded regional age assessment centres. The centres would be multi-agency and the young person would be referred to the centre as soon as they arrived in the country.

Dr Heaven Crawley, director of the Centre for Migration Policy Research at Swansea University, says: "Another approach is needed. Home Office staff and social workers need training and support to assess the age and needs of asylum-seeking children and young people. It should be separate from immigration control procedures and social care provision."

Ian Johnson, chief executive of the British Association of Social Workers, also backs an independent regional panel and says: "We want these children to have the same rights as other children. Currently, it's at odds with Every Child Matters."

In January, the Home Office's Border & Immigration Agency (BIA) published its reform plans for unaccompanied asylum seeking children. Better Outcomes: The Way Forward pledged to improve the system for assessing the age of those claiming to be unaccompanied asylum-seeking children.

The BIA promises to set up regional specialist centres to assess age. It is also setting up a working group of medical practitioners, children's charities and the children's commissioner to review assessment. The group will examine government proposals for compulsory dental x-rays.

X-ray concerns

The British Dental Association (BDA), the Royal College of Paediatricians and the Royal College of Radiologists have all voiced their opposition to this. Peter Ward, chief executive of the BDA, says: "The method isn't accurate, appropriate or ethical. The BDA is gravely concerned."

The BDA says studies reveal dental x-rays can estimate the age of children from three to 13, but there can be a margin of error of two years when estimating the age of young adults. It also claims asylum-seeking children have the right to refuse a dental x-ray because it is not of direct benefit to their health. Nandy says: "The medical community is united on this."

Terry Smith, Save the Children's child protection specialist, agrees. He says: "Unaccompanied asylum-seeking children are extremely vulnerable. Examinations could be confusing and intrusive. Immigration officers do a difficult job, but they are not trained to make judgments about the age of a child."

AGE DISPUTES OF UNACCOMPANIED CHILDREN

- According to Home Office figures from 2006, more than 5,500 asylum applicants claimed to be unaccompanied children. Around 3,250 were accepted as children by immigration officers, while the rest had their age disputed and were processed as adults

- Some EU countries use techniques such as x-ray analysis to determine age in immigrants according to the Border & Immigration Agency

- The British Dental Association questions the accuracy of using dental scans to determine the age of young people over 13. Various studies suggest there is a large margin for error because children and young people develop at different rates.