Young separated asylum seekers are among the most vulnerable groups in State care, writes Carl O'Brien
There has been no outcry, no demand for an inquiry and no search for accountability. Two hundred and fifty young people have disappeared from care over the last five years. Serious concerns have been expressed about the risk of sexual exploitation these children face. And few, if any, welfare checks take place for children reunited with adults claiming to be their family members.
If this happened to Irish children in State care, there would be cries of protest and anger. However, it is happening to young asylum seekers in the same care system, and there has been barely a whimper of public debate. Although they represent a minority of asylum seekers, separated children who arrive in the country are among the most vulnerable groups in State care.
About half of unaccompanied minors are reunited with family members, although a significant number - 174 in 2004, 225 in 2003 - end up in the care of health authorities. In all, around 200 young asylum seekers are in State care at any one time.
Health authorities believe most separated children have been either trafficked or smuggled into the State. Many come to be reunited with their families or relations who are already here. However, some are trafficked for sexual or financial exploitation.
What's most extraordinary about the experiences of young asylum seekers is that health authorities, who have a duty of care to all children in residential care, have adopted a two-tier care system which discriminates between Irish children and separated children seeking asylum.
For example, the accommodation and level of care for young asylum seekers is not of a standard equal to that provided to other children in State care under the Child Care Act (1991). Older separated children seeking asylum typically reside in private hostels or residential centres that do not necessarily meet national standards and are not subject to inspections by the Irish Social Services Inspectorate (ISSI).
Staffing levels are also a major concern. Although each separated child is allocated a social worker, underfunding of the services means they are often in the care of unqualified or untrained private hostel staff. In addition, there is no safe house for victims of trafficking, despite evidence that some missing children have fallen into the hands of traffickers.
As the HSE said in correspondence obtained by The Irish Times last year under the Freedom of Information Act: "[ We] have on several occasions taken children into care following their rescue from desperate situations by the GNIB [Garda National Immigration Bureau]. It is also a matter of fact that the vast majority of children coming into care have been trafficked into the country . . . "
Accommodation standards and missing children are just part of the problem. There are also deep concerns over the lack of checks for young asylum seekers reunited with adults claiming to be family members. Hundreds of children have been reunited with adults in Ireland, but few, if any, health authorities provide proper follow-up care or monitoring of children after they are reunited.
As a report commissioned by HSE itself concluded: "Family reunification is poorly monitored and the processes leading to decisions are rushed and inadequately validated. They are not reviewed internally or externally . . . "
The HSE has tried to remedy some of the chief concerns over the manner in which these children are being cared for. It has improved accommodation standards for younger children and says it is improving the reunification process. However, it is clearly frustrated at the lack of funds being released from the Department of Health, despite repeated requests.
Reviews of services for separated children by the HSE in the east coast area and the south have both highlighted a range of concerns among officials over inappropriate standards of care for the hundreds of children in care. These reviews say it has been forced to take staff from other parts of the service to provide at least "a minimum standard of care" to children seeking asylum.
However, in the main, funding requests to the Department of Health since 2001 "remained unanswered, despite repeated submissions".
The department, for its part, has expressed surprise that services cannot be enhanced within existing resources, especially in light of the declining numbers of unaccompanied minors arriving.
As a battle for funding continues in the background, the consequences of presiding over a flawed care system, where children are still at risk of abuse, are serious. The horrific death of Victoria Climbié, a nine year old from the Ivory Coast tortured to death by her London-based grandaunt after being sent to Britain by her parents, illustrated the danger of a poor child-protection system for separated children.
Closer to home, the Ferns report outlined in simple, stark terms the horrific alleged abuse of more than 100 young people over 40 years and how, in many cases, State authorities failed to protect them.
With evidence of serious failures in the child-protection system for hundreds of separated young people seeking asylum, is there to be another report in the coming years on how another group of children were similarly failed by the State?
Time will tell. In the meantime, the failure of authorities to do their utmost to protect unaccompanied minors seeking asylum is placing already vulnerable children at further unnecessary risk. The consequences for children, and the State, may only become fully apparent in the years to come.