Home Office urged to reconsider ‘unethical’ age assessments for unaccompanied asylum seeking children
Scientific methods include the use of x-ray and MRI scanning of teeth and bones. There is no evidence that they work better than Merton compliant social work assessments.
The UK Government has also provided no clarity on who will conduct the medical investigations, how requests are going to be raised, and who will bear the cost. Indeed, the Government’s own Scientific Advisory Committee has advised against the proposals.
A joint letter from BASW, Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) and the British Dental Association (BDA) has laid out these concerns to the Home Secretary and called on him to therefore ditch the plans immediately. Our concerns on these problematic and unethical proposals were also raised by Baroness Brinton in a recent parliamentary debate.
Commenting, BASW CEO Dr Ruth Allen said:
“Age assessments are a complex, specialist piece of work, which needs to be done holistically, fairly and objectively by a social worker, not a machine. There is no evidence provided that biological methods deliver greater certainty on age determination than the currently used Merton process.
“We are also conscious that the government has not explained what shortfalls have been identified in the Merton process to warrant a change nor how it could be improved. We are also deeply concerned that if a young person is to refuse a biological method, then they would be considered to be over 18. This is coercion.
“In short, the adoption of biological methods violates long-standing rights in relation to informed medical consent, offer no real advantages in assessing age and produce a procedural quagmire of unallocated responsibilities. We need to ditch these plans immediately.”
BASW will continue to campaign vigorously against the adoption of scientific methods. Read our full statement here.
