Commission Website: National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention
here to return to the Submission Index
Submission to National Inquiry
into Children in Immigration Detention from
the Coalition Assisting Refugees
After Detention (CARAD) Perth, WA.
The Coalition
Assisting Refugees After Detention (CARAD)
CARAD is a group
of volunteers, supporters and donors formed from January 2000, in an attempt
to meet some of the range of essential and urgent needs of refugees who
reach Perth, following assessment of their claim while in a detention
centre. We have now met in excess of 2,000 refugees, not all of whom remain
in WA, and have provided them with compassionate, practical assistance.
We estimate that there are about 1000 individual volunteers, supporters
and donors affiliated with CARAD.
Objectives of
CARAD
- To provide practical
assistance with settlement needs to those refugees, released from a
detention centre, who hold a temporary protection visa; or in some cases,
a bridging visa.
- To advocate for
particular individuals and groups in these categories
- To campaign for
the promotion and protection of the rights of asylum seekers and refugees.
We are a loose coalition
of individuals and organizations of mixed humanitarian, age, political
and faith backgrounds, motivated by the way that refugees with temporary
protection are treated by the law and the public policies that have been
adopted by the Government. A temporary protection visa denies essential
services provided to refugees who have permanent protection. This includes
denial of family reunion.
Volunteers provide
a huge range of services to refugees, including finding housing and settlement
assistance, completing application forms for entitlements, enrolling children
at schools, teaching English, organising community based information sessions,
public speaking and advocacy for refugee individuals and families. We
campaign and lobby to change state and Commonwealth laws and the policies
of mandatory detention and temporary protection for people acknowledged
to be refugees. Individuals and agencies also support the work of CARAD
with donations of furniture and household goods, clothing and money for
refugees with temporary protection.
Increasingly our
attention has been drawn to the conditions in detention centres, especially
from experiences related by refugees on release and from media reports
of events occurring there. A number of asylum seekers in detention are
in contact with CARAD volunteers and relay their concerns to us.
Introduction
CARAD opposes mandatory
detention for asylum seekers whose claim is being processed. Along with
many bodies whose focus is to promote human rights and work for social
justice, CARAD holds that the Australian Government is in breach of a
number of international treaties and human rights conventions in its treatment
of asylum seekers. It must seek alternatives to mandatory detention -
and also give people found to be refugees, permanent protection with the
entitlements to which refugees from offshore assessments have.
Our organization
holds that once identity, health and security checks have been completed,
the claims for refugee status should be processed in the community.
CARAD notes that
the refugees we are currently meeting have been in detention for many
months, some for up to two years. There are people with whom we are in
telephone contact who have been detained for three and two years. Although
their claim has been rejected, there is no country to which they are able
to repatriate. Visitors to centres tell us that there is palpable despair.
There is little to do and no hope: there is no known future and people
have had no contact with family.
Self-harm and threat
of self-harm, mental illness and physical manifestations of illness are
apparently common for detainees, but approaches to alleviating this distress
are pharmaceutical and/or isolation. Such solutions do not address the
issues for each person. There have been protests and riots at some centres.
These are unacceptable
conditions for every one, and especially for children, to live in and
to observe.
Letters recently
sent from Nauru, where there are many children, to one man we know, tell
of this despair and loss of hope for the future; they tell of the iron
curtain behind which the asylum seekers live and the lack of contact with
the outside world and their total disempowerment.
Despite official
denials, detention centres are prisons, but the conditions do not match
those for offenders. There are standard guidelines for prisoners held
in other Australian correctional services. At the least, convicted offenders
know the length of their sentence. Children would never be incarcerated
with adults in any other Australian prison.
While mandatory detention
remains the means of dealing with "unauthorised arrivals", then
a similar set of criteria to those which operate in prisons in order to
maintain minimum standards and the basic rights of offenders should assist
broadly in the improvement of conditions for detainees. This would include
an Independent Inspector of Detention Centres.
This brief submission
addresses our concerns about mandatory detention and its effects on very
vulnerable children, as well as bringing particular cases, with parental
permission, to your attention. We would be pleased to appear before any
hearings should you think that helpful.
We outline concerns
related to all of the terms of reference, but especially address terms
2 and 4; viz
- The mandatory
detention of child asylum seekers and other children arriving in Australia
without visas, and alternatives to detention
- The impact of
detention on the well-being and healthy development of children, including
their long term development
The provison is that
we have not, of course, had access to detention centres and rely on the
stories of refugees, as well as media reports and the publicly and privately
expressed concerns of a number of professionals and representatives of
church bodies who have visited.
Because of the guardianship
issues involved with refugee children who are not accompanied by a parent,
we have little direct contact with them. We remain concerned at their
incarceration, about the conditions of care in detention and also provisions
when released. Other organizations will be making submissions to this
Inquiry in regard to these children.
CARAD volunteers
have, however, met many children of all ages who have been in a detention
centre. They are our major concern. Although there have been more than
500 children detained
at any one time through
2000-01, we argue that the refugee children we meet after detention must
be recognised as a continuing vulnerable population with special needs.
As yet we have had
not met any children detained at Nauru or Manus, but parents of some are
known to us, and they hold grave fears, with some justification, that
they won't be reunited.
In the introduction
we want to suggest that a tool, the trajectory, could help understand
the anxiety and uncertainty, common to this group of refugees and detainees.
It may help to understand the ongoing anxiety and uncertainty of refugees.
Skilled mental health
professionals have been able to identify three stages of the refugee experience
that can contribute to mental illness, in particular the now well-accepted
syndrome of post-traumatic stress disorder. These are the conditions of
persecution leading to the decision to flee the country, the journey to
safety and the arrival/settlement experience. There is a reasonable expectation
that these will be sequential.
While it is critical
that, for assessment purposes or as a critique of policy and law, the
impact of detention on children be distinguished, it seems to us that
while refugees -and observers- can identify particular times or components
of their experience, and while the mental health literature can isolate
particular phases and consequent dislocations, it may be a false distinction
for individual experience and mental health outcomes.
It seems to us that
the detention remains, in most part, one component of the journey for
which safety and freedom are the end goals. Many of the concerns of asylum
seekers and refugees are temporal; how long will I be here: our house
was burned before the snow came: when can my father come: we lived in
the mountains for six months: this started when X came to power: we only
have ten months left on our visa, etc. They have no control over any of
these matters, a condition to which there are different individual responses.
"Trajectory"
is a descriptive tool, developed by medical sociologists thirty or so
years ago, to understand illness over a period of time, which may assist
with understanding the refugee journey. It is a line or pathway that develops
under given forces and can be used to describe the way in which the course
of an illness is expected to take shape. The experience belongs though,
not only to the patient (or the refugee), but also to those managing their
case, whose expectations can standardise the outcome.
There is nothing
precise about illness trajectories. There need be nothing linear. The
length of time remains uncertain and new circumstances re-define them.
For example, people with cancer might die more quickly that anyone expected
or have very long remissions; a seemingly minor viral infection can have
devastating consequences.
There is nothing
precise, either, about refugee trajectories; nothing linear, nothing sequential,
nothing certain. They see others in detention who came later, leave earlier.
They get no information as to the status of their claim. There is no end
point, no sentence length. And neither is there any end once they are
determined to be refugees. It is our contention that the uncertainty now
generated for acknowledged refugees has returned them to the status of
persecuted again.
When released, refugees
with temporary protection have no idea what is to become of their lives
in Australia. There is much speculation among all refugees, including
those not from Afghanistan, as to their likely fate in Australia; about
when they can secure family reunion and about the difficulty of making
any plans for their future.
Even though objectively
safe, detained asylum seekers whose future remains undetermined for months
and years, cannot be said to have arrived at any end point. There may
not be one for people who cam by boat as "unauthorised arrivals".
And the Parliament ensured that it would be almost impossible for any
unauthorised arrival to settle permanently in Australia from September
27th 2001.
The insecurity now
generated for refugees about their future, especially those from Afghanistan,
has pushed them backwards along their trajectory.
But despite their
country of origin, as the first group of people with claims for permanent
protection are soon due to be assessed, a palpable anxiety is building
in the temporary refugee community. Uncertainty and insecurity are heightened
as they contemplate a future over which they have no control, for which
they can make no plans; a future that might take them backwards.
So the refugee trajectory
is marked by uncertainty and any ability to plan, a condition that dis-empowers
and takes the capacity to make a future away from parents, and one felt
very keenly by the child refugees we know. This contributes in negative
ways to the well-being and healthy development of child refugees. Their
journey can never be over until their status as refugees is resolved.
Detention and
the rights of refugee children.
Given that most of
the world's refugees are women and children it is unsurprising that children
have reached Australia by unauthorised means. It should be emphasised
that the government's policies to detain children and unaccompanied minors
do not protect the best interests of those children. The treatment of
child asylum seekers in Australia contravenes the Convention on the Rights
of the Child by breaching a number of its Articles (see below).
Australia agreed
to be bound by the Convention on the Rights of the Child in December 1990
when it ratified the Convention. The Australian government has made the
Convention a "relevant international instrument" under the federal
Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Act 1986.
The UNHCR has directed
that minors who are asylum seekers should not be detained, the considered
view also of CARAD. The Convention provides that children should only
be detained as a last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of
time (Article 37b).
Alternatives to the
detention of children which involve the child remaining with her or his
parents out of detention should be the policy norm in Australia. CARAD
also opposes the splitting of families and where there are two parents,
both should be assessed in the community, not just the mother.
The Inquiry is examining:
- the provisions
made by Australia to implement its international human rights obligations
regarding child asylum seekers, including unaccompanied minors
- the mandatory
detention of child asylum seekers and other children arriving in Australia
without visas, and alternatives to their detention
- the impact of
detention on the well-being and healthy development of children, including
their long-term development.
- the adequacy and
effectiveness of the policies, agreements, laws, rules and practices
governing children in immigration detention or child asylum seekers
and refugees residing in the community after a period of detention,
with particular reference to:
- the conditions
under which children are detained
- health, including
mental health, development and disability
- education
- culture
- guardianship
issues; and security practices in detention
- the conditions
- the additional
measures and safeguards which may be required in detention facilities
to protect the human rights and best interests of all detained children
- the additional
measures and safeguards which may be required to protect the human rights
and best interests of child asylum seekers and refugees residing in
the community after a period of detention.
The Minister for
Immigration is able to grant a bridging visa to a child under 18 (but
not their parent/s), pending the resolution of their application to remain
in Australia. A child released from detention would therefore be denied
the protection and assistance of his or her parents. However, this section
of the Act does and should apply to those children not accompanied by
an adult, and there is no need to detain them during the time their claim
for refugee status is being assessed.
CARAD claims that
not only has Australia failed to implement the obligations accepted as
a signatory to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child to this population
of children, but that those obligations have been flouted. These failures
are apparent in the imposition of mandatory detention and the conditions
of temporary protection. The best interests of the child are neither considered
nor protected.
In order to preserve
those rights, no child should ever be kept in a detention centre. The
negative experiences of adult detainees are magnified for children whose
innate vulnerability is compounded by the conditions that drove them from
their country, who do not have access to counselling, to an appropriate
curriculum for general education or for English language or for suitable
play experiences. They also in very touching ways, often take responsibilities
beyond their years for protecting and making decisions about a parent
or sibling.
CARAD works with
a range of organizations and agencies and is able to refer children to
them as necessary. We want to take this opportunity to pay tribute to
the high quality and respectful services provided to refugee children
by the counsellors from the Association for Torture and Trauma Survivors;
to the school teachers who took risks to enrol the first groups of children
at Intensive Language Centres; and to those church schools who made room
for refugee children. They have each made a statement by their actions
that recognises the rights of these children.
Since the first group
of refugees holding Temporary Protection Visas (785) arrived in January
2000, we have been perturbed by a consistent pattern of stories about
the conditions at Port Hedland and Curtin Detention Centres, as well as
of individual experiences of detention. (In many cases they mirror the
more publicised stories of Woomera detainees). We have been increasingly
drawn to issues related to detention, and increasingly concerned at the
implications of this policy.
Some complaints made
by refugees, relate to the slow processing of claims and the lack of information
as to progress; to the conditions in the centre, including breaches of
privacy, general hygiene and cleanliness, maintenance of equipment, the
early ban on watching TV news; a perceived unfairness in the application
of a range of rules; staff taunts and threats and denial of access to
needed health care and health information.
We continue to be
appalled by ongoing reports that detainees, children included, are identified
and called by number, not by name; the names apparently too difficult
to be pronounced by staff in detention centres. A common story is that
children of all ages do not have enough clothing while in detention. We
have heard of parents needing to work to earn the points so as to buy
nappies and clothes.
There are patterns
of issues about which complaints are made, and while most allegations
clearly have substance, we are not able to persuade complainants to formalise
their grievance, as they fear reprisal, in the form of denial of permanent
protection. It is also feared that news of such could identify them in
the country they have left, making their family there vulnerable.
This fear is itself
an indictment of the actual and/or perceived DIMIA processes; at the very
least the people acknowledged to be refugees should feel safe and be safe
from the possibility of reprisal or punishment for speaking about their
experiences while in Australia.
Conditions for
children in Detention Centre
A point to be considered
is that the children who arrive as "unauthorised entrants" have
direct experience of the conditions that caused their parents to flee.
Children are incarcerated with troubled, anxious men and women in a prison
like environment with limited space and barbed/razor wire fencing. They
tell of witnessing self harm, fights, attempted suicide, being temporarily
separated from a parent for no reason and being punished and/or threatened
by centre staff. These experiences resonate with the violence they have
left. We remain concerned about these and similar anecdotes, but parents
and older children are reluctant to complain, even when they leave detention,
for fear of reprisal. Detention Centres are no place for children
As set out in the
Convention on the Rights of the Child, all children are due the following
rights:
- the right of
all children to enjoy all the rights of the Convention without discrimination
of any kind (article 2)
- the right to survival
and development (article 6)
- the best interests
of the child as a primary consideration in all actions concerning children
(article 3(1))
- the right of all
children to participate meaningfully in all matters affecting them (article
12)
- the right to family
life (articles 5, 9, 18).
The following information
is paraphrased from discussions with AseTTS, and is included, as it reflects
the comments relayed to CARAD volunteers by refugees CARAD claims that
not only has Australia failed to implement the obligations accepted as
a signatory to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child to this population
of children, but that those obligations have been flouted. These failures
are apparent in the imposition of mandatory detention and the conditions
of temporary protection. The best interests of the child are neither considered
nor protected.
Living conditions
in detention are very difficult for families living with almost no privacy
and little to no control over their circumstances. Bathroom areas are
not kept clean; most detention centres are in hot climates with little
shaded area outside and air conditioning is, we are told, temperamental.
Head counts continue by day and night thus interrupting sleep, a critical
need for any one in these circumstances.
A number of issues
go to the heart of parenting practices and decisions. The deprivations
and inflexibilities must add to the disempowerment of this population.
They could also undermine the authority of parents in the eyes of their
children.
For instance;
Meals are at set
times which doesn't always work well for infants, toddlers and children.
If they are unable or unwilling to eat at the set times they go without
food.
It is sometimes
difficult to launder and dry clothing.
Clothes are taken
away from detainees on arrival. They are often left with one outfit
to wear. This causes problems particularly with infants and breast-
feeding mothers. Often there are not enough blankets particularly for
young babies and children to keep warm. Fathers of infants have been
required to work for tokens in order to pay for nappies etc. Some time
ago a CARAD volunteer met a woman sent on a 14 hour journey from detention
by bus with an infant. She had no nappies given her for the journey.
Play areas are
not suitable and there is a dearth of suitable/stimulating play resources
and toys.
Keys are necessary
to get anywhere in the detention centre and children, like their parents,
are treated as prisoners.
ACM staff and others
are often accused of interfering in disciplinary and other measures
they think parents should be exercising, or in ways that unaccompanied
children should be behaving. We have been told that staff members have
hit, or shouted at children, whether the parent is present or not.
There is little or
nothing to do and to keep occupied, which is a complaint of all detainees.
Recent first hand reports from teachers have verified the fact that schooling
is inadequate and the children have no curriculum to follow. Adaptations
for individual children are not made.
It seems inevitable
that there will be developmental delays simply because children are in
an environment where their needs, including their emotional needs, are
not met and they are surrounded by troubled adults, often their own parents.
Many medical and
health problems go undiagnosed or are not dealt with. In the last few
months, the media have brought two cases of children with severe psychiatric
illness to public attention with the stories of one at Villawood and another
from Woomera.
Post Traumatic Stress
Disorder of children is often neither looked for, nor identified, even
when problems are obvious and reported by the parent. These symptoms may
include withdrawal, depression, acting out and/or aggressive behaviour,
bedwetting, teeth grinding, nightmares and twitching.
As outlined below,
many of the children carry these problems with them on release. Non-identification
of a range of mental health problems and lack of torture and trauma counseling
services give reason for concern. Health services are inadequate and dental
care is limited to extractions.
There are concerns
about the lack of cultural and religious awareness among staff, not only
ACM staff, but also DIMIA and visiting staff. Few seem to have much appreciation
of the circumstances leading to reasons for their clientele leaving home
and then being detained, and few are able to deal with the numbers of
incidents that arise, except with a response that is used in prisons.
Staff still walk on prayer mats and do not knock before entering a room.
The Convention on
the Rights of the Child acknowledges that a child should grow up in a
family environment. We are disturbed by the lack of assistance in locating
family members, including
children, and friends
who are or who may be in Australia, or off shore detention centres. Detainees
and refugees should be informed that the Red Cross could assist with tracing
family members.
Children known
to CARAD volunteers
One of our (CARAD)
priorities is to provide clothes, including shoes, for children, as well
as toys and resources for school on release. We try to ensure they are
enrolled at school as soon as is practicable, and, as donated funds allow,
we try to ensure that there are some recreational and leisure activities
for them. We also provide support for their parent/s.
Those children, classified
as unaccompanied minors, are met on release by representatives of their
guardian, the Department of Community Development. Although we have little
contact with them, we have some major concerns about arrangements in and
out of detention for this group of asylum seekers and refugees, and understand
that submissions from other organizations will address relevant matters.
CARAD volunteers
who meet the newly released refugees continue to note that many refugees,
including children, require urgent medical and dental care for long-standing
and/or non-addressed health problems when they arrive in Perth.
The following fourteen
cases illustrate a range of experiences of child refugees, whose parents
have given us permission to include. Those of us who know the children
acknowledge the poignancy and grief that lies behind the incidents, as
well as the trust invested in us in this permission.
NOTE: the cases
referred to are confidential
Summary
As cautioned above,
CARAD volunteers have not visited children while they are in detention.
Our knowledge of conditions is derived both from what we have been told,
as well as the behaviours of children on release. Despite the small number
of cases we have outlined, there is a disturbing pattern of issues that
crosses the time at which they were in detention, as well as the center
they were in. The problems continue for children following their release,
not only because of experiences to date, but also because of the vulnerable
health status of refugee children and the increasing uncertainty round
their status.
A case can be supported
to claim that Australia is neglectful of its obligations to children as
set out in the Convention on the Rights of The Child.
For example: as set
out in the Convention, children in detention have the right to a range
of protections.
It is our contention
that the following obligations are not met in detention - as others may
not be:
- the highest attainable
standard of health (article 24)
- education (articles
28 and 29)
- protection from
all forms of physical or mental violence, sexual abuse and exploitation
(articles 19 and 34)
- protection as
an asylum seeking child (article 22)
- recovery from
the effects of neglect, exploitation, abuse, torture or ill-treatment,
or armed conflicts (article 39)
- not be deprived
of liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily, with detention only in conformity
with the law, as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate
period of time (article 37)
- access to legal
assistance and the right to challenge their detention (article 37)
- rest and play
(article 31)
- privacy (article
16)
- a standard of
living adequate for physical, mental, spiritual, moral and social development
(article 27) if detained, be treated with humanity and respect for their
inherent dignity and in a manner which takes into account their age
(article 37).
It will be important
for medical advisers to establish whether the prognosis of illnesses and
chronic conditions of individual children have been compromised by what
appears to be ineffective diagnosis and treatment. Almost every child
referred to in the cases above has required the services of skilled torture
and trauma counselors, a service that we believe should be available to
all people in detention, including children.
To summarise problems
for children as evidenced by the cases [note: these are in a confidential
submission], these include, while in detention,
- undiagnosed and/or
untreated health problems
- neglect of the
concerns of parents for children and lack of access to effective medical
and health care
- lack of an education
program
- identified and
called by number and not by name
- fears created
by being detained with adults whose behaviours may be frightening
- concern for their
parent/s
And after release,
- aggressive or
untoward behaviour
- withdrawal and
depression
- night terrors
and dreams
- loss of trust
- return to bed
wetting
- concern for their
parent/s and siblings
- it is not uncommon
either for children to lose time from school, because of headache, stomach
ache and as one so eloquently said "heartache".
We have been privileged
to learn of ways that refugee children adapt to their experience and can
only deduce that the conditions they left, as well as conditions in detention
have contributed to the dreams, bedwetting, illnesses, fear of loss and
bullying.
It is impossible
to expect that social reintegration or recovery from trauma (Article 39)
will occur when the community is receiving hostile messages inviting vilification
of refugees, and there has been no moral leadership to explain the needs
of these people for a safe place.
Post detention
experiences for children
As outlined in the
introduction, detention is one component in the refugee trajectory and
we want to bring some issues to the Inquiry that do not arise directly
from the terms of reference. Refugee children are further disadvantaged
by the conditions of the Temporary Protection Visa for them and their
parent/s. We outline four concerns.
School and English
Language
In the early days
there was even confusion as to whether refugee children could attend state
schools, although a primary and a secondary Intensive Language Centre
and Catholic schools were the first to be prepared to enroll children
in their classes.
In our view, the
conditions of the visa breach articles of the Convention (eg 28,29,39).
One is denial of access to English Language lessons for adults and children
alike. For instance, there is no Federal Government funding for places
at Intensive Language Centres for children with temporary protection visas,
The new state government in WA has left enrollment of refugee children
to the discretion of teachers, so that they can be enrolled if places
are available. This kind of schooling is essential for these children,
not only because of their experience of absent or interrupted schooling,
their needs for the best English language teaching, but also because pastoral
care is readily available for them.
It is far from a
cliché to note that unless children are enrolled in Intensive Language
Centres, they are being set up to fail, and not only in their schooling
experience.
Another issue is
the way in which asylum seekers and refugees have been demonized and vilified
by the Government and in the media. Until the debate is reconfigured and
until there is a changed policy position, children will bear the brunt
of racist taunts or bullying at schools as well as the burden of feeling
they need to protect their parent/s from similar expressions of ignorance.
Identity
The rights to culture
and to nationality (Article 8) are crucial aspects of identity, nationality
in particular being connected to the claim for asylum. The right to a
name is often compromised, not only in detention by the use of numbers
for identification, but also at schools and in the wider community, children
are often assigned an anglicised name. Some children (and other refugees)
take it on themselves to adopt an Anglo/American name in order to reduce
difference.
A number of infants
have been born both in detention and following release. Each birth is
recorded by the state registrar of births. A certificate is provided to
the parents who are advised to notify the DIMIA to add the child's name
and date of birth to its records and to their applications for permanent
protection. Nationality is not recorded on any birth certificate in WA.
Article 5 of the
Convention frames the right of all children to grow up in a healthy family
environment with their parents or legal guardian having primary responsibility
for their upbringing. Family may include members of an extended family
or community, especially for those children coming from traditional pastoralist
and trading backgrounds.
The right of a child
to family relations also extends to the right of separated children to
be reunited with their parents. Article 22(2) obliges Australia to actively
trace the family or relatives of unaccompanied child asylum seekers. We
are concerned that this right to tracing and reunification extend also
to those children on Nauru and Manus who have a parent in Australia. This
agreement should be written into the contracts negotiated between the
countries. No-one should be sent elsewhere until it is established that
there are family members in Australia as refugees, with priority given
to families with children.
It is incongruous
that a Government that prides itself on support for family values, including
the right of children to know both parents, can discriminate against refugee
families by denying them the support that comes from strong families.
The conditions of
the Temporary Protection Visa have meant that some families have tried
to reunite informally, only to be thwarted by being detained in other
countries. Others fled their country from persecution without knowing
that the person who had left previously had come to Australia - and still
may not know they have part of their family here. Until very recently
even the Red Cross was unable to assist with tracing the links between
family members when someone was in detention as part of the so-called
"Pacific Solution".
The denial of family
reunion is the most pernicious of the conditions of the Temporary Protection
Visa (785). The ongoing uncertainty of its provisions takes a toll on
the adjustment and settlement progress of all refugees, including children,
some as young as six. Children certainly appreciate the vagaries of the
visa and follow changes in policy and legislation; they have a strong
sense of fairness and injustice. This raises issues related to mental
health.
Mental health
It is acknowledged
that children arriving in Australia as asylum seekers will have direct
experience of persecution and violence. They will (and do) have indirect
experience of the additional concerns of their parent/s, especially about
their future. Observations of children whose mother is the victim of domestic
violence has shown that the preverbal children are likely to be the most
adversely affected by the fears imparted by their mother. Refugee children
at this stage of development are no doubt similarly affected.
According to ASeTTS,
detention is often perceived as a repetition of previous experiences in
their country of origin. Children have no comprehension of the reason
for detention although they experience its effects. Among other things,
detention undermines the parental promises of escaping to safety.
The Convention requires
its signatories to make health services available and accessible to children,
including prevention, diagnosis and treatment services and including provisions
for mental health. Our cases demonstrate that these services are sadly
lacking. Even where there may be access to treatment, mental health matters
are notoriously poorly dealt with for all detainees and especially for
children.
Children who are,
or who are at risk of, mental illness must have access to specialised
crisis care and trauma counselling, as well as paediatric psychiatric
assessment.
The circumstances
of detention and temporary protection have forced them to relive the conditions
from which they escaped and to which it is feared they may be forced to
return. They are reliving the journey which brought them here, they are
reliving the way their claim was made in detention and some of the situations
in which they find themselves now. It all seems that these are ripe conditions
for triggering trauma issues and mental health problems.
There is also an
argument, that if as likely, most recognised refugees will be able to
remain in Australia, the Government has set up a system for this population
to be an underclass which will be dependent on social security, on the
mental health and public health and housing systems and find it very difficult
to be integrated into mainstream Australia.
In the three years
that refugee children hold a Temporary Protection Visa (785) they develop
significantly. Most are more competent in English language skills than
the adults for whom they come to interpret. A child who has started school
in the 6th year is more-or-less attuned at the age of 9 to the values
and content of an Australian primary education. Someone who came as a
child at 12 is now 15, or one who came as a dependent 15 year old is now
an independent young adult. These older children have been indoctrinated
by Amero/Australian teenage cultural values. The children increasingly
share the discussions of adults about their futures and some have said
they are getting illnesses that keep them from school.
Children share the
uncertainty of the whole temporary refugee community, which seems to us,
ripe for an epidemic of mental illness. This is compounded by the detention
experience, by vilification by Government and media, by racism and by
family separation.
In conclusion,
CARAD claims that not only has Australia failed to implement the obligations
accepted as a signatory to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child
to this population of children, but that those obligations have been flouted.
These failures are
apparent in the imposition of mandatory detention, including off shore
detention, and the conditions of temporary protection. The best interests
of the child are neither considered nor protected, the effects of which
will perpetuate grave harm on a very vulnerable population.
Recommendations
The recovery of children
from the traumatic conditions they left should be promoted by the prevention
of further harms; in the first place by rejecting detention for children
and parents, in the second place by ensuring that refugees have permanent
protection with the right to family reunion.
They and their families
can then plan for their future, supported if necessary by health, counselling
and educational services of the highest quality.
CARAD does not
support mandatory detention for any asylum seekers whose claim for refugee
status is being processed and these principles should apply to those who
arrive without authorisation ;
- alternatives to
mandatory detention of asylum seekers should be reconsidered for all
asylum seekers,
- that as a matter
of principle and to support rights protection as set out in the Convention,
no child should ever be kept in a detention centre,
- children under
the age of 18 yrs should be in the care of one or both parents or foster
parents in the community,
While mandatory
detention remains government policy and practice, CARAD recommends that:
- resources for
the processing of claims for refugee status be increased,
- a finite time
for assessment of all claims be determined, and individual applicants
should be informed of the progress of their claim,
- children and
families have separate accommodation from other detainees,
- parents can cook
suitable food at suitable times for their children,
- but those children
who arrive without direct family members be released to the guardianship
of the state while their claim is processed,
- qualified staff
be available at all times for children (and for all detainees) in relation
to education, play, trauma counselling and all health needs,
- a properly staffed
health service, including mental health services, be available for detainees,
with specialists available for children,
- an accredited
educational curriculum taught by qualified teachers be instituted at
all centres where children are detained, and if practicable, the children
should be taken to community schools close to the Centre,
- provision be
made for children's clothes, shoes and other material goods to be sufficient
for needs in all detention centres,
- a set of guidelines,
similar to those prepared for other Australian correctional facilities
be prepared and adopted for the protection and treatment of detainees,
- the so called
Pacific Solution should be abandoned and detainees transferred to Australia.
Asylum seekers
found to be refugees should be provided with permanent status
- Refugee children
with temporary protection should have right of access to Intensive Language
Centres for their schooling
- Staff and financial
resources for trauma counselling and parental supports after detention
must be increased
- Efforts must
be made for family reunion to be effected as soon as is possible for
all refugees with temporary protection.
The appointment of
a Children's Commissioner is overdue and would be one means of ensuring
that the rights of all children, including those in detention centres
and those found to be refugees, are protected and promoted.
Last
Updated 9 January 2003.