Complaints

Search

National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention



Click 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 provision 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 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.