Commission Website: 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 Australian Psychological

Society

Executive

Summary

Context

of Concerns About Children in Immigration Detention

Detention

is Worse than Prison

Detention

is a Negative Socialisation Experience

Detention

Accentuates Developmental Risks

Detention

Threatens the Bond Between Children and Significant Caregivers

Detention

Limits Educational Opportunities

Detention

Has Traumatic Impacts on Child Detainees

Detention

Exacerbates the Impacts of Other Traumas

Implications

for the Wider Australian Community

Detention

Raises Unanswered Questions and Concerns

Executive

Summary

The Australian Psychological

Society categorically condemns the practice of detaining child asylum

seekers and their families, on the grounds that it is not commensurate

with psychological best practice concerning childrens development

and mental health and wellbeing. Detention of children in this fashion

is also arguably a violation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the

Child.

A thorough review

of relevant psychological theory and available research findings from

international research has led the Australian Psychological Society to

conclude that:

Detention is a
negative socialisation experience.
Detention is
accentuates developmental risks.
Detention threatens
the bonds between children and significant caregivers.
Detention limits
educational opportunities.
Detention has
traumatic impacts on children of asylum seekers.
Detention reduces
childrens potential to recover from trauma.
Detention exacerbates
the impacts of other traumas.
Detention of children
from these families in many respects is worse for them than being

imprisoned.

In the absence of

any indication from the Australian Government that it intends in the near

future to alter the practice of holding children in immigration detention,

the Australian Psychological Societys intermediate position is that

the facilitation of short-term and long-term psychological development

and wellbeing of children is the basic tenet upon which detention centres

should be audited and judged. Based on that position, the Society has

identified a series of questions and concerns that arise directly from

the various psychological perspectives that have been brought to bear

on estimating the effects of detention on child asylum seekers. The Society

argues that, because these questions and concerns relate specifically

to improvement and maintenance of child detainees educational, social

and psychological wellbeing, they are legitimate matters for the Inquiry

to consider and investigate.

What steps are
currently being taken to monitor the psyc hological welfare of the children

in detention? In particular, what steps are being taken to monitor the

psychological wellbeing of children arriving from war-torn countries?
What qualifications
and training do staff who care for children and their families in detention

centres have? What knowledge do they have of psychological issues faced

by people who have been subjected to traumatic experiences and are suffering

high degrees of anxiety, stress and uncertainty?
What provisions
have been made for psycho-educational assessment of childrens

specific learning needs prior to their attending formal educational

programmes?
who are suffering
chronic and/or vicarious trauma as a result of witnessing threatening

behaviour whilst in detention?
What provisions
have been made for families who have been seriously affected by displacement

to participate in family therapy?
What critical
incident debriefing procedures are in place for children who have witnessed

their parents, other family members, or social acquaintances engaging

in acts of self-harm or being harmed while in detention? What psychotherapeutic

support is in place for children who themselves have been harmed or

have engaged in self- harmful acts while in detention?
What provisions
are in place for parenting programmes that provide support for parents

of children under extremely difficult psychological and physical circumstances?
What efforts are
being made to provide parents with the opportunity to model traditional

family roles for children, such as working to earn an income, meal preparation,

other household duties, etc.?
What opportunities
are in place for the assessment of safety issues such as bullying, and

sexual or physical abuse of children or their mothers in detention centres?
How are resources
distributed to children and families in detention centres?
What socialization
opportunities are available either within detention centres or in the

wider community for children to develop skills and independence, engage

in social activities, participate in cultural traditions, and communicate

and interaction with same-age peers and adults from similar ethnic and

religious backgrounds?
What access do
children and families have to videos, music and entertainment from their

cultures of origin?
What provisions
are in place to ensure the maintenance of privacy in a manner commensurate

with usual cultural practice?
What is the Governments
rationale for continuing to implement a policy of mandatory detention

of child asylum seekers that on the face of it is likely to have a pernicious

impact on these childrens mental health?
In view of the
evidence on the potential long-term impact of mandatory detention on

children, what processes may be followed by Government to avoid such

a practice and, more importantly, to develop policies and practices

that will have a positive impact on these childrens psychological

development and mental health?

Context of Concerns

About Children in Immigration Detention

By definition, refugees

are people who have fled or been driven from their countries of origin

(or habitual residence) and cannot return for fear of persecution, war

or oppression (Collier, 1991). There are four principles on which the

Australian refugee policies are supposedly based (Committee on Migration

Regulations, 1992):

Australia fully
recognizes its humanitarian commitment and responsibility to admit refugees

for relocation;
The decision to
accept refugees must always remain with the Government of Australia;
Special assistance
will often need to be provided for the movement of refugees in designated

situations or for their relocation in Australia; and
It may not be
in the interest of some refugees to settle in Australia.

The Australian Government

makes an annual contribution to the United Nations High Commission for

Refugees (UNHCR), which is the main organisation associated with such

relocation.

Australia has developed

a reputation as the only Western country to enforce a policy of mandatory

detention for asylum seekers who arrive in the country without entry documents,

irrespective of their age or family situation (Silove, Steel & Watters,

2000). Australia receives relatively few refugees on a per capital basis,

being ranked 17 out of 21 industrialised countries receiving refugees.

Figures from Amnesty

International indicate that 1103 children were held in immigration detention

centres in Australia in 2000/2001, with no legal limit being placed on

the length of their detention. The backgrounds of these children in mandatory

detention are unique. They often arrive in Australia after fleeing war,

violence, economic deprivation, religious persecution and famine. Their

experience of flight frequently adds to their hardships and emotional

trauma. It is not uncommon for them to experience the death of parents

and loved ones, loss of home and destruction of community, separation

and even torture and starvation. The implication of detention in relation

to a particularly vulnerable group has important psychological and sociocultural

ramifications for the Australian community at large, and is of special

relevance for the allied health and medical professions.

Detention is Worse

than Prison

In many respects,

immigration detention centres in Australia are like prisons. They are

run by custodial staff, enclosed by high fences topped with razor wire,

and those staying there are not free to leave. Time is structured for

the detainees by centre regulations and procedures. Some may argue, despite

these conditions, that detention centres are not nearly as bad as prison

because detainees have good physical facilities and relative freedom to

do what they choose inside their centres. However, notwithstanding the

provision of satisfactory physical facilities in some centres, others

would argue centres are worse than prison. This view is expressed clearly

by a former inmate of Villawood detention centre who said, Detention

centres are not prisons. They are worse because prisoners have basic rights

- in detention centres people have none and they have committed no offence

(Fox, 2002). It is wrong to assume, because peoples basic needs

for shelter, warmth, food, etc. are relatively well catered for, that

their mental health would not be adversely affected. Drawing the distinction

between a detention centre and a prison is important because social psychological

research has shown that being a prisoner can have strong negative impacts

on an individuals psychological well-being. Zimbardos (Haney,Banks,

& Zimbardo, 1973) classic experiment demonstrated this clearly. In

that study, students at Stanford University were recruited and randomly

assigned to play the role of either a prisoner or a guard

in a simulated prison environment. The study was meant to last two weeks,

but it had to be abandoned after six days. In that short period of time

guards grew more aggressive and abusive towards their prisoners

but, more importantly in terms of detainees experiences, prisoners

became passive, helpless and depressed and, within that short time period,

five of the nine original prisoners had been released because

of depression and acute anxiety.

Research in Hong

Kong and the Philippines indicates that the occurrence of apathy, depression

and anxiety are common responses in displaced children of all ages who

have been detained in camps (McCallin, 1992, 1993; Comerford, Armour-

Hileman, & Walker, 1991). It may be argued that these symptoms result

from asylum seekers experiences prior to arriving in the camps but,

while this is certainly likely to be a factor, it is not the whole explanation.

There is evidence to indicate that detainees psychological well-being

is linked to the length of time they have been in detention (McCallin,

1992) and that where there is an open camp policy, i.e., inmates are able

to go out within a prescribed radius, the emotional well-being of children

is better than that of similar children in closed camps (McCallin, 1993).

Underlying this finding

of depression and apathy in detainees is a number of possible factors,

including a perception of lack of control over their lives. As Baumeister

(1998) points out, the need for control (or at least a feeling of control)

has long been identified by psychologists as an important precondition

of psychological wellbeing. One of the most influential theories in this

regard is Seligmans (1975) theory of learned helplessness, which

was later reformulated by Abramson, Seligman and Teasdale (1978). Seligmans

theory postulated that if people come to perceive their situation to be

one over which they have no control, i.e., they are helpless, they become

anxious and subsequently depressed. This apathetic response to the lack

of real or perceived control has been demonstrated in both animals (e.g.

Seligman & Maier, 1967) and humans (see Mikulincer, 1994 for a review).

Such feelings of powerlessness or lack of control over their lives have

commonly been reported by both adolescent and adult immigration detainees

and have been linked with feelings of depression (Comerford et al., 1991;

McCallin, 1992). The perceived lack of control in detention centres arises

largely from the fact that the lives of detainees are controlled by centre

rules and regulations. For instance, they cannot leave to seek work, or

they cannot choose when and what to eat. Not only does such regimentation

rob people of a sense of control, but it also changes their roles, in

turn, impacting on their personal identity and self-esteem. Peoples

identity and selfesteem are intimately linked to their work roles, both

paid and unpaid, as well as to their parenting and/or caring roles (Watson,

1996). A change of roles can affect psychological wellbeing, particularly

if the change is involuntary. Hence, people who become unemployed tend

to suffer psychological distress (Watson, 1996). In the detention centres,

parents cannot fulfil the traditional roles of breadwinners, homemakers,

and caregivers, because many of those duties are performed by centre staff.

In the societies from which Australias immigration detainees come

mainly, such roles are strongly held, and the inability to fulfil them

is likely to impact negatively on individuals as well as on family units.

The attenuation and/or removal of important social roles may lead to reduced

feelings of worth which are likely to be magnified if detainees come to

think of themselves as prisoners, which was the case with

some detainees in the Hong Kong camps (Comerford et al., 1991). This,

together with a learned sense of helplessness, is likely lead to depression.

John Torgrimson, who was Director of Community and Family Services International,

the organisation providing mental health care for detention centres in

Hong Kong in the early 1990s, put it like this:

The whole concept

of provision of basic care is missing and, I think, in a way that changes

the role that a parent can have. Men become emasculated, the fact that

they are not in a role to provide for their family, to make major decisions

in relation to how the children live, how the children grow or what will

happen to them afterwards. In a sense the mother who cannot cook, and

the father who cannot provide for the family, are forced to relinquish

the visible ways in which each literally nourished and cared

for the family. This loss can leave parents feeling useless, incompetent

and helpless, leading to a depression. (Comerford et al., 1991, p. 59)

Where conditions enable detainees to maintain traditional roles, e.g.,

fathers going out to work, they do not become as dependent as those in

detention, and they suffer less adverse effects (Markowitz, 1996; McCallin,

1993). So far the focus of the research being evaluated here has been

on adults, but being in a detention centre also impacts on children. For

instance, McCallin (1992) found that the majority of the more than 600

children surveyed in a Hong Kong detention centre exhibited symptoms of

depression and anxiety. These negative impacts are particularly severe

for unaccompanied children (Comerford et al., 1991; Harding & Looney,

1977; McCallin, 1992). For those who are living with parents, the impact

of living in camp is moderated to some extent by their parents. Parents

can assist children in coping with stress, but that assistance is dependent

on the parents being psychologically he althy. Garbarin, Kostelny, and

Dubrow (1991) claimed that, Children will continue to cope with

difficult environments and maintain reservoirs of resilience so long as

parents are not pushed beyond their stress absorption capacity. Once that

point is exceeded, however, the development of young children deteriorates

rapidly and markedly (p. 380). In immigration detention camps, parents

are not likely to be able to provide this buffering effect because of

their own poor state of psychological wellbeing (Garbarino, 1996; Garbarino

et al., 1991). Many parents have had a traumatic time reaching Australia,

are anxious and depressed because of the situation they are in, and are

without their own extended family support network. They are often consumed

by their own emotional needs, and therefore their capacity to function

in a supporting role for their children is diminished and their parenting

role suffers. As Torgrimson put it, Children learn that parents really

aren't in control, someone else is in control, and so it changes how they

view their parents. It changes how they respond to the parents' authority....

the family structure itself... starts to break down. (Comerford et al.,

1991, p. 59) The above picture of family life in detention centres is

consistent with compelling evidence that children of depressed parents

are at risk of developing psychological difficulties later in life (Downey

& Coyne, 1990) and, in the detention situation, this relationship

is particularly strong in relation to the mothers mental health

(Adjukovic & Adjukovic, 1993; Ekblad, 1993; Miller, 1996).

Detention is a

Negative Socialisation Experience

Bandura (1977) stressed

the importance of modelling processes in childrens development

they observe adults behaving in a particular way and copy that behaviour,

especially if it seems that no negative consequences are associated with

the behaviour. The inability of parents in detention centres to fulfil

traditional parental roles has the potential to disrupt their childrens

social development. If parents are seen as ineffective, then other role

models become more important and these are likely to be those who are

seen to be powerful or successful, and whose behaviour is

rewarded, or at least not punished. These are not necessarily likely to

be good role models. In the Hong Kong centres, children were observed

to be using guards or criminal elements who dominated the

camps as models (Comerford et al., 1991). Because these role models frequently

achieved their aims through the use of vio lence or coercion, e.g., through

the use of threats, batons, teargas etc., a potential exists for the development

at a later stage of aggressive behaviours in children who have been in

detention (Baron & Richardson, 1994). Parents in the Hong Kong detentio

n centres were aware of this problem. For instance, one parent interviewed

in the Comerford et al. (1991) study said if parents say no to fighting

but next door there is fighting, they learn it easily (p. 87), a

sentiment echoed by another who said my child just plays, and mimics

fighting adults (p. 77). Hart, Atkins and Ford (1998) proposed a

transactional model of moral development. In their model stable characteristics

of individuals and their family in conjunction with social attitudes,

self-conceptions and opportunities for the exploration of prosocial action

were preconditions for development of positive moral identity. However,

when families are in disarray, experience poverty or lose their sense

of purpose, children are at greater risk of not being provided with the

necessary family milieu or parenting opportunities to sustain strong,

positive moral identity development. Developmentally, it is critical that

these opportunities to establish vital socialization processes are provided

before formal schooling begins. Otherwise, according to Smale (2001),

it may be too late. Garbarino et al (1991) also suggested that families

provide the emotional context for making positive moral sense of danger

or trauma. Intact communities foster moral development at the next social

level. If, however, trauma occurs in the context of an antidemocratic

social context and in an authoritarian social climate, especially if it

is then manifested within the family system, then truncated moral reasoning

is likely to occur. Garbarino et al. (1991) asserted that children are

at risk of seeing and/or experiencing acts of aggression in detention

institutions, which may be interpreted by young children as appropriate

behaviour in stressful situations.

Detention Accentuates

Developmental Risks

Adoption of a psychosocial

and temporal perspective on childrens development is a useful way

of drawing attention to the interactivity of the psychological and social

effects of their experiences of

Leaving their
place of origin;
Being detained
on foreign shore in an uncertain manner; and
Adjusting to
life following detention.

The psychological

realm comprises the developmentally contingent cognitive, emotional and

behavioural elements of children's reactions to their perceived experiences.

Their thoughts, memories, dreams, educational performance, stress reactions,

attachment, and coping behaviour provide insights into the psychological

aspect of their detention experience. The social realm encompasses their

interpersonal relationships and the effects these have directly or indirectly

on them. People within the childs proximal asylum-seeking context

at various points in time may include siblings, peers, neighbours, community

members, people smugglers, government officials, fellow asylum seekers,

detention officers, custodial officers and doctors. It should be kept

in mind that, in many cultures, the family unit does not comprise the

nuclear family, but constitutes a rich extended family whose role it is

to aid in the inculcation of the traditions and belief systems specific

to that ethnic group. Consistent with a temporal framework of before,

during and after detention, the inter-relational experiences of children

in immigration detention may revolve around: separation, estrangement,

grief, trauma, loss, or death prior to seeking asylum; separation, uncertainty,

abuse, violence, anger, conflict, fear, prejudice, cultural and individual

disempowerment, trauma and grief when in detention; and then possibly

trauma, fear, anxiety, grief, estrangement, loss, separation, reunion,

poverty, depowerment and cultural and social displacement following detention.

Many families and individuals become destitute through experiences that

lead to displacement and asylum seeking. Their social status and place

in a familiar cultural, economic and social network are eroded. Impoverishment

and destitution can lead to exploitation, and children of families currently

in detention may face this socio-economic risk in future if appropriate

interventions at a social and political level are not implemented. The

postpersecution environment is considered critical in preventing the intensification

of any trauma experienced by children (Lubben, 1996).

From an integrated

ecological perspective, the key to determining the effect of acute and

chronic trauma and stress on a child suffering the consequences of disaster

or conflict is contingent on five interactive factors:

a child's psychobiological
composition and emotional resources;
the reaction of
parents and caregivers to a threatening event and the subsequent disruption

this may cause to the family unit;
the breakdown
of a sense of community and community networks;
the ameliorating
effects of cultural, historical and political factors; and
the occurrence,
duration, intensity and level of trauma, disaster or conflict (Elbedour,

ten Bensel & Bastien, 1993).

When the world of

a child breaks down to the extent that the child experiences a fear of

separation from significant others, a diminished sense of a secure base,

an unhelpful socio-cultural milieu, broken rules, a fragmented societal

structure, and a loss of meaning, then more than likely dysfunctional

psychological reactions and regressive developmental behaviour will emerge.

Support for this model of understanding children's reactions to traumatic

events has been consistently demonstrated by research examining the psychological

functioning of children and families around the world who have suffered

trauma in the face of conflict and disaster. For example, Hunter (1988)

found that if mothers were able to function during stressful periods of

family disruption, then the children tended to cope adequately. Prior

to this, Kinzie, Sack, Angell, Manson and Rath (1986), in an assessment

of Cambodian refugee children, found that children who were able to re-establish

family contact did better than those who did not, highlighting the importance

of a childs family as a buffer or neutralizing factor for severe

trauma. It is important to note that being alone or in a foster fa mily

exacerbated the perception of disaster for that particular group of children.

In a much earlier study, Silber, Perry and Bloch (1958) concluded that,

a child's response to a situation of acute stress may therefore

be determined not only by the intra-psychic phenomena but also by the

forces within the family social system of which he (sic) is a part.

(p. 167) Freud and Burlingham (1943) maintained that, although children

in the short term could survive war experiences reasonably well, provided

they were in the care of their mothers or a familiar mother substitute,

some years later many of the children experienced a sleeper effect

of delayed emotional difficulties.

Other research has

shown that alternative management of families seeking asylum can have

positive impacts on childrens adjustment. For example, Markowitz

(1996) described the situation of Bosnian Muslim refugees living in Israel

while awaiting placement. Although their future placement was unknown,

families seeking asylum were maintained as units and the head of the family

worked and provided for the family, thus avoiding dependence on authorities.

In that situation, parental roles and practices were sustained and the

sense of stability that prevailed while families were in limbo had positive

effects on childrens adjustment to their changing circumstances.

This model

provides an exemplar for an alternative approach to the detention of asylum

seekers in the Australian context.

Detention Threatens

the Bond Between Children and Significant Caregivers

The theory of Bowlby

(1969, 1973, 1980) that attachment behaviour serves to regulate proximity

between infants and their caregivers with attachment behaviour operating

as a system of regulation of distress associated with perceived threat

is widely accepted in psychology and other people professions. From this

perspective, the attachment system is activated when any phenomenon is

perceived as a threat. According to Sroufe and Waters (1977), caregivers

responsiveness and sensitivity to children's affective signals provide

a critical framework for children to organize their emotional experiences

and regulate their sense of security. Consequently, infants whose early

attachment needs have not been adequately met because of a disruption

to parents ability to regulate the attachment system efficiently,

are likely to maintain a view of the world that is comfortless and unpredictable,

and subsequently to develop relationships that are characterized by anxiety

or detachment (Drury-Hudson, 1994). Supporting this position, a recent

study conducted by Almqvist and Broberg (1999) that examined the mental

health and social adjustment of young refugee children in Sweden found

that the emotional wellbeing of mothers was a predictor of childrens

emotional wellbeing of children.

Aidukovic and Ajdukovic

(1993), Aidukovic and Ajdukovic (1998), Fox, Cowell and Montgomery (1994),

Ekblad (1993), Emmott (1996), Garbanino, Kostelny and Dubrow (1991b),

Hicks, Lalonde and Pepler (1993), and Miller (1996) all found that mothers

responses to (a) traumatic conditions prior to leaving their country of

origin, (b) their current refugee status, and (c) their future prospects

are major determinants of the coping skills of their children. Garbarino

et al. (l996) discussed the importance of home to a child

and what that entails. It incorporates the idea of a parent being in charge

of the family, permanence, safety and being surrounded with familiar and

personal things. In the detention centre environment, the concept of home

is significantly diminished. Over extended periods of time, this is likely

to have a marked impact on the development of familial and other social

bonds that underpin healthy identity, moral, and emotional development.

The Australian Psychological Society, therefore, considers that it is

paramount for children's experiences of detention to be considered in

light not only of their individual wellbeing but also of the wellbeing

of their proximal caregivers in detention. The extent to which the

physical and emotional well-being of the adult upon whom children depend

for nurturance and support is affected by their [the adults] experiences

can pose a particular risk for children (Oxford Refugee Centre,

2001).

Detention Limits

Educational Opportunities

Elbedour, ten Bensel

and Bastian (1993) emphasized the role of formal schooling has as mitigating

influence in precarious situations. Schools can provide children with

an alternative security network, and therefore with physical and cognitive

developmental opportunities, and consistent and positive care. Structured,

routine opportunities for children to participate in a rich learning environment

in the company of peers within the confines of detention centres are considered

to be one of the minimal requirement of child care, if children are to

be detained at all. Opportunities to learn both in the language of origin

and in the language of the detention context should be provided in order

to facilitate childrens psychological sense of identity and place,

and their ability to adjust, cope and grow with adversity.

Detention Has

Traumatic Impacts on Child Detainees

There is limited

psychological research pertaining directly to the unique impact of mandatory

detention on children in Australia. However, it is possible to draw upon

two important sources of knowledge to inform this assessment of the impact

of current practices on the immigration detention of children: conceptual

models of trauma and empirical studies of the impact of trauma. These

conceptual models and empirical studies of trauma guide assessment and

prediction of the consequences of the current policies and practices pertaining

to child asylum seekers on their future mental health. Linear conceptual

models of trauma have been criticised as simplistic and failing to capture

the rich and diverse human experiences associated with extreme events

(Silove, 2000, p. 339). It is argued that culture and belief systems play

a significant role in mediating the impact of such events on the individual

in the community. The impact on children of adverse events is even more

complex. Silove (2000), whose research is highly regarded in Australia,

proposed a model for conceptualising trauma and its impact upon individuals

and communities. The model is based upon the notion that human reactions

to trauma are governed by the drive toward survival and psychosocial development.

Silove adopted an adaptive focus that recognises the restorative capacities

of trauma-affected individuals and their communities. According to his

model, under certain circumstances exposure to adverse situations may

result in a process of transformation resulting in exceptional achievements.

Siloves model

is based on five hypothetical constructs for conceptualising trauma and

response to trauma: safety; attachment; identity and role; justice; and

existential meaning (Silove, 2000). Two dimensions of his model, the safety

system and the attachment-bonding system, are particularly salient when

considering the impact of detention on the mental health of child asylum

seekers.

Judgements about

childrens safety needs by necessity occur within a context. The

context of mandatory detention of child asylum seekers in Australia is

that their experience has generally evolved over several defined phases:

the period of threat in their country of origin, the time of flight and

seeking asylum in Australia and the period of incarceration in the detention

centre. The very nature of their experience of detention undermines their

sense of safety and may contribute to a sense of ongoing danger, thus

detracting from their recuperative capacities. Bowlby postulated that

the attachment-bonding system is the result of a drive to form attachments

and that the drive to maintain interpersonal bonds is phylogenetically

determined (Bowlby, as cited by Silove, 2000). Silove has suggested that

the separations and losses experienced by refugees are multiple in nature,

and include both actual and symbolic losses. The very process of detaining

an unaccompanied child asylum seeker, in particular, disrupts the childs

interpersonal bonds with potential longterm carers in the community. The

experience of incarceration is arguably a very significant breach

of trust resulting in the loss of a sense of belonging, and undermining

future opportunities for social cohesion within the broader community.

A number of theorists support the importance of attachment in positive

human development and the potential long-term consequences of ruptures

to bonds in effecting adult mental health. The situation is exacerbated

in asylum seekers in terms of the grief resulting from the losses incurred

by the young person, including the loss of culture or cultural bereavement

(Eisenbruch, 1991).

This brief overview

of a model for trauma provides a framework for understanding the impact

of mandatory detention upon the psychological wellbeing of children in

detention. There is little direct evidence, to date, on the impact of

detention centre experiences on adults or children, and some of that evidence

is equivocal. There is more evidence pertaining to the impact of conflict

upon individuals. A rigorous epidemiological study undertaken by Mollica,

Donelan, Tor, Lavelle, Elias, Frankel and Blendon (1993) investigated

the prevalence of Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in Cambodian residents

living in camps on the Thai border. They reported that 15% of the residents

sampled suffered from PTSD, even though the majority of participants in

the study had experienced multiple war related traumas. Similarly, displaced

persons who had fled persecution in Bhutan and were living in camps in

Nepal evidenced low rates of PTSD, i.e., 14% who were tortured versus

4% who we not tortured (Shrestha, et al. 1998). A related study indicated

a 9% rate of PTSD for Vietnamese refugees entering Norway (Hauff &

Vauglum, 1993). These figures may be compared with the lifetime prevalence

rate for PTSD in the general population in the USA, which is 8% (Kessler,

Sonnega, Bromet, Hughes, & Nelson, 1995). Figures on PTSD rates for

the general community in Australia show its incidence as 3.3% (McLennan,

1997). These findings suggest the need for caution in drawing a direct

link between traumatic experiences and the long-term impact of trauma

on mental health and psychosocial functioning.The impact of detention

on children who have already been exposed to cultural dislocation and

trauma may result in a more diverse range of symptoms than those included

in the PTSD diagnosis. Potential symptom profiles include evidence of

depression, somatisation, anxiety, panic attacks, separation anxiety,

pathological anger, and dysthymia including lack of motivation. In contrast

to the relatively optimistic outcomes described above, Suurander (1998)

undertook a study of 46 unaccompanied refugee minors awaiting placement

in an asylum centre in Finland. Utilising a methodology that included

a broader definition of emotional and behavioural problems

he reported that the children experienced a number of losses, separations,

persecution and threats, which were not dissimilar to the experience of

children who are arriving in Australia. He also reported that approximately

50% of the sample was functioning in the clinical or borderline range

while younger children (under 15 years of age) evidenced more severe psychiatric

problems. Ajdukovic and Ajdukovic (1993) who studied the psychosocial

adaptation of refugee children to displacement reported that children

placed in a collective shelter had a higher risk of mental unwellness

than children placed with host families. Stressrelated reactions, including

sleeping and eating disorders, separation fears, and withdrawal and aggression,

were evident among the displaced children. Significantly, children exhibited

a significantly higher incidence of stress reactions if their mothers

had difficulty coping with the stress of displacement.

The impact of detention

on parental figures, who are the traditional care givers of

children, has already been outlined in this paper. Added to the sense

of parental absence and/or perceived depowerment, children in detention

centres are victims of absent or dislocated social networks. Children

are separated from immediate and extended family, which may contribute

to the perpetuation of psychiatric symptoms. In an 18-month follow- up

study of Vietnamese refugees resettled in the USA, Hinton, et al. (1993)

reported that pre- migration trauma variables were less powerful predictors

of persisting depression than demographic variables including age and

English language proficiency. The practice of mandatory detention can

have a particularly pernicious impact on competencies such as English

proficiency and related acculturative skills which, in turn, will impact

adversely upon the young persons sense of wellbeing and future capacity

to integrate into his or her adopted culture. Detention Reduces Childrens

Potential for Recovery from Trauma It is important in any contemporary

psychological framework for children's development to consider psychological

vulnerability and the associated capacity to recover from developmental

setbacks. There are a number of resilience, or recovery, factors that

serve to minimize developmental risk and prevent further psychological

harm, whilst at the same time providing protective scaffolding for childhood

socialization, which have been shown to be important in determining developmental

outcomes. Three main models of resilience exist that, together, have contributed

to a better understanding of the healthy psychological development of

children (Garmezy, Masten & Tellegen, 1984):

The compensatory
model that emphasizes compensatory factors which neutralize exposure

to risk, such as an active approach to solving problems or the ability

to gain the positive attention of others;
The challenge
model that focuses on the successful engagement of stress and embraces

the idea that a moderate risk factor could act as a potential enhancer

for successful adaptation; and
The protective
factor model that operates indirectly with a risk factor to reduce the

probability of a negative outcome, such as a more highly developed cognitive

ability or a better quality of parenting.

Children who have

been displaced and/or who are detained in Australian detention centres

have been exposed to a number of cumulative risk factors, which makes

them particularly vulnerable and less resilient. Protective factors that

may serve to strengthen their capacity to meet the demands of their environment

are scarce under such circumstances. Usual and regular social opportunities

such as peer socialization, play, sport, interactive leisure activity,

regular classroom activity, creative pursuits, and opportunities to develop

independence and resourcefulness are important prerequisites for children's

normal development, but they are provided in limited and irregular fashion

in detention centres. Greater access to these social opportunities, and

expansion of the range of opportunities available for children can help

to increase the protective mechanisms and build resilience. It is important

to recognise that cultural as well as individual differences exist in

the operation of protective and risk factors in the detention environment.

A study by Rousseau, Drapeau and Corin (1998) of school-age refugee children

from Southeast Asia and Central America confirmed the importance of taking

cultural differences into consideration. When considering resilience from

a psychosocial perspective, it is important also to consider the role

of meanings assigned to difficult life events. Genero (1995) maintained

that meaning derived through mutual relationships is a critical source

of personal validation because the concepts of meaning and validation

are socially and culturally defined. Mutual participation in relationships

give meaning to the adaptive processes that arise in response to environmental

demands and challenges over time (O'Leary, 1998, p.436). With this

in mind, it is arguable not only that children's needs are severely compromised

by displacement and detention, but also that their parents psychological

needs are also compromised, which further reduces childrens recuperative

capabilities, making them less resilient in the face of hardship (Garbanino,

Kostelny, & Dubrow, 1991a). Garbarino et al. (1996) added a further

caution that the concerns of parents in refugee camps at times may lead

to stricter disciplinary measures being implemented in an attempt to exert

some sort of control over their lives and sense of protection for their

children. Strict disciplinary action is not consistent with development

of resilience.

Detention Exacerbates

the Impacts of Other Traumas

Several studies have

investigated the role of mediating variables in the psychosocial adaptation

of refugees. In a study on the adjustment of unaccompanied Indochinese

refugee minors, Porte and Torney-Purta (1987) reported that the ongoing

presence of an adult of similar ethnic background appeared to mitigate

against the stress of adapting to a new country. Similarly, Vietnamese

children separated from their families and placed in a refugee camp demonstrated

increased emotional vulnerability (Harding & Looney, 1977). Studies

have consistently emphasised the role that ethnic origin and specific

pre- and post-migration contexts play in mediating the impact of protective

and risk factors on school-age refugee children (Ro usseau, Drapeau, &

Corin, 1998). In a sample of South American child refugees, family trauma

history was a principal determinant of symptoms whereas, in Southeast

Asian children, family variables such as family conflict and parental

depression contributed to increased symptomatology. These finding are

pertinent to the Australian context in which children are detained in

an environment which has been described as promoting parental depression

(Sultan & OSullivan, 2001). Displacement and detention of children

may impact on immediate mental health, but exposure to extremely intense

stressors can have delayed effects and cause difficulties in psychosocial

functioning in adulthood. Ajdukovic and Ajdukovic (1998) interviewed displaced

mothers and children in a refugee centre in Croatia over a period of 3

years. Their findings confirmed that while the incidence of stress-related

reactions in children decreases over time, the support provided by the

family was highly significant in assisting children to cope with the prolonged

stressed associated with displacement. Beiser, Dion, Gotowiec, Hyman and

Vu (1996), in a major review on migrant childrens adaptation and

mental health in Canada, acknowledge the equivocal findings in research

with asylum seekers and refugees. They criticised the simplistic understanding

of the dimensions of adaptation of migrant and displaced children, and

pointed out instead the need to focus on both casual risk factors and

protective factors for assessing the impact of migration and detention

on childhood mental health. They also favoured measures of both mental

health deficits and assets. The research reviewed in this submission draws

attention to factors associated with the detention of children and mental

health deficits. Conventional wisdom suggests that the current practice

of detention of unaccompanied children and children in the company of

their parent fails, at the very least, to contribute to the assets of

children and to their potential for integration into the Australian or

any other community, irrespective of their mental health outcome.

Implications for

the Wider Australian Community

The potential psychological

costs of the policy of mandatory detention on the psychological well-being

of children who are already coping with all the other negative experiences

which resulted in their decision to flee their country of birth and seek

asylum in Australia is arguably exacerbated by the system of mandatory

detention. The possible consequences that have been outlined above focus

on the negative sequelae of detention for individuals, but there are also

possible negative consequences for communities at large. Many of the children

may eventually be awarded refugee status and will settle in Australia.

The adverse consequences of detention outlined above will continue after

release into the community and, in turn, have at least four interrelated

and serious long-term consequences for Australia.

First, any mental

health problems that develop as a result of experiences in detention centres

will place an additional burden on health and other social services once

children enter the community. Even if detention itself does not traumatize

children, the lack of early treatment of the traumatic experiences of

war, displacement and flight is likely to exacerbate the negative consequences

of that trauma (Sourander, 1998). Such disturbances can be trans-generational

and hence the societal consequences can be very long term. A second likely

consequence for society at large is that disruption of psychological development

is likely to impact on the childs education and intellectual development

and thus potentially reduce the future value of these children in the

workforce and the community in general.

A third consequence

of detaining children in detention centres is in the form of potential

for an increase in future anti-social behaviour and its associated financial

and social costs to Australias systems of administrative and criminal

justice. Garbarino (1996; Garbarino et al., 1991) suggested that growing

up in refugee camps can stunt moral growth. One parent housed in a Hong

Kong camp commented, It is difficult to teach children right from

wrong here, because the conditions are so mixed. We cannot control the

conditions the children grow up in and what they see (Comerford

et al., 1991, p. 90), while another commented, They will lose the

ability to oppose wrong things in their lives and will only know how to

be ordered. (Comerford et al., p. 81). From a societal perspective

it is desirable that future Australian residents have well developed moral

belief systems because delayed moral development carries with it the potential

for increased antisocial behaviour.

Finally, if people

who have been detained in the camps feel that they have been mistreated,

they may become resentful and antagonistic towards the source of that

treatment, which in this case would be the State. Obviously it is not

in the interests of the wider Australian community to have a group of

people who are alienated and disaffected. This, and the other consequences

listed above could, either individually or collectively, contribute to

the development of a youth sub-culture with few legitimate outlets or

opportunities, and few cultural and social resources to assist with identity

formation that is consistent with pro-social values. Such problems are

self-perpetuating and are seriously detrimental to Australian society

in the longer term In a more immediate timeframe, research has shown that

such an accumulation of risks has a negative impact on psychological development

(Ajdukovic & Ajdukovic, 1998; Sameroff, Seifer, & Bartko, 1997),

and in the detention centres and refugee camps there is the potential

for a number of major risk factors for children to be compounded. These

include untreated prior traumatic events, dysfunctional parenting, depression,

inadequate educational and developmental opportunities, and lack of appropriate

role models, all of which, in isolation and in combination, have a serious

impact on childrens future wellbeing.

Detention Raises

Unanswered Questions and Concerns

The challenge for

those persons and organisations charged with a humanitarian duty of care

of child asylum seekers and their families is to understand and facilitate

healthy developmental opportunities to which all children are entitled.

The Australian Psychological Societys categorically condemns the

practice of detaining child asylum seekers and their families, on the

grounds that it does not appear to be commensurate with psychological

best practice concerning childrens development and mental health

and wellbeing. Detention of children in this fashion is also arguably

a violation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. However,

in the absence of any indication from the Australian Government that it

intends to alter the practice of holding children in immigration detention,

the Australian Psychological Societys intermediate position is that

facilitation of both short-term and long-term psychological development