Hosted by www.ijjo.org

Chapter 5 | Age Disputes
after her arrival but her age was disputed, even
though she was in possession of her ID card with
her date of birth. She had to wait at the Asylum
Screening Unit from 8 am to 7.30 p.m. that initial
day and then return for a second interview which
she described as more intimidating, which lasted
for six hours. Four days later she was given a
third interview. She was subsequently granted
discretionary leave to remain in the U.K. until
her 18th birthday. 26
5.2 The Kent Model
Kent operates a much more sustainable alternative
model for assessing age which ensures
that the best interests of any unaccompanied
or separated child are taken into account.
Regrettably, despite its acknowledged success, this
model has not been replicated elsewhere for financial
reasons. An unaccompanied or separated child
who arrives at Dover is granted temporary admission
to and accommodated by Kent Social Services
for an initial one week, or even one month, period
in order for a detailed age assessment to be undertaken
by social workers. The person is then brought
back to Dover for an interview, with a social worker
acting as the “responsible adult.” If Kent Social
Services has assessed the person to be over 18, he
or she is returned to the adult asylum determination
process. If Kent accepts that the person is
under 18, he or she is accommodated and given a
Child’s Statement of Evidence Form to complete
within 28 days. The benefits of this model are obvious.
Age disputed children are not placed in adult
accommodation or detained in an Immigration
Removal Centre or reception centre where they may
be in danger of physical, emotional, or sexual abuse
whilst their age is determined. Equally the benefits
to the local authority are clear in that they minimize
the risk that an adult posing as a child is being placed
with other children whether in a foster family or a
residential setting. This approach also ensures local
authority compliance with its duty under section 17
of the Children Act 1989 to ascertain whether the
individual in question is a child in need requiring
assistance and accommodation.
This approach to age disputes was originally
run as a pilot project by the Immigration Service at
Dover and Kent Social Services in 2003 and was the
subject of research carried out by the University of
Kent. 27 During this period all age disputed children
who presented themselves as unaccompanied minor
asylum seekers on entry at Dover were referred to
Kent Social Services for a full age assessment. Those
who entered clandestinely, for example in the back
of a lorry, and were then discovered by immigration
officers were not referred and were used as the control
group. The sample was very small as during this
period only 39 age disputed children applied for
asylum on entry at Dover and 150 were discovered
to have entered clandestinely, and the pilot project
has never been formally evaluated by the Immigration
and Nationality Directorate. However, researchers
from the University of Kent did interview some
of the age disputed children from this sample and
also talked with the Immigration Service and the
local authority. The two agencies agreed that the
pilot had improved their ability to cooperate and
brought their practice more into line with international
conventions and guidelines for the treatment
of unaccompanied asylum seeking children. The
research concluded that the sample was too limited
to lead to any definitive conclusions but that it
provided evidence of a potentially more efficient
and humane mechanism for assessing age.
The views expressed by the age disputed children
themselves were more negative. They had no
real understanding of why they were being assessed
and perceived the adults they came into contact
Hosted by www.ijjo.org
59