Age assessment practices: a literature review & annotated ... - Unicef

Given that medical age assessments are an invasion of privacy for no therapeutic gain, it is
particularly important that informed consent is gained. However, concerns have been raised
that, particularly in the cases of asylum seeking children who have only just arrived in the
country of asylum, that few children will be in a position to give consent that is both genuine
and informed, and few understand how significant age determination actually is for their
asylum application and their rights (see Crawley, 2007). While children are usually told that
they have the right to refuse age testing, the majority feel that they have to agree, and
Parson‟s notes that in Finland, the Parliamentary Ombudsman has recommended that there
should be legislation on age assessment, particularly as it is hard to ascertain, particularly
with younger children, whether they were able to judge the significance of giving their
consent for an age determination examination (Parsons, 2010).
A report by Save the Children Norway notes that a lack of adequate legal support makes it
particularly difficult for children to understand or challenge decisions that are made in the
context of age disputes. The report raises concerns that „it is largely a matter of chance
whether and to what extent the asylum seeker receives assistance in documenting his or
her age‟ (2006:06).
Children also have a right to contest a decision and have made available to them a range of
options through which they might be able to prove their age. For example, in the UK if a
child does not agree with the conclusion reached by a social worker‟s assessment, they can
request a medical assessment by a paediatrician. Unfortunately, while this right might be
respected in principle, resource issues can make it difficult to implement in practice. In
Afghanistan there is a practical problem in that if a child wishes to contest the age, there is
an assumption that the child has legal representation and the resources to enable them to
make a challenge (UNICEF, 1995:20). A similar assumption exists in Austria, where
amendments made in 2003 to the Austrian Aliens Act made it possible that „at the request of
the alien, an x-ray of his carpal bones shall be taken at his expense‟ (Einzenberger,
2003:38).
In a Judicial review of Andy Moke and the Refugee Applications Commissioner (2004,
No.374JR), the judgement lays out minimum requirements in terms of informed consent.
These are;
1) The applicant must be told the purpose of the interview in simple terms. This may be
as straightforward as informing the applicant that the interviewers need to decided
whether the applicant is under the age of 18 years.
2) Where an applicant claims to be under 18 years of age and the interviewers form a
view that this claim may be false, the applicant is entitled to be told in simple terms
the reasons for or grounds upon which the interviewers consider the claim may be
false and to be given an opportunity of dealing with those reasons or grounds.
3) Where, as in this instance the applicant produces a document which purports to be
an official document which includes a record of his alleged date of birth and the
33