Children in immigration detention

Parliament house flag post

Children in immigration detention

Posted 20/08/2012 by Rebecca de Boer



As part of the Government’s response to the Expert Panel on Asylum Seekers, it would appear that children will again be held in processing centres on Nauru. This policy has been subject to sustained criticisms by refugee advocates, human rights groups and government backbenchers. The debate in the Parliament last week reflected this, with many voicing opposition and deep disquiet to the return of such an approach. While not much is known about the arrangements and conditions specifically for children on Nauru in the past, this Flag Post provides a brief history of the effects on children in detention in the Australian context and a summary of some of the key research papers about the impact on children in detention.

Brief history (reproduced from ‘Immigration detention in Australia’ by Janet Phillips and Harriet Spinks)

During the Howard Government, the Australian Human Right Commission (formerly HREOC) produced a report in 2004 which was highly critical of the detention of children. In response, the Government rejected the findings and recommendations of the report and reaffirmed its commitment to the policy of mandatory detention. At the time the Minister stated that ‘to release all children from detention in Australia would be to send a message to people smugglers that if they carry children on dangerous boats, parents and children will be released into the community very quickly’.

However, in June 2005, following significant pressure from certain Coalition members of the back bench, the Howard Government announced a ‘softening’ of immigration detention policy, including the release of families with children into community detention arrangements.

The detention of children has also proved to be a contentious issue for the Labor Government. One of the seven ‘immigration detention values’ endorsed by Cabinet in 2008 was that children should not be held in immigration detention centres, but in lower security detention alternatives such as immigration transit accommodation or in community detention. Yet as more and more people began arriving by boat from 2008 onwards this ‘value’ was put to the test. The number of children being held in detention rose steadily, attracting vocal criticism from refugee advocates and human rights groups.

In response to growing pressure by interest groups and overcrowding in detention centres generally, the Immigration Minister announced in October 2010 that children would be progressively moved out of detention facilities into community-based accommodation by June 2011.Progress on this commitment proved to be slow, but by 30 June 2011 the Government announced it had moved ‘most’ children out of centres and into community detention.
Due to the recent increase in asylum seekers (including 208 children) arriving by boat, the number of children in detention facilities increased during June 2012. As at 30 June 2012, there were 591 children (aged under 18 years) in immigration detention facilities and alternative places. Of these, 489 children were in community based detention. The Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIAC) notes that the majority of children in facilities based detention have been in detention for less than two months. It also notes that no children are detained in an immigration detention centre (refer to p. 7 of Immigration Detention Statistics Summary, 30 June 2012)

Research

The negative impact of detention on children is well known. As noted by DIAC in its submission to Joint Select Committee on Australia’s Immigration Detention Network (2011), children who spend time in detention are more likely to experience post-traumatic stress disorder, high levels of depression and poor mental health (p. 63). The likelihood of this increases with the length of time spent time in detention.

Although the sample size of these studies is small, the results are consistent across multiple studies.

  • Steel et al (2004) documented the psychiatric status of asylum seeker families in a remote detention centre in Australia. This was the first study of its kind to report on the mental status of whole families. All families in the study had been in detention for more than two years. All children had at least one (independently assessed) psychiatric disorder and most (80%) had multiple disorders. Every adult was diagnosed with a major depressive disorder and most had persistent thoughts of killing themselves. Parents also reported that detention compromised their capacity to parent their children. All children reported boredom, isolation and poor quality food. A number of children had witnessed friends and family harming themselves further compounding the negative mental health impacts of detention.
  • In the same year, Mares and Jureidini (2004) reported on referrals from a remote detention centre to a child and adolescent mental health service. All of the 20 children (ranging from 11 months to 17 years) that participated in the study had at least one parent with a psychiatric illness and had been detention for at least 12 months. The majority of preschool aged children displayed developmental delay or emotional disturbance. Of the ten children aged 10-17 years, all were diagnosed with post traumatic stress disorder and major depression. Around 80% of these children had attempted self harm. This study also highlighted the lack of access to appropriate services and treatment by these children and the ethical tensions faced by clinicians providing care in the detention context.
  • Similar results were found in a Demark study. Nielsen et al (2008) concluded that protracted stays in asylum centres had an adverse effect on children’s mental health. Children who spent more than a year in detention were more likely to report mental difficulties. As a result of these findings, it was recommended that a time limit be applied to time spent by children in detention.

These examples are by no means exhaustive. Submissions to the HEROC Inquiry into children in detention were sobering, especially the evidence from the Department of Immigration about the levels suicide and self-harm among children in detention centres (statistics for the past ten years can be found at Figure 13 of this report). Last year (May 2011), there were reports of children under the age of ten attempting self harm in the Darwin immigration detention centre. Although the number of children in this study was small, a clear association was documented between the time spent in detention and incidence of mental illness.

It is not yet clear what the conditions in Nauru will be like. There have been reports that asylum seekers will only be subject to a night curfew and children will be able to attend local schools. The Nauru Foreign Minister has been quoted as wanting to make ‘the process as good as it can be’. The Government has given an undertaking that there will be greater oversight for Manus Island and Nauru than previously. There are also Ministerial powers to exempt vulnerable people (including children) from offshore processing centres where it is in the ‘public interest’ (see section 198AE of the Migration Legislation Amendment (Regional Processing and Other Measures) Bill 2012. Note – public interest is not defined in the Bill).

There is strong evidence that children held in detention are likely to suffer from adverse mental health outcomes and the likelihood of this increases with time. And the children who remain in war torn countries or refugee camps are also likely to experience a similar fate. Yet for the children who are held in Australian offshore processing centres, reconciling this evidence with the concept of ‘no advantage’ will be a considerable policy challenge for Government.

Key references:


Nielsen, S., Norredam, M., Christiansen, K., Obel, C.,Hilden, J. & Krasnik, A, (2008), Mental Health among children seeking asylum in Denmark: The effect of length of stay and number of relocations, a cross-sectional study, BMC Public Health, 8, pp 293-302;

Mares, S. and Jureidini, J. (2004), Psychiatric assessment of children and families in immigration detention: Clinical, administrative and ethical issues,’ Australia and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 28, pp 520-526.

Steel, Z. Momartin, S., Bateman, C. Hafshejmii, A. Silove, D.M., Everson, N., Roy, K, Dudley, M. Newman, L, Blick, B. and Mares, S. (2004), Psychiatric status of asylum seeker families held for a protracted period in a remote detention centre in Australia, Australia and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, December 28(6), pp 527-536



Thank you for your comment. If it does not require moderation, it will appear shortly.
Facebook LinkedIn Twitter Add | Email Print

FlagPost

Flagpost is a blog on current issues of interest to members of the Australian Parliament


Parliamentary Library Logo showing Information Analysis & Advice

Archive

Syndication

Tagcloud

refugees asylum immigration Australian foreign policy Parliament climate change elections women social security Indigenous Australians Australian Bureau of Statistics Employment Sport illicit drugs people trafficking taxation Medicare welfare reform Australian Defence Force higher education welfare policy United Nations health financing Asia income management Middle East criminal law disability Australian Sports Anti-Doping Agency World Anti-Doping Agency United States federal budget gambling school education forced labour aid statistics Australian Electoral Commission WADA emissions trading dental health Australia in the Asian Century steroids detention Private health insurance OECD ASADA labour force transport Law Enforcement Australian Federal Police Industrial Relations people smuggling National Disability Insurance Scheme Australian Crime Commission slavery Senate election results Papua New Guinea Australian Public Service constitution International Women's Day corruption Afghanistan Fair Work Act child protection debt federal election 2013 parliamentary procedure poker machines ALP New Zealand Newstart Parenting Payment 43rd Parliament political parties Census High Court skilled migration voting Federal Court terrorist groups Higher Education Loan Program HECS youth paid parental leave Aviation environment foreign debt gross debt net debt defence capability customs doping health crime health risks multiculturalism aged care Gonski Review of Funding for Schooling sex slavery sea farers Special Rapporteur leadership United Kingdom UK Parliament Electoral reform politics banking firearms public policy violence against women domestic violence mental health China ADRV terrorism social media pensions welfare ASIO intelligence community Australian Security Intelligence Organisation governance public service reform Carbon Pricing Mechanism carbon tax mining military history employer employee fishing by-election European Union same sex relationships international relations coal seam gas family assistance planning United Nations Security Council Australian economy food vocational education and training Drugs health reform Indonesia children codes of conduct terrorist financing health system money laundering asylum seekers early childhood education Canada Population Financial sector national security fuel disability employment Tasmania integrity science research and development Australian Secret Intelligence Service sexual abuse federal state relations World Trade Organization Australia accountability housing affordability bulk billing water renewable energy children's health health policy Governor-General US economy export liquefied natural gas foreign bribery question time speaker superannuation expertise Senators and Members climate Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry food labelling Pacific Islands reserved seats new psychoactive substances synthetic drugs UNODC carbon markets Indigenous constitutional recognition of local government local government consumer laws PISA royal commission US politics language education baby bonus Leaders of the Opposition Parliamentary remuneration Australia Greens servitude Trafficking Protocol energy forced marriage rural and regional Northern Territory Emergency Response ministries social citizenship human rights High Court; Indigenous; Indigenous Australians; Native Title ACT Indigenous education Norfolk Island External Territories emissions reduction fund; climate change child care funding refugees immigration asylum procurement Indigenous health e-voting internet voting nsw state elections 44th Parliament 2015 ABS Age Pension Death penalty capital punishment execution Bali nine Bali bombings Trade EU China soft power education Fiji India Disability Support Pension Antarctica Diplomacy by-elections state and territories workers Bills anti-corruption fraud bribery transparency corporate ownership whistleblower G20 economic reform innovation standards NATO Members of Parliament Scottish referendum Middle East; national security; terrorism social services Criminal Code Amendment (Misrepresentation of Age to a Minor) Bill 2013 online grooming sexual assault of minors ACT Assembly public health smoking plain packaging tobacco cigarettes Asia; Japan; international relations Work Health and Safety Migration; asylum seekers; regional processing China; United States; international relations fiscal policy Racial Discrimination Act; social policy; human rights; indigenous Australians Foreign policy Southeast Asia Israel Palestine regional unemployment asylum refugees immigration political finance donations foreign aid Economics efficiency productivity human rights; Racial Discrimination Act employment law bullying Animal law; food copyright Australian Law Reform Commission industry peace keeping contracts workplace policies trade unions same-sex marriage disorderly conduct retirement Parliament House standing orders public housing prime ministers election timetable sitting days First speech defence budget submarines Somalia GDP forestry world heritage political engagement leave loading Trade; tariffs; safeguards; Anti-dumping public interest disclosure whistleblowing Productivity Commission regulation limitation period universities Ireland cancer gene patents genetic testing suspension of standing and sessional orders animal health live exports welfare systems infant mortality middle class welfare honorary citizen railways disciplinary tribunals standard of proof World Health Organisation arts international students skilled graduate visas temporary employment visas apologies roads Italy national heritage NHMRC nutrition anti-dumping Constitutional reform referendum Rent Assistance competition policy pharmaceutical benefits scheme obesity evidence law sacrament of confession US presidential election international days DFAT UN General Assembly deregulation Regulation Impact Statements administrative law small business Breaker Morant homelessness regional engagement social determinants of health abortion Youth Allowance Members suspension citizen engagement policymaking federal election 2010 workplace health and safety Trafficking in Persons Report marine reserves hearing TAFE Victoria astronomy resources sector YMCA youth parliament alcohol Korea rebate Australian Greens presidential nomination Racial Discrimination Act entitlements political parties preselection solar hot water Financial Action Taskforce Horn of Africa peacekeeping piracy Great Barrier Reef Stronger futures political financing Hung Parliament political education social inclusion Social Inclusion Board maritime early childhood National Quality Framework for Early Childhood Education and Care Murray-Darling Basin Iran sanctions Norway hospitals republic President Barack Obama Presidential visits

Show all
Show less
Back to top