Preparation and pathway planning for unaccompanied asylum seeking young people: A review of evidence

1
Preparation and pathway planning for
unaccompanied asylum seeking young people A
review of evidence in England

• Jim Wade

2
Legislation Children Act 1989

• Local councils
• Duty to safeguard and promote the welfare of
  children in need
• Duty to assess and meet the needs of these
  children through provision of appropriate
  services
• May accommodate and look after the child (Section
  20 of CA 1989)
• May support child in the community as a child in
  need (Section 17 of CA 1989)

3
UK asylum applications by UASC (2006)

• Applications by age (2006)
• 3,245 asylum applications by UASC
• 51 aged 16 or 17
• 27 aged 14 or 15
• 16 aged under 14
• 5 age unknown
• Outcomes of asylum applications (2006)
• Indefinite leave to remain (6)
• Discretionary leave to remain (70)
• Refused (16)

4
Study design

• Analysis of social work case files for a sample
  of 212 young people in care of 3 local councils
• Interviews with 31 young people and with their
  main support workers in social services
• Main fieldwork conducted in 2002-2003
• Wade J, Mitchell F, Baylis G (2005) Unaccompanied
  Asylum Seeking Children The Response of Social
  Work Services, London BAAF

5
Preparation what do we know?

• Preparation for looked after young people is
  generally inconsistent
• Good preparation should
• Occur gradually over time
• Context of stable placement
• Maintenance of young peoples key links and
  relationships
• Positive encouragement for education
• Formal integration into child care planning and
  review procedures
• Cover all main life domains

6
Preparation how do UASC compare?

• Although evidence very limited
• Tend to be quite resilient and resourceful
• Less placement movement
• Fewer emotional/behavioural problems
• Tend to do well at school
• Fewer problems on leaving care
• Advantages for those UASC looked after (s20)
• More consistent education participation over time
• Stronger social support networks
• More consistent social work support

7
Multi-dimensional pathway planning

• Flexible planning for several discrete groups
• Those who have long term futures in the UK
  (indefinite leave to remain)
• Those who are seeking a long term future
  (awaiting a final decision)
• Those refused permission to stay (failed asylum
  applicants)
• Those who may choose or be forced to return to
  their countries of origin

8
Pathway planning the evidence

• Written pathway plans rare (only 3 overall 12
  of those looked after)
• Pathway planning too often truncated especially
  for those supported in the community (s17)
• Good planning more likely where there was
  consistent social work contact backed by formal
  planning and review
• Those in unsupported housing were most likely to
  experience poor planning and abrupt transitions

9
After care 18 and over

• Looked after UASC may fare quite well
• More likely to continue in education (including
  higher education)
• More likely to be in supported accommodation
• Appear to experience fewer problem behaviours
• Full entitlement to leaving care support (not
  much evidence of different levels of service
  compared to other care leavers)

10
After care (18 plus) evidence of need

• Most young people had some form of home base -
  mainly independent housing of variable quality
• Some had experienced homelessness and sofa
  surfing
• At a minimum 14 were not in education, training
  or work
• 39 had no recorded support from adults
  (professional or informal)

11
Bringing the story up to date

• Gradual increase in the proportion of UASC looked
  after and eligible for leaving care support
• Continuing tensions in child care and immigration
  policies create an uncertain terrain for social
  work with UASC
• Home Office Reform Programme (2008) what will
  the future look like?