To think only 3 of the 15 migrant children look under 18

[AmyMiller]

www.google.co.uk/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3843900/amp/First-migrant-children-arrive-UK-Calais-French-prepare-raze-Jungle-camp-ground.html?client=safari

This is so ridiculous, many of them look around 25.

Jihadi John was a British national - but before that, he was a Kuwaiti refugee. As were the rest of his family. None of whom ever worked and for whom the tax payer paid rather a lot in rent, education, benefits etc.

So probably not the best example, netflix!!

Moo yes - similar thoughts here. Like a double bluff. It's not a pr victory for tactivists. With the camp disappearing , this or car crash will additionally reduce public pressure.

Look at this poor child arriving today. It's really wonderful that so many Mumsnetters are willing to have him in a classroom with their 17 year old sons and daughters. Of course he could well be 14-16 years old. We mustn't make assumptions!

Telegraph story on child refugees with disputed ages. But read past the very misleading headline: it's not 2/3 of all child asylum seekers who are found to be adults, it's 2/3 of children where their age is disputed and tested

That's a fully grown man. This has got to be on purpose.

Is there any information on the (claimed) age breakdown of the children in Calais? I've been trying to find information but I can't find any detail, particularly from non-biased sources.

The IB Times has had a series of articles on the Calais 'children' and their pictures (where you can see the faces) look fairly similar to those of today's arrivals here

This has been happening for years. Dm used to teach in primary school where some so called junior boys looked at leat 14.

I showed my Arab DH the child in blue above. He doesn't think he is under 18 either. There really seems to be something odd going on.

Gini on buzzfeed there's some justification from govt about how they were age tested?

Sorry that wasn't your question x

Moo - I posted before - it is because the majority of the unaccompanied children are not younger than 10. I said upthread a couple of months ago I read something where a volunteer at the camp said of the unaccompanied children one was 'as young as 10'.
I found an article in the guardian from a few weeks ago saying there are 'up to 30' under 13s - out of 600. But of those 30 it doesn't say how many have relatives in the UK...which these ones do supposedly have (I would like to see DNA testing as well as age testing...)
www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/02/child-refugees-calais-failed-by-britain
Read the article - there is a 10yr old who is responsible for his 9yr old cousin...
One (either 12 or 9 - not really clear from what is written) was sent by his family from Afghanistan as the oldest child - his family sold half their land to pay the smugglers...I am guessing once he is in the UK his family will be planning to join him...

One also says Europe isn't what he was expecting...and it seems the smugglers dump them in Calais. And they are trying to get on lorries to get them into the UK - because that is what their family expects and paid for - they are frightened...
I'm sorry - but surely their families have to take some blame for their situation - it isn't the UK's fault they are there and trying to get onto lorries. The best thing with the under 13s would be to take them into care in France and then deal with any claims etc they have. Force them into care - so they have an excuse to give their parents - it isn't their fault and they haven't let them down . And that would mean more will be less likely to be sent by their parents in the future (Although the article mentions a cut off date - which I guess is to stop parents sending their children - lets just hope the smugglers don't stop the parents getting that message...)
I think people are so surprised because often news stories talking about unaccompanied children in the past have shown images of 6yo girls or toddlers - who are actually there with their families...
No wonder people are cross and feeling mislead - they have been mislead...

It is outrageous that actual children are being denied access to the UK because these men have taken the places.

And whatever happened to taking refugees from the camps in the Middle East to discourage people from making th dangerous journey?

I am seriously fucked off about this

I'd rather take the under 10s who have no right to be here. Except more young tinies would endanger themselves and be exploited by unscrupulous kidnappers and liars.

If any of the children in Gini's article are under 18 I am a monkey's uncle.

Camp selection definitely the best. But even there , there will be exploitation and corruption. Plus one of the most vulnerable groups, yazidis and Christians, would be left out.

Gini99 Tue 18-Oct-16 20:21:30

scrolled down and found hannid - 15 from Afghanistan he looks 15 to me and a good age gage to look at the others with.

I'm sorry - but surely their families have to take some blame for their situation - it isn't the UK's fault they are there and trying to get onto lorries

I agree but I feel for every success story news spreads. Its up to us to help explain what happens and why the journey is not worth it - in afghan.

I heard wonderful doctor on radio - possibly 4 - possibly 2, he was lovely and explained how he been in A' stan, life at risk - yadda yadda, got himself to uk and is now highly thought of doctor - worked as a waiter and got himself to Cambridge he has a charity giving phones to people in Afghanistan who are doctors to help with medical care by phone.

However - its also up to people with strong links to tell people back home - dont send your sons!

"Mr Davies said: “It’s pretty obvious that migrants who are willing to risk jumping on moving lorries are not going to shy away from lying about their age.

“We have to verify the ages independently with a test. There are two tests - one that involves bone X-rays and one that involves a dental check.

“Currently Government advice is that they need to give these people the benefit of the doubt and that needs to change.

“When I went to Calais there were caravans with notices on how to get coaching on what to say if you need to get into Britain. So I am very concerned about this.

“I’m all for helping innocent children but it is completely ridiculous if we are just going to allow people in based on what they tell us.”

The home office said that their document are checked, the demeanour and physical appearance by 2 yes 2 social workers who then had to sign off on them being under 18

I can't comment on the documents thing, but if social workers are unable to see that some of these "children" are clearly well into adulthood, I'd suggest that either questions need to be asked about their competence - or maybe even about who's pressuring them to make such decisions?

Medical and dental checks were not carried out as they are too intrusive, according to the home office

And if this is true, the Home Office need their arses kicking. I appreciate dental checks aren't exact (though it's pretty close according to gov.uk, which says: The margin of error ... is approximately plus or minus 2 years or less, for 95% of the population) but given what's at stake, anyone who describes having teeth looked at or wrists x-rayed as "intrusive" needs a reality check IMHO

Puzzledandpissedoff

they need a trip to specsavers.

and that is being polite

Medical and dental checks were not carried out as they are too intrusive, according to the home office

^^ surely its more intrusive to allow adults into school with children ?

Unbelievable.

Thus story has pissed me off. Children? Yeah right. Pull the other one.

justgivemeamo

surely its more intrusive to allow adults into school with children

absolutely not. The UK born children are much more privileged than these children and to be honest it doesn't matter if they lied they deserve to be here because it's not up to you to say who owns the land and who can come and go and you are a racist bigot

I just gave you a summary of the whole thread according to 2 posters. You're welcome

they need a trip to specsavers

Hang on - I realize you're referring to assessors rather than the would-be entrants, but no doubt some would insist eye checks are "intrusive" too

Puzzledandpissedoff

You never know. they might like it 😀