Guest post: "Britain must not turn its back on child refugees in Europe"

[MumsnetGuestPosts]

I can only imagine my desperation if I had to consider sending my boys away just to keep them safe.

But if I ever had to, I’d want a mother like Karen to be there for them. Karen is an amazing woman who told her story of fostering a refugee boy and brought huge attention to a campaign to get more refugee children settled safely in Britain.

This week, MPs had the chance to vote to let mothers like Karen keep doing what they want to do - opening their homes and their hearts to refugee children who are in Europe all alone without a mum or dad to look after them. I'm ashamed to say that they did not, and that the government decided to close the door to the thousands of children who need our help. The campaign was only asking for 3,000 children to come to Britain. To put that in context – that would be just five children per parliamentary constituency, and nowhere near the 10,000 mostly Jewish children that Britain saved through the Kindertransport before the Second World War.

I took a special interest in this vote because I have been working at Theirworld to help create school places for Syrian refugee children in Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan, where many fleeing families arrive first. I have been focused on how to make sure that children never embark on a further dangerous journey to find a safe haven. When I saw that the British parliament was considering a vote to offer a welcome to 3,000 lone children who really need us to open our hearts and homes, I wanted to add my support. So last week I wrote to my local MP for the first time ever. I wanted his backing for refugee children, an issue that goes well beyond party politics. I know lots of Mumsnetters contacted their MPs too and have heard from many of you on Twitter. It was devastating to see the government vote down the proposal to give safety to lone refugee children in Europe.

But this does not stop there. The House of Lords last night voted to back the bill thanks to the efforts of Lord Dubs and other campaigners. So it goes back to the House of Commons next Tuesday with a chance for MPs to reconsider their vote and help 3,000 lone children.

One of the ways you can help them think again is to sign this petition. If enough of us do it then perhaps a few more MPs will listen and reconsider their vote. In pushing for this change we won't be on our own – we have the backing of lots of energetic dedicated groups like Citizens UK, Save the Children, HelpRefugees and others. This weekend the former Archbishop of Canterbury gave his blessing, arguing that this is a chance to honour what our parents and grandparents did in the face of an earlier catastrophe.

This is not a question of sparking a new political controversy - that is not my way and not the Mumsnet way, I don't think - it is a matter of simple humanity. While we can't ensure that every child is safe in his or her own country, we can act to prevent children dying on our doorstep here in Europe, and ensure a safe home and education and hope for a better future.

As long as this terrible crisis runs on and horribly on - then we have obligations to the children who are here in our continent. Our MPs now have a second chance to help these vulnerable children and we should help them to take it.

Please join me, and sign here: Britain must not turn its back on child refugees in Europe.

Maudd and Cheese

You clearly know what you're talking about, have masses of personal experience, and deserve all respect for making huge personal sacrifices for what you believe in.

Of course, now that you have mentioned that the system here is badly overstretched and that the new arrivals are closer to 18 than 5, you have committed ideological heresy against the Open Borders cult, who will now denounce you in the most vicious terms as liars and xenophobes!

I think the experience ofKaren, the foster carer linked to in the op is very interesting,

Karen said she wasn't sure what to expect when she first agreed to foster a refugee, but has no regrets.

She said: 'You get the call and you always want to help. I was concerned if what he had been through would reflect on his behaviour and if he would be challenging but he is a lovely, sweet boy and it couldn't have worked out better.'

Karen said: 'When he talks about his journey it is horrific what he went through and the risks he took and how many children don't make it through.

'He has seen a lot of dead bodies along the way, he has been through a lot to get here but he wasn't safe at home.'

Speaking of the risk he faced while clinging to a train, she said: 'He was scared and said if he died his mother wouldn't know where his body was.'

She said he is adapting to his new life in Britain which is a far cry from his upbringing.

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3549754/Foster-mother-14-year-old-Afghan-refugee-reveals-clung-bottom-train-Channel-Tunnel-reach-Britain.html#ixzz47JYBuKk7

Such a contrast to the cynical and negative responses here.

Over the last few days I've spent more time than is probably sensible trying to find how they define "missing children" in this context, and unless I've missed something the information just doesn't seem to be there

So does anyone at all actually know what's meant by this? Is there in fact any real basis to it, or is it just a wild guess - or worse still a cynical invention - designed to ramp up the gnashing of teeth?

Emily - given one of the thread's foster carers tells of a child brought from Manchester to the South East because there was nowhere for the child to go, can you expand upon the "spaces for all" because I must be missing something.

Still awaiting your answers/contribution/solutions.

emily

"I think the experience of Karen, the foster carer linked to in the op is very interesting"

Karen sounds amazing - so how many will you be fostering personally, following her awesome example?

"Sarah, I don't think me not having a spare room is a barrier to the 3000 children coming to the UK."

So what if you don't have a spare room? You’ve just stated that in Europe today we have “Children sleeping rough. Kept in cages. Not being schooled. Beaten by fascists and not protected by police ... Beatings with truncheons. Made to kneel in mud. Babies born dead. Babies moaning from the cold in tents outside in winter ... Refugee children and adults in boats shot at ...”

So are you refusing to help the desperate people you keeping forcing the rest of us to take just because you don’t have a spare room? What kind of a humanitarian attitude is that? I’m sure you wouldn't mind sharing a room to save these desperate children, right? Right?

There was a report on local tv. There had been an alert recently as 3700 minors had disappeared from reception centres (not children's homes as they're now all full) and there was concern that this was due to Mafia activity, but it later transpired that many had moved on to find relatives (these were mainly North African teens).

This article states that an average of 4700 go missing every month from Italian reception centres and children's homes. This does not include those that escape registration. These are Europol figures. The article however expands on the Europol findings, which imply all the missing minors become victims of organised crime, and explains that many of these minors are North African, with family connections in Rome or Milan, plus others do not want to remain in Italy for economic reasons:

Da un lato, gran parte dei minori stranieri non accompagnati non vuole rimanere in Italia, ma cerca di raggiungere i paesi del nord Europa, come la Svezia, la Germania o il Regno Unito. In alcuni casi, vogliono raggiungere i famigliari o gli amici che vivono già lì; in altri, si dirigono a nord per trovare un paese con un'economia più florida, dove hanno più possibilità di andare a scuola ed eventualmente di trovare un lavoro, dove l'integrazione è più facile e più probabile.

"Escludono assolutamente la permanenza in Italia, salvo in alcuni casi che rappresentano però un'eccezione," dice Prosperi a VICE News.

"Naturalmente, sono minori che hanno intenzione di rendersi invisibili, non vogliono essere identificati, non vogliono rilasciare le loro impronte, non vogliono entrare nel sistema di accoglienza; hanno il timore che una volta raggiunto il paese di destinazione possano essere rinviati nel paese d'origine," spiega.

Sorry, could not find the article in English.

So are you refusing to help the desperate people you keeping forcing the rest of us to take just because you don’t have a spare room? What kind of a humanitarian attitude is that? I’m sure you wouldn't mind sharing a room to save these desperate children, right? Right?

How very PA.

emily How many children are you looking at taking in then?

CoolforKittyCats

"How very PA"

That part was my question - it's the only way to deal with some people. Just wait to see the answer to your question and you'll realize I'm 100% right!

Ops sorry wing

Thanks, Izlet

So if I'm reading this right and many of these "minors" are assessing national economic issues, negotiating registration procedures, tracing relatives and relocating accordingly, I'm left feeling it's hardly the kind of thing you'd expect little children such as those in OP's post to be capable of

If we add to this the numerous reports about the very significant numbers who've been found not to be children at all, I also have to wonder exactly what agenda those putting out these figures have ...

This shower lay out an agenda, Puzzled.

Some of the hyperbole and rhetoric may be familiar, particularly the 'we will all kill ourselves' emotional blackmail.

They, and others sharing such an agenda, are also keen to share such information as you outline, and actively encourage many migrants not to register in a safe country, but to shop around and demand to go to more economically advantageous countries.

emilybohemia Just to give you a heads up, linking DM articles doesnt go down well on MN. its wrtitten off as right wing manipulative tosh. In fact its soley credited with educating millions of the UK population with its supposedly anti immigration postion.

It is linked to in the op, Stepinto.

So if I'm reading this right and many of these "minors" are assessing national economic issues, negotiating registration procedures, tracing relatives and relocating accordingly, I'm left feeling it's hardly the kind of thing you'd expect little children such as those in OP's post to be capable of

Yes Puzzled, any five year olds capable of that would probably be snapped up and put into a G&T programme somewhere.

I think that is what is annoying me, the gaslighting going on. pretending we are talking about small toddlers and that men aren't pretending to be children It's the same tactics the trans movement are using and in each case it will be women that suffer.

For the record Emilybohemia, I have never turned down a foster child on grounds of race or religion, so not sure how I can show prejudiced attitudes

I don't take little children because I'm not set up to take them, haven't got the equipment in the house and anyway there are usually foster carers who prefer to take babies and under tens. We get the call from social services for emergencies and often only have a name, age and pick up place. They could be born and bred ten minutes away or newly arrived in the country, it doesn't matter to us - it's our job to look after these children and as long as it's safe for everyone in the household to do so we take them.

Me too howto.

Although I'm mostly finding Emily's assertions amusing. Bless her. She's certainly tenacious.

It's your statement, 'We just don't have the capacity,' that concerns me, cheese. Can you honestly say your experience is the same all around the country and that there are no empty beds or available places? What about Purplecrocs comment, who is also a foster carer?

This is their comment,

'There are also lots of foster carers with empty beds at the moment who would be willing to help these children. I'm a foster carer. Several carers in my area have expressed an interest in helping out refugees, or already have foreign children living with them.

Yes the children come from very troubled backgrounds and have experienced severe trauma - so have lots of the children foster carers already care for.

From memory I think there are around 330 local authorities in England. That would mean less than 10 children per LA. Is it really better for these children to stay in the danger they're currently in?'

Wouldn't it be better to try to encourage improvement and provisions for refugee children rather than simply saying it's not possible?

Wouldn't it be better to believe in unicorns and faries and a world without borders where money grew on trees and everyone was exactly the age they claimed and believed wholeheartedly in love and peace and equality and glitter?

I'm leaving the thread to those who can be arsed to debate this claptrap.

Some of the hyperbole and rhetoric may be familiar

Yes, you could say that

I don't know purplecrocs Emilybohemia. I know the real life experience of the foster carers in my area in the South East. The only carers who have empty beds in this area are those who foster little children and won't take hard to place teens, the ones my social worker calls 'the bitey, sweary ones!'

You can have all the ideals in the world to wish a situation were different, but this is the case in my neck of the woods.

If there is one child in this country (and I know there are many more) who is still waiting for foster care, these 3,000 should not be allowed in.

If these 3,000 children are currently in Calais then they are no longer asylum seekers but economic migrants and should not be allowed in.

No-one knows what percentage of these 'children' are in fact 18+ adults. I do not want adults masquerading as children allowed into this country. There have been cases in Sweden of male migrant 'children' sexually assaulting and raping women, and who were subsequently found to be adults.

I would also like to ask Sarah Brown how many of these children she will personally be fostering.

It is a bit harder to foster traumatised children than just offering a bed and board. If that were the case I could take two little ones today. I have space in home and in heart.

What I don't have is the expertise. I understand that it takes about a year to qualify to foster, doing both the Skills to Foster course and also the CWDP piece of work, which involves written evidence of each skill that you have for working with foster children, fellow professionals, schools, community etc etc. All this qualification is needed before you have the skills to work with traumatised children. It takes a long time to complete.

Other than that you can have all the kindness in the world and then risk the placement failing and then feel terrible that you let these children down.

A lot of people on this thread have said we need more information, more specialist skills, and a good hard look at what is needed. I agree with this. We will only let these children down inevitably if we do not think things through.

Rortycrankle I totally agree with you. If one of our UK children is still in need of bringing into a safe home with a foster family, we must help these children who are also at risk or in danger first.

Totally agree Rorty & Yuk (& plenty of others). There are no foster families waiting in the wings, there are no resources to recruit more, taxes are already high and people don't want them raised. Yet the NB crew seem hellbent on flooding the country with unlimited numbers, without giving a second's thought to the consequences.

I think NB are ridiculously idealistic and see the whole thing as one big game - except it isn't, they're playing with people's lives by doing things such as encouraging migrants to break through border fences and supporting them in lying about their ages/nationalities.