Lesser youth?: particular universalisms and young separated migrants in East London

Abstract

While entitlements are often expressed as universal and linked to the rights citizens should have, young people's access to them is shaped by their social positioning, meaning that whether, and in what sense, they are citizens is pertinent. If citizens have access to universal entitlements, does this position certain young people who do not have such access as ‘lesser youth’ because their entitlements are reduced and citizenship diminished or non-existent? This paper examines whether and how young, separated migrants wanting refuge may be positioned as ‘lesser youth’. It draws on a sample of them and multisector professionals examining qualitative data on accessing health care, sexual exploitation and rebuilding lives. The data suggest that the legislative and institutional framework they face militates against their enjoying the ‘universal’ entitlements of citizens. This reflects their positioning as ‘lesser youth’ excluded from the full rights citizens are entitled to. Such a positioning is in large part underpinned by contested notions of nationhood, belonging and entitlement central to communitarian citizenship but which exclude them. We argue that a meaningful citizenship for these youth requires a contestation of restrictive communitarian ideas and practices in ways forwarding a more inclusive and socially just multicultural UK.

Keywords:

• refugees
• citizenship
• race
• asylum seekers
• universalism
• multiculturalism
• unaccompanied
• youth

Notes

1. The term ‘separated’ rather than ‘unaccompanied’ is used when describing those wanting refuge, aged under 18, and not cared for by parents or their usual carer. This follows the UN High Commission on Refugees’ (UNHCR 2004, p. 2) suggestion. Like the term ‘unaccompanied’ preferred by the UK government, this covers asylum seekers under 18 and cared for by social services because no parents or ‘usual carers’ are available to care for them. However, the term ‘separated’ also includes those separated from usual carers or parents who are either seen by social services as part of extended families and not requiring their support as ‘unaccompanied’, or whose care arrangements are unknown to state authorities. The UNHCR notes that such children and young people may face heightened risks of labour exploitation, sexual exploitation and ill health. This paper focuses on young, separated migrants, including both those classified as ‘unaccompanied’ and those who are not.

2. We included her because she wanted to participate as her friends had and we felt her experiences might help illuminate what happens when care arrangements become less extensive after the age of 18.

3. PIIS are those who have no legal immigration status in a country, including those who have had their claims for asylum refused beyond appeal and have no other valid visa, as well as those whose presence remains undetected.

4. Compulsory psychiatric care, contraception and certain care for certain communicable diseases are exempted from this (Department of Health 2004). Further information can be found at www.dh.gov.uk/en/Healthcare/International/AsylumseekersAndrefugees/index.htm [accessed 8 October 2008].

5. Following a judicial review on 10/11 April 2008, a High Court ruling now makes it possible for failed asylum seekers to be considered “ordinarily resident” in the UK and therefore entitled to free NHS hospital treatment. The Department of Health is considering options on a potential appeal, but unless and until the decision is overturned, the Judge's decision is effectively the law. Guidance has now been issued by DH to the NHS, stating that trusts must consider whether each failed asylum seeker that they treat can be seen as ordinarily resident in the UK, in the same way as they would do with any other patient. However, this requires asylum seekers to provide written proof that they have been granted temporary admission or temporary release from detention, and that they have been in the country for “a significant period”. This period is unspecified (Department of Health 2008b). The implications are that undetected migrants, including those separated and under 18 who have no such documentation, continue to have very limited rights to non-emergency health care.

6. After the end of data collection the rules regarding immigration changed. The category of ILR (indefinite leave to remain) has been replaced with temporary leave to remain (TLR) for those asylum seekers who are eventually granted refugee status. Those holding TLR must reapply for residence at least every five years post 18, which means the permanent residence status of those classified as 'refugees' is no longer guaranteed.

7. The government has now removed its exemptions from the UNCRC. However, while this in principle might suggest a move towards equal entitlements, young separated migrants remain subject to the possibility of removal enshrined within immigration legislation (Gillen 2008).