Governing complexity: the case of age assessment procedures for unaccompanied migrant children in the UK

Hundreds of unaccompanied migrant children seeking asylum in the UK are being wrongly assessed by the UK Border Force (immigration officials) as adults at the point of entry into the UK. Recent legislation adopted by the British Government has further blurred the legal and policy remit of age assessment: whether it should serve an immigration enforcement role or a social care one. There are various forms of age assessment currently in place used to determine migrants’ age: the visual age assessment (used by immigration officials at the border), a more holistic method (Merton-compliant) used by social workers (local authorities), the scientific methods (still in pipeline) used medical experts and judicial review, where judges decide cases of age disputes. The multiplicity of methods and the 'complex interdependencies' between all these various professionals and actors involved with age assessment generates complexity, and specifically ambiguity, over the ownership for age assessment decisions: namely, who is the final adjudicator to determine unaccompanied migrants’ age: is it social workers, immigration officials, medical doctors and judges (courts). The complexification of the age assessment(s) as evidenced by the variety of professionals and their roles, along with the blurred responsibility and accountability lines for cases where children are wrongly assessed as adults, unveils the political dilemmas regarding how to govern migration through the chronological age perspective, given that no age determination method is 100% accurate. This paper draws on recent qualitative interview data with key stakeholders (social workers, clinicians, refugee charities, doctors, statisticians, immigration lawyers) involved in age assessment(s), official statistics, along with legal and policy documents to illustrate one of the “wicked” problems in migration governance: the policy of age assessment regarding unaccompanied migrant children without documents to prove their age. The empirical findings show governing age assessment processes in the UK generates complexity and uncertainty in terms of the policy framing (migration control, social care), blurred accountability and responsibility structures for flawed age assessments and the development of 'complex actor networks with diffuse roles and positions'. It is argued that governing age assessment generates complexity due to the power struggles between various rationales, such as immigration control, child protection, medical reasoning, which in practice translates into inaccurate and inconsistent outcomes of age disputes.