Dr. Fiona O'Reilly:

I will comment on our experiences of all that through the children and young people whom we meet. Dr. O'Dalaigh will then give the Senator an idea of the vulnerabilities she is asking about. It is certainly complex, as our colleague from Tusla said. There is a difference between complexity and lack of clarity or transparency. Just to say from the start, there is no doubt that the new document governing this process, which is from March this year, is definitely a move in the right direction and talks about providing for the benefit of the doubt. However, our experience of the age assessment, eligibility assessment or the situation that migrant children who come to the doctor and claim to be a child are in, what they go through and what they understand, is not acceptable and has not been over the last year. If the benefit of the doubt was given to these children, it would not be possible to put people into adult accommodation after deeming them adults and then, eight months later, take them into care because they have been deemed children. If the benefit of the doubt was given right through the appeals process and the assessment, then they should not be put into adult accommodation until after the reassessment.

I understand that Tusla has a responsibility to safeguard other children. The fear is that it would put somebody who is potentially an adult into schools or in with children who are obviously not adults. However, I do not think it has to be black and white. There can be safe accommodation for young people in the process if the process is seen as something more than a once-off or something that happens in 24 hours. One of the things that contributes to the lack of clarity is the fact that, as the Senator said, the age assessment provision is not with Tusla but with the IPO. Therefore, the IPO is using something which Tusla says should not be used for age determination. Based on that, children are being put in risky situations with adults. We accept that while the provision is not with the organisation, what the organisation is actually providing involves making the determination. Who is responsible? That is a big problem.

The children with whom we are still connected, speaking to and being doctors for are waiting for an assessment or reassessment because their papers may have come or they may have resubmitted them. They are in adult accommodation. We have fears and concerns for them. We do what we do when the Children First training tells us to report it on the Tusla portal, but then we are told not to do so for these children because they are not deemed adults based on an assessment that should not have been done by Tusla but is being done by Tusla. In the narratives of our children, they are confused and we are confused. Where are their advocates? I ask Dr. O'Dalaigh to talk about some of the cases of vulnerability.