Seven-fold increase in child neglect reports from direct provision centre managers

Commending the direct provision centre managers who fulfilled their obligations by making reports to Tusla, the Ombudsman for Children Niall Muldoon, said children ought not be at risk in such centres. 

There was a more than seven-fold increase in mandated reports of child neglect in direct provision centres last year.

Direct provision centre managers reported 15 cases of child neglect to Tusla in 2020, in comparison to just two cases of neglect in both 2018 and 2019. There were also two cases of sexual abuse, five cases of physical abuse, and seven cases of emotional abuse of a child or children reported to Tusla by direct provision centre managers last year.

This compares to two reports of child sexual abuse, nine cases of physical abuse, and five reports of emotional abuse of a child or children in 2019.

Centre managers reported no instances of sexual abuse of a child or children in direct provision centres to Tusla in 2018. Six cases of physical abuse were reported that year and 14 cases of emotional abuse of a child or children.

Ombudsman for Children, Niall Muldoon, whose office earlier this year highlighted the inherent vulnerability of minors in the direct provision process which, they said, Tusla did not recognise. Picture: Maxwells

In addition to the 29 reports from direct provision centre managers in 2020, who are mandated reporters under the Children First Act 2015, Tusla received an additional 53 referrals regarding neglect and abuse from direct provision centres last year.

The agency said corresponding non-mandated reports for previous years are not available.

A spokesperson for Tusla said all child protection and welfare concerns are screened and assessed in line with Children First, child protection legislation.

“When a report is received by Tusla the first consideration is always the immediate safety of the child. All reports and information are checked on the day that they are received, and emergency action is taken if it is necessary. Some concerns may not require social work intervention and can be dealt with through other types of support services.” 

Tusla did not provide details as to how many reports, if any, required emergency action.

Inherent vulnerability

A recent investigation carried out by the Ombudsman for Children’s Office (OCO) found that Tusla did not recognise the inherent vulnerability of minors in the international protection process and “failed to make reasonable adjustments, which would give the children in DP [direct provision] an equal opportunity to reach their full potential".

The investigation also concluded that Tusla has no effective mechanism to gather data about children living in direct provision accommodation which might identify risks and inform planning at a strategic level.

Tusla, the HSE and International Protection Accommodation Services (IPAS) have also failed to collaborate to provide on-site preventative and early intervention services and to gather data on national trends of referrals to services, it said.

Following the office’s investigation, the Ombudsman recommended Tusla conduct a review of child protection and welfare referrals from April 3, 2017 (when the OCO began to accept complaints on behalf of children in direct provision) to ensure that no child residing in State provided accommodation is “at an enduring risk of harm” as a result of the issues identified in this investigation.

John Lannon, chief executive of Doras: 'In many cases Direct Provision staff are not adequately trained in child protection... and in one case staff members were not even vetted to work with children.'

A spokesperson for Tusla said the agency accepts “all the findings” of the report and is working to implement its recommendations.

Ombudsman for Children Dr Niall Muldoon said while the overall increase in mandated reports is “very concerning for the children involved” updates to the reporting system may be a contributing factor to the overall increase.

“Children should not be at risk in direct provision centres or any other setting funded by public money, but where there are reports of child abuse and neglect, they should be treated extremely seriously and thoroughly investigated,” he said, adding that he commended all of the managers who fulfilled their obligations and made reports to Tusla when they were concerned.

Dr Muldoon added that the OCO will carry out a six-month review of the recommendations made in April 2021.

Child welfare issues ‘inextricably linked’ to lack of supports, living conditions, and mental health of parents

John Lannon, chief executive of Doras, an NGO working to promote and protect the rights of migrants and those in direct provision centres, said direct provision is an “entirely inappropriate environment” for children and this is reflected in the reports to Tusla: 

Families are forced to live in unsuitable settings for many years, waiting for their asylum applications to be processed. For parents, giving their children the care and attention they need and deserve is next to impossible, given the restrictive and isolated nature of living in direct provision.  

Mr Lannon said there has been an “ongoing failure” amongst statutory service providers to “recognise the vulnerability of children within the international protection process".

 “In many cases Direct Provision staff are not adequately trained in child protection, with the Ombudsman for Children’s 2021 report noting that in one case staff members were not even vetted to work with children and that parents were given misleading and harmful information.” 

Mr Lannon also pointed to a 2015 Hiqa report which listed a range of issues including children sharing accommodation with unrelated adults and “inappropriate contact” by adults towards children.

Many of these issues “remain a concern,” he said.

While the real solution must be an end to direct provision, the absence of independent oversight and human rights-based inspections of centres is a factor at present. 

The Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth announced last October that Hiqa would undertake independent monitoring but to date this has not happened.“ 

Mr Lannon said the absence of an independent monitoring, oversight and human rights-based inspections of direct provision centres has contributed to an ”already dysfunctional system that falls short in terms of child protection":

Families are isolated from the support services they need, and this is having a detrimental effect on the wellbeing and development of children. 

Indeed, he said Hiqa inspectors in 2015 found common themes arising from child welfare concerns including physical or mental illness of parents impacting on their capacity to care for their children and gaps in the provision of practical support.

Bulelani Mfaco pointed out that the Movement of Asylum Seekers in Ireland which he represents had previously expressed concerns about children's wellbeing in the 'abhorrent' direct provision system. Picture: Leah Farrell/RollingNews

“Child welfare issues are not something that happens in a vacuum,” he said, “they are inextricably linked to the lack of supports, the living conditions, and the mental health of parents who are left languishing in direct provision for many years, socially excluded, stripped of their dignity, and without any hope for their future.

This is still the reality for families in direct provision, and until such time as it is abolished, parents will not be in a position to care for their children properly.

Bulelani Mfaco, spokesperson for the Movement of Asylum Seekers in Ireland (MASI) said the group has previously expressed concerns about children's wellbeing within the “abhorrent” system of direct provision.

“Children themselves reported to the Ombudsman for Children that they were concerned for their safety. This is because direct provision is not a home. It is an institutional set-up that shouldn't exist.” Mr Mfaco said the group has urged, and continues to urge, the Government to get children out of direct provision centres.

Their childhoods will be lost forever the longer they stay in the system. 

"The entire set-up is not suitable for children. Report after report shows this and the government does little to change the material realities of children in direct provision."