Child refugees

I saw on the news that there are boarding schools who have offered to take in Syrian refugees (a couple each). They are complaining that no-one is doing anything. I wonder is a British boarding school the best place for a Syrian refugee? Better than a camp I suppose.

www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/06/war-to-sweatshop-for-child-refugees

This is what teenage Syrian refugees are being condemned to when they are being sent back to Turkey.
They should be in school.

Hope your shoes aren't made in Turkey.

www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2015/07/16/600-unaccompanied-child-asylum-seekers-deported-uk-afghanistan/

Not hopeful when this happened last year.

I had been wondering where they would go, as a children's home may not be the right place.Small group homes is a good idea, do you have experience of this GA does it happen ?

I think that is an idea well worth exploring grannya It would keep the connection with each other but offer some structure , care and.individual opportunities and support.

Please may I say a word about Afghan teenagers who are adrift from family in the camps? I can only speak from first hand knowledge about Afghans, but I have no doubt that the stories of teens from Syria, Eritrea and other war torn places will be similar. These young people have seen and experienced some atrocities that I don't want my own grandchildren to even imagine. Many of them are amazingly resilient, but they are nevertheless deeply affected by their experiences. Some have been through serious trauma and/or torture - so much so that people who work with refugees are at risk of themselves being vicariously traumatised. To be a teenage refugee means that you have simply experienced the horrors for longer than a younger child.

I too wish that more had been done for them sooner, in the countries they have passed through on the way. I say this not so that we don't have to deal with them here in the UK, but because it would have shortened the length of time it's taken for them to receive care. To be passed from camp to camp, country to country with no-one reaching out to them simply reinforces their experience of being the world's flotsam and jetsam.

I also worry about what will happen to the children that we do accept; what provision will be made for them and where they will be cared for. My hope is that individual families will be vetted and resourced to take in child refugees as part of a coherent policy, but my experience says that it's unlikely in the current climate.

The question of fostering these children raises all sorts of issues about child protection, long-term strategies for them etc. In my case we would find it very difficult to foster 'home grown' children because of practical difficulties around managing transport. Taking in refugees with no contact requirements is easier for us to commit to and we have experience of living with a diverse mix of cultures, religions and ethnicities. Not everyone can do this so I wonder if there might be some merit in setting up mentoring and/or sponsorship schemes whereby these children can live in small group homes, but have a sponsor family to visit them and take them out etc.

God even my spelling has gone down the pan?

Yvette has been working flat out on the refugee issue since she lost the leadership contest. Fair play to her, she has found a role outside the cabinet where she can try to have an impact and do some good.

Agressive? No! Passionate anc caring, yes - thanks goodness.

Imagine your grandson there, you grand-daughter?

Most of the children in Calais are Afghans, so they wouldn't be considered as Cameron has specified Syrians. The vast majority are male. Most are over 15. There is plenty of evidence for this. They are not wandering around alone, they are with countrymen. They have travelled through plenty of safe countries. I do think we should be doing our share along with other EU countries. I also don't think we care for vulnerable children who are here already that brilliantly. It's not a simple solution.

Hopefully just finding out from LA's what they will be able to provide ahead of decisions?

True rose they have definitely changed their policy, but unfortunately largely because so many of their backbencher so were threatening to rebel.

It is widely agreed that Ed Ball's wife (senior moment)? question last week was a seminal moment. !Eyvett Cooper! ?

It is worrying that they have passed the buck to LAs and are not talking about extra resources as far as I know.

Aggressive?
Where?

Nobody is turning their backs or quibbling, the Government is planning to help.

My my, such aggresive posts! it is a reasonable question to wonder how old most of the children are, just out of interest.This is the way Gransnet is going now,
Such a shame.

I saw a young teenager yesterday hoping to be able to join his family, and he looked a lovely lad. He reminded me so much of my eldest GS. How can we turn our backs.

In fact, jingl, those who are quibbling about ages are looking for a way out.

They do not slip through the net. They walk and ride with other people from their country.

The UK has a special deal with the Dublin agreement, as we do not have a border where anyone can claim asylum directly. They are not allowed to go the UK embassies and claim to come to the UK.
So we agreed as part of the Dublin agreement to take in all the children who have family connections to the UK.
We have not been doing this. We have been very obstructive.
Worldvision says that the government has to give positive help, as what Cameron said yesterday was meaningless without numbers. He could say we've done what he said if we only let in two children.

D'you know? In that kind of situation I doubt if it makes that much difference if a child is seven or fourteen. Not to the child.

ww was talking about tinies. I wondered what the bulk of the ages was of the children.

I think they are mostly teenagers. So what? Bit hard to be all alone in a hostile environment at fourteen, sixteen, or even eighteen. They don't have to be sweet little cuddlies to need care.

Yes, it matters that small children are the first to be cared for.

Hope that we take the younger ones first.

I would hope that my 14 and 16 year old grandchildren would get help if they needed it.
Does it really matter?
They are all children.

I don't think there is any evidence, that's why I ask if perhaps the bulk are teenagers, not sure that anyone seems to know.