Background: During the last 20 years, in Europe the immigration phenomenon has progressively grown, and nowadays it has been accepted as an intrinsic and widespread phenomenon of the demographic and social dynamics of the nations. This phenomenon has created significant changes within the host Countries. A particular and fundamental aspect of such phenomenon concerns the state of the clandestine children immigrated in one of the European Union (EU) Countries, as well as the child protection provided and carried into effect by the different EU Countries. Aim: aim of the present study is to evaluate different EU Countries approaches to the already described emergency and to analyse the main differences on child protection policies such as expatriation, health and education, particularly on what attains unaccompanied children. Methods: The analysis has reviewed 6 countries of the EU, two Mediterranean (Italy-Spain), two of the Center Europe (France-Germany) and two of the North (UK-Sweden) pairing them according to their common historical-geographical background, in order to highlight the considerable differences. The comparison analysis has been conducted considering the last decade, evaluating primarily the acknowledgement of the Convention of the Right of the Child, and highlighting issues regarding residence permit/expatriation, health and education. Data on the above mentioned issues have been collected from different databanks: European Union, WHO, World Bank, UNHCR, Unicef, Save the Children, ENOC, and governmental Countries. Results: The results of the pilot analysis conducted on Italy and Spain brought to light two different scenarios. Italy: clandestine children cannot be expelled with the exception of State public order and safety reasons; all the children under 18 have the right to get the residence permit and to be registered in the Italian Health System in order to receive free health assistance; compulsory schooling even if without residence permit. Over 18 their situation is characterized by uncertainty, in fact generally the residence permit is not automatically confirmed and expired. While in Spain, has been brought into effect a restrictive policy with the passage of the 2003 law Instruccion 3/2003 (Fiscal General del Estado) that allow an automatic repatriation of children, without an age check and cut off. This law representing an encroachment on an international right was abrogated, but Spanish policy on this issue remain restrictive. Further results on all the EU countries considered will follow. Conclusions: According to our preliminary results the issue of child protection of clandestine children is strongly different between Italy and Spain. If the preliminary results will be confirmed also for the remaining countries, homogenization rise up as a burning priority at a community political level; this priority need to be in charge not only to professionals involved in legislative, health and social sectors of each country, but also to EU political stakeholders in order to create an EU common policy and regulation on this issue aiming in reduce the existing social inequalities.

State and child protection of foreign clandestine children: mapping the European Union.

FACCHIN, PAOLA;ROSA RIZZOTTO, MELISSA;MANEA, SILVIA;
2007

Abstract

Background: During the last 20 years, in Europe the immigration phenomenon has progressively grown, and nowadays it has been accepted as an intrinsic and widespread phenomenon of the demographic and social dynamics of the nations. This phenomenon has created significant changes within the host Countries. A particular and fundamental aspect of such phenomenon concerns the state of the clandestine children immigrated in one of the European Union (EU) Countries, as well as the child protection provided and carried into effect by the different EU Countries. Aim: aim of the present study is to evaluate different EU Countries approaches to the already described emergency and to analyse the main differences on child protection policies such as expatriation, health and education, particularly on what attains unaccompanied children. Methods: The analysis has reviewed 6 countries of the EU, two Mediterranean (Italy-Spain), two of the Center Europe (France-Germany) and two of the North (UK-Sweden) pairing them according to their common historical-geographical background, in order to highlight the considerable differences. The comparison analysis has been conducted considering the last decade, evaluating primarily the acknowledgement of the Convention of the Right of the Child, and highlighting issues regarding residence permit/expatriation, health and education. Data on the above mentioned issues have been collected from different databanks: European Union, WHO, World Bank, UNHCR, Unicef, Save the Children, ENOC, and governmental Countries. Results: The results of the pilot analysis conducted on Italy and Spain brought to light two different scenarios. Italy: clandestine children cannot be expelled with the exception of State public order and safety reasons; all the children under 18 have the right to get the residence permit and to be registered in the Italian Health System in order to receive free health assistance; compulsory schooling even if without residence permit. Over 18 their situation is characterized by uncertainty, in fact generally the residence permit is not automatically confirmed and expired. While in Spain, has been brought into effect a restrictive policy with the passage of the 2003 law Instruccion 3/2003 (Fiscal General del Estado) that allow an automatic repatriation of children, without an age check and cut off. This law representing an encroachment on an international right was abrogated, but Spanish policy on this issue remain restrictive. Further results on all the EU countries considered will follow. Conclusions: According to our preliminary results the issue of child protection of clandestine children is strongly different between Italy and Spain. If the preliminary results will be confirmed also for the remaining countries, homogenization rise up as a burning priority at a community political level; this priority need to be in charge not only to professionals involved in legislative, health and social sectors of each country, but also to EU political stakeholders in order to create an EU common policy and regulation on this issue aiming in reduce the existing social inequalities.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Caricamento pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11577/2445796
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact