U.N. refugee boss concerned over U.S. separating children from families

[webfact]

U.N. refugee boss concerned over U.S. separating children from families

By Tom Miles

 

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Filippo Grandi attends an interview with Reuters at the UNHCR head

 

GENEVA (Reuters) - The United Nations refugee agency is very concerned over the United States separating children of asylum seekers from their families, and has raised the issue with Washington, U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees Filippo Grandi said.

 

In an interview with Reuters, Grandi said the Donald Trump administration has legitimate concerns over how to manage asylum applications, noting that the United States has the largest backlog of asylum cases in the world.

 

"One positive sign is that the administration wants to invest more resources on reducing this backlog," he said. But Washington needed to find ways to manage the flow "without penalising the people themselves, people who oftentimes have very valid reasons to seek asylum".

 

"On measures that result in separating children from their families, we are very concerned and have expressed this concern," he said.

Grandi said governments in many rich countries had adopted "despicable" rhetoric on migration, ignoring their duty to help people fleeing war or persecution. UNHCR's annual report, published on Tuesday, showed the global number of refugees grew by a record 2.9 million in 2017 to 25.4 million, with another 43.1 million people forcibly displaced in their own countries.

 

The vast majority of refugees remain in poor countries, with only small numbers seeking refuge in the West.

 

"We’re not talking about unmanageable numbers moving to the rich countries," he said.

 

Governments should explain why it is right to help refugees, "but the contrary has happened. Governments have projected an image of emergency, of invasion, and actually, unfortunately many political leaders have capitalised on that to gain votes."

 

"They’ve built fear to build their electoral bases. And I think that this is despicable and this is irresponsible."

 

Some poorer countries like Bangladesh had gone beyond their international obligations by accepting huge numbers of refugees.

 

UNHCR tries to help rich countries to accept refugees after they have fled into overburdened places such as Lebanon, Jordan, Kenya or Pakistan. But such resettlement programmes are a drop in the ocean, Grandi said, and they are at risk of drying up.

 

Last year around 60,000-70,000 people were resettled, which he described as a "gesture of burden sharing".

 

The United States has the biggest resettlement programme in the world, with 110,000 approved places in the final year under former President Barack Obama.

 

But numbers have fallen sharply under Trump, who lowered the cap this year to 45,000. Grandi said he feared the actual number would be much lower because of security vetting and cuts in funding.

 

(Reporting by Tom Miles; Editing by Peter Graff)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-06-19

[FreddieRoyle]

 No idea why the Trump administration is getting heat over this. If migrant parents don't want to be separated from their kids, then get a passport and proper visas. It seems like a no-brainer.

 

[Lungstib]

What many of these people are running from is the despicable conditions in their homelands that have been created by 60 years of USA political interference and the training of brutal military forces on US soil. Their only desire is to keep their children safe and give them hope for a better future, then find on arrival that American family values, that are shouted to the rooftops during elections, doesn't exist. That they hope for help in the USA does however still baffle me.

[ThreeEyedRaven]

1 hour ago, FreddieRoyle said:

 No idea why the Trump administration is getting heat over this. If migrant parents don't want to be separated from their kids, then get a passport and proper visas. It seems like a no-brainer.

 

If you can't work out that decent people think such atrocity is wrong, no brain, might be more appropriate than no-brainer. As with many of the comments made by people with right wing views, your ill informed and quite frankly, sick comment, shows that America, a land of migrants, has become evil, twisted and depraved. Addressing the real problems the country has would be far more productive, than spouting anti immigrant rubbish, for sick racists to suck in and mindlessly spew out again. 

[johnnybangkok]

2 hours ago, FreddieRoyle said:

 No idea why the Trump administration is getting heat over this. If migrant parents don't want to be separated from their kids, then get a passport and proper visas. It seems like a no-brainer.

 

I really wish some of you Trumpers would get a modicum of facts before you jump to the defense of your beloved leader and start spewing your usual ill-informed opinions. I posted this in another group but it goes just as well for this. 

The Trump administration decided to charge everyone crossing the border with illegal entry rather than as asylum seekers (which the vast majority are). Human rights organizations, including the United Nations, have argued that this violates international law as this allows his administration to charge them in criminal court rather than waiting to see if they qualify for asylum. Even with all this, however there is still no law that requires immigrant families to be separated, however because migrants who’ve been referred for criminal prosecution get sent to a federal jail and brought before a federal judge, that’s where the separation happens — because you can’t be kept with your children in federal jail. 

The ACLU won an early victory in its case in June when the federal government asked the judge to throw out the case about families being separated from their parents. The judge refused and in his ruling, he made it clear he believed that if the allegations against the administration were true, they might very well be unconstitutional — violating family integrity, which some courts have found is implicitly part of the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of “liberty” without due process of law.

So firstly it's not legal but more importantly, where is your humanity? These are innocent kids being forcibly separated from their parents because Trump wants to appeal to his xenophobic base. It's just simply awful. 

[connda]

Partisan politics 101 using illegal immigrants and children as pawns. How offended and horrified you are is directly related to what group you identify with along with your ability to filter history.

[rgraham]

It is quite simple actually, just tell the invading parents to leave their children at home!

[stevenl]

5 minutes ago, rgraham said:

It is quite simple actually, just tell the invading parents to leave their children at home!

Why should they leave their children at home when applying for asylum?

[Srikcir]

23 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Why should they leave their children at home when applying for asylum?

More so that asylum is for the safety and survival of their children.

[Srikcir]

Trump on what he's learned in his first year: “You know, governing — when you're a businessperson, you don't have to worry about your heart, the heart. You really do what's best for almost purely monetary reasons. You know, you make your money. You competing against people. In many cases, you don't like them, you want to beat, and all that stuff.” https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-hes-learned-year/story?id=52713807

Now in the middle of his second year, statement from FLOTUS Trump:

"Mrs Trump hates to see children separated from their families and hopes both sides of the aisle can finally come together to achieve successful immigration reform," the statement said.

"She believes we need to be a country that follows all laws, but also a country that governs with heart." http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-18/melania-trump-says-she-hates-to-see-children-separated-at-border/9879116

Trump suggests separation of families at border is a negotiating tool.

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/16/politics/trump-separation-families-negotiating-tool/index.html

POTUS doesn't do heart. Period.

[altcar bob]

Build a prison that allows accompanied children stay with their parents,problem solved

[bristolboy]

2 hours ago, rgraham said:

It is quite simple actually, just tell the invading parents to leave their children at home!

With the nanny.

[altcar bob]

2 hours ago, Srikcir said:

More so that asylum is for the safety and survival of their children.

So the game is anybody and everybody,children or not can invade another country with uncheck-able details ,tell them whatever they like and all is believed,yeah right.  If the parents were so upset about their kids they would never be separated,just a load of trash,most would just abandon them,as has probably happened,not just in US but UK  France Italy etc.

[bushdoctor]

5 hours ago, stevenl said:

Why should they leave their children at home when applying for asylum?

 

Wake up. It’s not necessary to enter the country illegally to apply for asylum. This is a false narrative.

[bushdoctor]

4 hours ago, altcar bob said:

Build a prison that allows accompanied children stay with their parents,problem solved

 

Ok send the money and I’ll get right on that. ?

[lannarebirth]

5 hours ago, Srikcir said:

More so that asylum is for the safety and survival of their children.

 

The irony is that between 1 and 2 Million Americans live in Mexico as expats.

[The Old Bull]

The "land of the free" locking up kids, what a sad lot.

[Tug]

This is Donald’s idea of negotiation he could care less about helpless kids infact I believe he gets off on taking advantage of the helpless the more disadvantaged the better and if he can blame someone else that’s better still a truly nasty piece of work 

[Scott]

The people are being stopped at the border and not allowed to apply for asylum, leaving many with the only alternative to try and cross illegally.  

 

Most of those seeking asylum are from Central and South America (some as far away as Brazil).   It is relatively difficult for a Mexican national to get asylum.  

 

People seeking asylum are frequently held in detention camps, but historically, the camps have been set up to accommodate families.   Frequently, there are separate facilities for single males and single females.  

 

International law does not permit holding asylum seekers (as opposed to those with no asylum claim) in prison or detention, but for practical purposes, it happens quite frequently.   It's just not feasible to allow people to wander around the country looking for a place to live, etc..   Once the asylum claim is adjudicated they are either resettled or deported.  

 

Some asylum claims are harder to adjudicate and the person may be released pending appeal.   They are handed over to some agency to assist in supervising them and getting them settled (often Church groups and charities).

 

The cost of separate facilities for children is almost unheard of and it is enormously expensive.   The children did not break a law.   The parents may have, but children are NOT held accountable for the actions of the parents.  

[lannarebirth]

8 minutes ago, Scott said:

The people are being stopped at the border and not allowed to apply for asylum, leaving many with the only alternative to try and cross illegally.  

 

Most of those seeking asylum are from Central and South America (some as far away as Brazil).   It is relatively difficult for a Mexican national to get asylum.  

 

People seeking asylum are frequently held in detention camps, but historically, the camps have been set up to accommodate families.   Frequently, there are separate facilities for single males and single females.  

 

International law does not permit holding asylum seekers (as opposed to those with no asylum claim) in prison or detention, but for practical purposes, it happens quite frequently.   It's just not feasible to allow people to wander around the country looking for a place to live, etc..   Once the asylum claim is adjudicated they are either resettled or deported.  

 

Some asylum claims are harder to adjudicate and the person may be released pending appeal.   They are handed over to some agency to assist in supervising them and getting them settled (often Church groups and charities).

 

The cost of separate facilities for children is almost unheard of and it is enormously expensive.   The children did not break a law.   The parents may have, but children are NOT held accountable for the actions of the parents.  

 

If most of the asylum seekers are not from Mexico, aren't they supposed to seek asylum at the first "safe country"? The UNHCR guy should certainly know that.

[Scott]

In theory they should seek asylum, however, they are not required to.   In some of these situations the people's claim is based on threats from the cartels which are active in Mexico and for whom the police do not or cannot provide protection.  

 

Mexico has and does provide protection.   I believe they accepted 400 from a recent caravan headed to the US.   It also deported a large number of those who crossed (presumably headed to the US).  

 

It's important to remember that large areas of Mexico are only nominally under the control of the gov't and chasing down illegals, who look similar to the locals and speak the same language is not a big priority.  

 

 

 

 

 

[jcsmith]

13 hours ago, FreddieRoyle said:

 No idea why the Trump administration is getting heat over this. If migrant parents don't want to be separated from their kids, then get a passport and proper visas. It seems like a no-brainer.

 

Just get a passport and proper visas isn't really an option when you are fleeing violence at home. These are largely asylum seekers. Who show up at the border and are told its closed or who basically slow walks people in so nobody is getting in. So basically rather than to abide their responsibility to take in refugees, they close the border. Then when people try to illegally cross it they arrest them and take their kids. But it's not only that. There have been many reports of people who crossed seeking asylum legally, and had their kids separated from them.

Forget about the policy or the reasons though. That's irrelevant. What they are doing to these people is cruel and immoral. Some of these people may never see their kids again. These innocent children will be traumatized by this. And it doesn't need to happen. 

This is just the tip of the iceberg though. They are trying to use the policy to get concessions on tougher immigration regulations, which should concern anyone who wants their Thai families to be able to make it back home with them, as one of the policies they are trying to change is bringing in family members. In essence these kids are political hostages to be used as leverage for Donald Trump to try to get some of his more radical immigration policies and border wall funding through congress. Let that sink in. Because that is what this is. He's doing permanent damage to children, for his own political gain. 

[bushdoctor]

1 hour ago, Scott said:

The people are being stopped at the border and not allowed to apply for asylum, leaving many with the only alternative to try and cross illegally.  

 

Most of those seeking asylum are from Central and South America (some as far away as Brazil).   It is relatively difficult for a Mexican national to get asylum.  

 

People seeking asylum are frequently held in detention camps, but historically, the camps have been set up to accommodate families.   Frequently, there are separate facilities for single males and single females.  

 

International law does not permit holding asylum seekers (as opposed to those with no asylum claim) in prison or detention, but for practical purposes, it happens quite frequently.   It's just not feasible to allow people to wander around the country looking for a place to live, etc..   Once the asylum claim is adjudicated they are either resettled or deported.  

 

Some asylum claims are harder to adjudicate and the person may be released pending appeal.   They are handed over to some agency to assist in supervising them and getting them settled (often Church groups and charities).

 

The cost of separate facilities for children is almost unheard of and it is enormously expensive.   The children did not break a law.   The parents may have, but children are NOT held accountable for the actions of the parents.  

The children were to young to have committed a crime I agree. So what is your solution? Put the kids in lock-up with their parents? Turn them loose at the border? Or give them food, shelter and medical at a holding facility while the mess created by the parent is straightened out? 

 

Short of not detaining people who enter illegally with children at all, please give us your solution. 

 

 

[bushdoctor]

36 minutes ago, jcsmith said:

Just get a passport and proper visas isn't really an option when you are fleeing violence at home. These are largely asylum seekers. Who show up at the border and are told its closed or who basically slow walks people in so nobody is getting in. So basically rather than to abide their responsibility to take in refugees, they close the border. Then when people try to illegally cross it they arrest them and take their kids. But it's not only that. There have been many reports of people who crossed seeking asylum legally, and had their kids separated from them.

Forget about the policy or the reasons though. That's irrelevant. What they are doing to these people is cruel and immoral. Some of these people may never see their kids again. These innocent children will be traumatized by this. And it doesn't need to happen. 

This is just the tip of the iceberg though. They are trying to use the policy to get concessions on tougher immigration regulations, which should concern anyone who wants their Thai families to be able to make it back home with them, as one of the policies they are trying to change is bringing in family members. In essence these kids are political hostages to be used as leverage for Donald Trump to try to get some of his more radical immigration policies and border wall funding through congress. Let that sink in. Because that is what this is. He's doing permanent damage to children, for his own political gain. 

These people you speak of are largely from South America, so they should be applying for asylum in Mexico.....or the first country they entered. 

Mare they really feeing violence? If so why do they travel all the way to the US?

Alo you will still be able to get Thai family members to the US. They are only fixing chain migration which included any relative, now they want it to be immediate family members. 

Edited June 19, 2018 by bushdoctor

[Scott]

3 minutes ago, bushdoctor said:

The children were to young to have committed a crime I agree. So what is your solution? Put the kids in lock-up with their parents? Turn them loose at the border? Or give them food, shelter and medical at a holding facility while the mess created by the parent is straightened out? 

 

Short of not detaining people who enter illegally with children at all, please give us your solution. 

 

 

I am not interested in getting into much of a discussion, but I did do Refugee screening for the UN for a number of years.   There are no easy solutions when dealing with situations like this.

 

In an ideal situation, no one claiming asylum should be held in detention, but that's not always possible, nor is it always humane to turn them loose in a foreign country.  

 

First when using detention, every effort should be made to keep the family unit together, so children should be housed with their parents as a family unit.   If they are seeking asylum, the family is screened as one unit, so there is no reason to separate them.  

 

Most of the people in SE Asia seeking asylum in the past were kept in detention camps.   These ran from being almost like a large prison with chain link fences to some that had a three strand barb wire fence that couldn't keep a cow inside.   In some they were given a fair amount of liberty to move around outside the facility to some where they were never let out.  

 

It's a lot more expensive for the state to take care of children than the family.   The border areas have a lot of space to open facilities capable of housing the family unit until they are screened. 

 

 

[bushdoctor]

7 minutes ago, Scott said:

I am not interested in getting into much of a discussion, but I did do Refugee screening for the UN for a number of years.   There are no easy solutions when dealing with situations like this.

 

In an ideal situation, no one claiming asylum should be held in detention, but that's not always possible, nor is it always humane to turn them loose in a foreign country.  

 

First when using detention, every effort should be made to keep the family unit together, so children should be housed with their parents as a family unit.   If they are seeking asylum, the family is screened as one unit, so there is no reason to separate them.  

 

Most of the people in SE Asia seeking asylum in the past were kept in detention camps.   These ran from being almost like a large prison with chain link fences to some that had a three strand barb wire fence that couldn't keep a cow inside.   In some they were given a fair amount of liberty to move around outside the facility to some where they were never let out.  

 

It's a lot more expensive for the state to take care of children than the family.   The border areas have a lot of space to open facilities capable of housing the family unit until they are screened. 

 

 

Perhaps, but that hasn’t been the case in America. Asylum seekers do not need to enter illegally in order to apply. They were freely waiting in Mexico to apply for US asylum. They are also able to apply for asylum in Mexico. 

If they break the law and enter illegally they are detained, as the law clearly states. 

Again, I ask for your solution. 

Edited June 19, 2018 by bushdoctor
Spelling errors as usual

[Scott]

They have been denying them the right to apply for asylum at the border.   This has prompted some to cross illegally.

 

Whether you enter legally or illegally, you still have the right, under the UN conventions which the US is a signatory to, to apply for asylum.   How fast or slow the claim is adjudicated is up to the gov't to determine, but denying them the right violates a number of international laws.

 

Holding them in detention is considered to be against the international laws, but it's not always possible to not have some form of detention.  

 

People who enter and have no asylum claim can be deported.   Most people in the past with a denied claim voluntarily repatriate because it does not bar them from further entering the country legally.   If you are formally deported, by the legal process, you are SOL for further entry to the US.

 

It's a lot easier and more convenient for all for families to be held as a family unit.  

[bushdoctor]

19 minutes ago, Scott said:

They have been denying them the right to apply for asylum at the border.   This has prompted some to cross illegally.

 

Whether you enter legally or illegally, you still have the right, under the UN conventions which the US is a signatory to, to apply for asylum.   How fast or slow the claim is adjudicated is up to the gov't to determine, but denying them the right violates a number of international laws.

 

Holding them in detention is considered to be against the international laws, but it's not always possible to not have some form of detention.  

 

People who enter and have no asylum claim can be deported.   Most people in the past with a denied claim voluntarily repatriate because it does not bar them from further entering the country legally.   If you are formally deported, by the legal process, you are SOL for further entry to the US.

 

It's a lot easier and more convenient for all for families to be held as a family unit.  

 

Thats not correct. They were told they couldn’t process them immediately. That’s different than denying them. The office gets overwhelmed at times especially when a large crowd converges. 

If the asylum seekers are really that desperate for asylum then why don’t they apply in Mexico instead of taking the chance of being seperated from their children? 

As a side, the Mexican cartels could not care less about immigrants as long as they aren’t selling drugs on their turf. The violence from cartels is against people involved in the illegal drug scene. 

Shall I assume you don’t have a better solution? 

 

[Scott]

I gave you my solution to how they can be held in detention WITHOUT separating families.   That is the issue.   I'll leave the debate about immigration to the members in general.  

 

I'll just say that the US is a signatory to the conventions and protocols and has the right, like every other country, to decide how to orderly allow people to enter.  

 

 

[bushdoctor]

I’m not sure where these family facilities exist. 

The problem Isee is is that previous administrations refused to enforce the law. That has created a feeling that anyone can just enter illegally and everything will be ok. Very soon that narrative will change, and as people realize ther are real ramifications for illegal entry, the need to build new expensive facilities will cease. 

By the way, it would be foolish to think that all of these people are refugees. Also, asylum laws are specific, they do not include reasons like gang violence.