Children in care are a vulnerable group of the child population who experience unacceptable levels of poor health. Comprehensive health screens can help identify previously undetected health problems.
Accumulating literature demonstrates that immigration detention is harmful to children. However, there is a scarcity of scientifically rigorous and reliable data about the health of children held in detention facilities. The aim of the study was to compare a community-based population of recently arrived refugee children flown into Australia, not detained, resettled in a non-urban area, with a population of children who arrived by boat seeking asylum, detained since arrival. The parent-version of the strength and difficulties questionnaire (SDQ) of children aged 4-15 years was compared in children living in the community with those held in detention. We compared 86 children who had a parent-completed SDQ performed, 38 (44%) in the community group and 48 (56%) in the detention group. The community sample had been living in Australia for 325 days, with no time in detention. The detention sample had been living in detention for a mean of 221 days. The mean age was similar for the community and detention sample at 8.4 years (P = 0.18). In the total sample, children in the detention group had significantly higher SDQ total difficulties scores than children in the community group (P < 0.0001). There was no difference between age groups (P = 0.82). The children in the detention group had, on average, an SDQ total difficulties score that was 12 points higher than children in the community group. Four of the five SDQ subscale scores indicated greater disturbance amongst children in detention (< 0.0001) compared to children living in the community. The detention group had significantly higher scores (P < 0.001) for all except Pro-social scores as compared to Australian norms for the 4-6 and 7-15 years age group. This study presents a rare opportunity to compare the wellbeing of displaced children who were detained following arrival in Australia with those settled in the Australian community since arrival. The community children's scores approximated data from the general Australian childhood population. Children held in detention had significantly more social, emotional and behavioural difficulties than children living in the community, and at levels resembling a clinical cohort. Despite the small sample size, data restrictions and other limitations of the data, statistical significance in differences between the community and detention children is marked and arguably demonstrates the negative impact of post-arrival detention in children who are presumed to have similar levels of pre-arrival adversity. If the objective is to optimise the health and wellbeing of children seeking asylum, removal of post-arrival detention is one of the most powerful interventions available to host countries.
Comprehensive health screening of children in care is likely to benefit a child's health, although this could not be determined. Agencies responsible for placing children in care need systems in place to ensure better inter-agency collaboration between the health system and community services. This should help improve health outcomes.
A significant proportion of ED presentations were potentially preventable with the use of culturally appropriate and accessible local community and primary health care services and better referral pathways back to these services. Community engagement is required to raise awareness of common presentations and to look at strategies to prevent common problems both occurring and presenting to the ED. This will enhance the health of urban Aboriginal children.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.