“Some provisions of the bill do not go far enough”, regrets Adeline Hazan of Unicef ​​France


This bill is supported by Secretary of State Adrien Taquet and must be examined in the National Assembly in early July 2021. – Alain JOCARD / AFP

Make protected children children like everyone else, with the same rights and the same opportunities. This is the ambition displayed by the new government bill, carried by the Secretary of State for Children, Adrien Taquet. Presented this Wednesday in the Council of Ministers, the text must be examined at first reading in the National Assembly at the beginning of July. To curb the violence that is raging in certain ASE (Social Aid for Children) homes, the text provides for a strengthening of controls, in particular of the criminal record of all adults, professionals or volunteers, in contact with children.

But certain measures, such as the generalization of the aid file for the assessment of the minority (AEM) for unaccompanied minors are singled out by associative actors. Special advisor to the president of Unicef ​​France, Adeline Hazan welcomes certain advances brought about by this bill but believes that the government could have gone “further”.

The bill aimed at improving the lot of children in care was presented to the Council of Ministers on Wednesday. What notable advances appear in this text?

The measures which allow stricter control of the institutions which care for or accommodate these minors are positive. Especially those concerning the fight against violence. Improving the practice of family assistants is also interesting, as is the strengthening of supervision standards in homes. However, some provisions do not go far enough in our view.
Which ones?

For example, the text provides for a ban on the use of hotel accommodation for children in care. In fact, the bill provides so many exemptions from this ban that in reality it is more of a means of reducing the use of these hotels. However, we believe that this practice should be completely prohibited, even if it means giving the departments a little more time to prepare themselves because we are well aware that a ban overnight can be difficult to implement. We also know that this type of accommodation mainly concerns unaccompanied minors (unaccompanied minors). A report from the Igas (General Inspectorate of Social Affairs) dated 2020 estimated that 95% of minors placed in hotels were unaccompanied minors, that is to say young people in a very precarious situation.

In a press release published on Wednesday, Unicef ​​France points to provisions that even go against the objectives of child protection. What are they and why are they problematic?

We are totally opposed to the generalization of the use of the AEM (Minority Assessment Aid) file. This measure prevents a minor who has already presented himself in one department – and whose protection has been refused – from appearing in another department. This seems to us contrary to the best interests of the child. The generalization of this file may have the effect of discouraging some minors from presenting themselves to Social Assistance for Children (ASE), and therefore of making them more vulnerable. It is hoped that this measure will be removed by parliament when the text is examined. Beyond this measure, we have the feeling that the common thread of the bill is to strengthen the control of these unaccompanied minors.

In your opinion, are any measures deemed urgent or essential by Unicef ​​missing from the text?

Yes. There is a real problem with the enforcement of the decisions of juvenile judges. When a placement or educational measures are decided by a magistrate, it often happens that they are not carried out by the departments in charge of social assistance to children. We were therefore expecting a more coercive measure on this subject in this bill. When we met the Secretary of State, we suggested that he set up a form of financial penalty that could be imposed on the departments so that they imperatively accommodate minors as quickly as possible, as soon as there is has a court decision. Finally, support measures for young people placed after their 18th birthday seem desirable to us, but they are lacking in the text at present.



Source link