An examination of bureaucratic Home Office systems relating to mixed immigration-status families, including the use of Section 55 (Borders, Immigration and Citizenship Act, 2009): a mixed methods study.

Abstract

This thesis examines the experiences of UK (United Kingdom) citizen children when their parents are detained under immigration powers. Very little is published in this field, and what is published, explores the existence and frequency of parental immigration detention in the UK. Family courts safeguard and prioritise the parental relationship, with children being given a voice at all stages of any family proceedings, however the degree to which this happens in immigration cases is unclear. The rights of UK citizen children should be safeguarded and prioritised in a similar way in the immigration process. Section 55 of the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009, should protect children from parental separation for immigration purposes. However, the insufficient amounts of research and publications in this area means little is known about these safeguarding and protection issues. This research study is anchored within a pragmatist methodology. Home Office and local authorities’ experiences of parental detention were sought through a freedom of information request (n=112) and through requests for interviews. The local authorities declined to be interviewed; therefore, interviews explored the experiences of family members where a parent was detained (n=2) and independent legal participants and/ or legal representatives from charities who support families experiencing parental detention (n=5) within the immigration system. Participant data collected was transcribed from Microsoft TEAMS recordings. Thematic analysis examined the themes experienced by, and across, all participant groups. Findings suggest that parental detention under immigration powers is a constant and frequent occurrence. It leaves UK citizen children negatively affected with the safeguarding promises of Section 55 not realised. Knowledge gained from this study can be used to refocus attention on the Section 55 provision. The importance of considering child welfare and the child’s voice and their best interests being held on a par to the priorities shown in the UK family courts should also be a focus for further study. The original contribution of this research is that it specifically reflects on current Home Office policy that should protect UK citizen children and how that policy is not considered as implemented effectively. Based on my findings I argue that a review of Section 55 policy use and a need for the Home Office to invite and respond to critique surrounding their approach to immigration detention of parents is necessary to avoid causing social, emotional, mental and developmental harm to children whose parents experience immigration detention.