Age Assessment, Technology and Trust: What the Debate Around Facial Age Estimation Means for Safeguarding
The Refugee Children's Consortium has published a new report examining the proposed use of facial age estimation technology to assess the age of unaccompanied young people seeking asylum in the UK.
The report, Benchmarks and Borders, raises concerns about the reliability, ethics and safeguarding implications of using artificial intelligence and facial analysis to estimate whether a young person is a child or an adult. It argues that there is currently insufficient evidence to demonstrate that the technology can accurately determine age across diverse populations and warns that reliance on such tools could increase the risk of children being incorrectly assessed as adults. (Refugee Children's Consortium)
Whilst discussions around immigration policy often attract strong opinions, this report highlights an important safeguarding consideration that extends beyond political debate.
How do we make decisions about at risk young people when uncertainty exists?
Why Age Assessments Matter
For unaccompanied asylum-seeking young people, an age assessment is far more than an administrative process.
The outcome can determine:
Whether a young person is treated as a child or an adult
Access to education and healthcare
Placement within children's services or adult accommodation
Safeguarding arrangements
Access to advocacy and specialist support
The legal processes that follow.
Getting these decisions right matters enormously.
If a child is incorrectly assessed as an adult, they may lose access to the protection, care and support they are legally entitled to receive.
The Report's Key Messages
The report questions whether facial age estimation technology is sufficiently accurate to be used as evidence in age assessments.
It highlights concerns about:
Limited scientific evidence.
Potential inaccuracies across different ethnic groups and populations.
The risk of over-reliance on technology.
Ethical considerations when assessing vulnerable children.
The importance of maintaining holistic, multi-disciplinary assessment processes.
Rather than suggesting technology has no place within safeguarding, the report argues that decisions affecting children should not rely heavily on systems whose accuracy and fairness remain contested.
A Safeguarding Perspective
The report raises wider safeguarding principles that are relevant across every sector.
Safeguarding decisions should always be:
Person-centred.
Evidence-informed.
Trauma-informed.
Proportionate.
Open to professional challenge.
Focused on reducing the risk of harm.
Technology can support professional decision-making.
It should not replace it.
Whether we are assessing risk in education, healthcare, social care, policing, housing or the voluntary sector, safeguarding depends upon professional judgement, curiosity, collaboration and understanding the individual's circumstances.
Our Perspective
One of the themes that stands out throughout this report is uncertainty. Safeguarding professionals regularly make complex decisions where the answers are not immediately clear. In those moments, there can be a temptation to look for certainty.
Technology can appear to offer that certainty.
But safeguarding has never been about finding the quickest answer.
It is about finding the safest one.
When working with children and young people, particularly those who may have experienced conflict, trafficking, exploitation, loss, displacement or significant trauma, our first question should always be:
"What is the safest course of action while we establish the facts?"
Professional curiosity remains one of the most important safeguarding skills we have.
It encourages us to ask questions, seek multiple sources of information, recognise uncertainty and remain open to challenge.
No technology can replace those professional responsibilities.
Looking Ahead
As the debate around facial age estimation continues, it is likely that policymakers, scientists, safeguarding professionals and children's organisations will continue to explore both the opportunities and limitations of emerging technologies.
Whatever the outcome, one principle should remain constant.
Children deserve decisions that are fair, transparent and centred on their welfare.
Technology may continue to evolve.
But safeguarding will always depend on human judgement, ethical practice and a commitment to acting in the best interests of the child.
Resources
Read the briefing