Changes to the Immigration Rules for child visitors

http://www.ukvisas.gov.uk/servlet/Front ... 8871558031

The intentions are good but this is definately additional bureaucracy which will affect many genuine visitors!!

It will be increasingly difficult for Children under 18 to travel...........

if the HO intentions are really genuine - who on earth is going to abuse someone over the age of say 10 years????.

This just another additional hurdle

Well they may have good intentions but the Entry Clearance Officers will have more reasons to refuse childrens applications.
You now have to look for additional ways of proving relationship to the child apart form a govt issued b.c.

Chess wrote:......The intentions are good but this is definately additional bureaucracy which will affect many genuine visitors!!

It will be increasingly difficult for Children under 18 to travel...........

if the HO intentions are really genuine - who on earth is going to abuse someone over the age of say 10 years????.

I don't dispute that it will make it more difficult for older children, who appear now to be unable to travel alone but, pulling the word "abuse" out of the the announcement is unfair. The actual phrase that is used is "...for some it can lead to abuse, exploitation and abduction" - and I've no doubt that these do go on. Isn't a 13 year-old, whose services are being hired out by the hour, being abused, as well as being exploited, having possibly been abducted?
How do you police these things? I don't know, but making a named audlt responsible for the welfare of a child seems to me to be a step in the right direction.

ppron747 wrote: I don't dispute that it will make it more difficult for older children, who appear now to be unable to travel alone

Maybe I'm mistaken but I have the impression that children intending to travel alone may still be able to get a visa annotated to that effect.

Sorry - you're right - read it too fast, assuming that that was Chess's problem with it! Since you've pointed out my misreading, I'm even less inclined to think that the new rule is a bad move. My immediate reaction now is that it only applies to visa national kids - aren't there equally valid concerns for the welfare of children who don't need visas, who I'd have thought would be in the majority? Seems odd...

ppron747 wrote:Sorry - you're right - read it too fast, assuming that that was Chess's problem with it! Since you've pointed out my misreading, I'm even less inclined to think that the new rule is a bad move. My immediate reaction now is that it only applies to visa national kids - aren't there equally valid concerns for the welfare of children who don't need visas, who I'd have thought would be in the majority? Seems odd...

It's probably designed to reduce the number of cases where under 18s turn up alone at a UK port of entry and claim asylum.