Daniel Hedlund

Statistics made available by the Swedish Migration Agency (SMA) make it possible to follow first-decision outcomes in asylum cases concerning unaccompanied children (types of residence permits granted, percentage of rejections, etc.). Yet, we know little about differences in asylum decision outcomes for unaccompanied children coming to Sweden. Therefore, we wanted to find out how gender, country of origin, and asylum reports are associated with the likelihood of being granted residency. Asylum decisions concerning unaccompanied children were first coded inductively. These codes were later merged into larger categories that were analyzed quantitatively by logistic regression analysis. The data sample consisted of one calendar year of asylum decisions issued by the SMA. Results show that fewer girls than boys were granted asylum, and in fact, girls have an overall lower prospect of being granted residency. Results also display statistically significant gender differences in reported reasons for seeking asylum.

This article explores the ways in which the results of language analyses were taken into account when Swedish Migration Agency (SMA) case officers built arguments concerning unaccompanied children's countries of origin. The research literature on LADO has primarily commented on risks of unreliability. Data was drawn from one calendar year of asylum decisions concerning unaccompanied children, and the sample where LADO had been conducted was analysed by qualitative thematic analysis. The main finding indicates that LADO is primarily used as an enhancer of other circumstances present in the asylum case, which means that it has the potential to ‘tip the scales’ into approval or rejection. The findings also suggest that case officers use the results of LADO in different ways to regulate the issue of credibility depending on the political and geographical dynamics in the children's reported countries of origin. The practical implications are that migration authorities should regularly examine to what extent the results of LADO are given weight in asylum case processing and that the influence of LADO results on individual decisions should be comprehensively explained in child consequence analyses.

Purpose: – The purpose of this paper is to explore how individual legislators perceive unaccompanied minors seeking asylum, their life situation, needs and best interests. Design/methodology/approach: – The total number of participants were 15. Thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006) was used in order to identify and analyze patterns in the interview data. The authors focused on their responses to the questions about the best interest of the child in migration policy and practice, and how this principle was related to unaccompanied children seeking asylum. Findings: – The main finding is that chronological age becomes a key sign for how legislators understand the life situation, needs and best interests of unaccompanied children. Also, the findings from this study suggest that the moralizing welfare ideology of the past is still present in political discourse and social planning, construing unaccompanied minors as an ambivalent category between civilization and savagery. The findings from this study indicate that legislators enact reforms of importance for unaccompanied children without considering them as agents of their own future, with their own motives and reasons to seek asylum. Practical implications: – The findings from this study indicate a need to adapt the understanding of the existing Aliens Act (SFS 2005:716) to the knowledge that unaccompanied minors need to be assessed on their own terms. Originality/value: – This study contributes to increasing the understanding about how the subjective values of legislators may have influenced migration reform in Sweden that can be valuable to both legal and social research, as well as policy planners.