The British government’s plans to implement AI-driven facial age-estimation technology at border crossings are facing fierce criticism from human rights organisations, who warn that the system could put vulnerable child refugees at grave risk. Experts argue that the flawed technology, which has shown bias against black children, may lead to unaccompanied minors being mistakenly classified as adults and subsequently housed in unsafe conditions.
Flawed Technology at the Border
The introduction of AI age-detection systems has raised alarms, particularly among children’s charities and advocacy groups. Maddie Harris from the Humans for Rights Network highlighted that the current age assessment procedures are already problematic, with many minors being misclassified. “We’ve seen hundreds of children wrongly placed in the adult system,” she stated, emphasising the risks that these young individuals face.
According to a report released by the Helen Bamber Foundation, 755 children were inaccurately identified as adults upon their arrival in the UK in 2025. The Home Office has admitted that even the most sophisticated systems can have a margin of error of up to 30 months. This discrepancy is particularly perilous for those fleeing conflict zones, where trauma may distort a child’s appearance. “When a child is treated as an adult, they are exposed to the same harsh consequences as adults, including detention,” Harris warned.
The Dangers of ‘Adultification’
The potential consequences of misidentifying unaccompanied children as adults could be dire. Experts point out that once classified as adults, these vulnerable individuals could be placed in shared accommodation with adults, exposing them to violence and exploitation. With recent protests against asylum seeker accommodation on the rise, the risks are exacerbated.
The government’s decision to use technology developed by Cognitec, a German facial recognition firm, has also drawn ire. Investigations have revealed that this system demonstrates a bias that tends to overestimate the ages of minors, particularly among sub-Saharan Africans. Critics, including the UK-based tech watchdog Foxglove, have called the government’s plans reckless, arguing that it is unacceptable to subject children to experimental technology.
Historical Precedents and Ethical Concerns
Petra Molnar, co-founder of the Migration and Tech Monitor, likened the use of facial age-estimation technology to the discredited pseudoscience of phrenology, which categorised individuals based on physical features. “We are effectively witnessing a form of neo-phrenology, where the physical attributes of individuals dictate their treatment,” she stated. Molnar added that the impact of trauma, malnutrition, and dehydration on a child’s appearance is often overlooked, making the reliance on such flawed technology especially problematic.
The Home Office has defended its approach, insisting that age assessments are crucial for maintaining border security. A spokesperson stated, “We are exploring cutting-edge AI technology to verify migrants’ ages as part of our efforts to make the process more robust and consistent.” However, critics maintain that the introduction of such technology is merely a cost-cutting measure rather than a genuine effort to protect children.
Why it Matters
The implications of misidentifying child refugees cannot be overstated. If the British government proceeds with its plans for AI-driven age assessments, it risks perpetuating a system that endangers the very lives it claims to protect. The potential to further marginalise and expose vulnerable children to harm underscores the urgent need for a review of these technologies and the policies surrounding them. As the world watches, the question remains: will the government prioritise the safety and well-being of those who are most at risk, or will it continue down a path fraught with peril?
