In a concerning development for vulnerable child migrants, rights organisations are sounding the alarm over the UK government’s plans to employ facial recognition technology to assess the ages of arriving asylum seekers. Critics warn that this flawed system, rife with racial bias, could lead to innocent children being misclassified as adults, exposing them to significant risks in an already fraught environment.
Flawed Technology Under Scrutiny
The proposed deployment of AI-driven age estimation tools has drawn fierce criticism from child advocacy groups, which argue that the technology is fundamentally flawed. Maddie Harris from Humans for Rights Network emphasised that many minors have already been mistakenly pushed into adult immigration systems due to poor age assessments conducted by officials. According to the Helen Bamber Foundation, 755 children were incorrectly classified as adults in 2025 alone.
“The introduction of AI is a cost-cutting measure that does nothing to enhance the safeguarding of these children,” Harris stated, highlighting the potential dangers of treating minors as adults. The Home Office has acknowledged that even the most sophisticated systems can have a margin of error of up to 30 months—a discrepancy that could have dire consequences for children seeking safety.
Risks for Vulnerable Populations
The implications are particularly dire for unaccompanied minors arriving from conflict-ridden nations such as Sudan and Somalia. Once classified as adults, these children face the same harsh realities as adult migrants, including detention and deportation. Harris warned that such misclassifications could lead to unaccompanied children being placed in accommodation with adults, heightening their risk of violence and exploitation at a time when protests against asylum seeker housing are on the rise.
The government has contracted Cognitec, a German company known for its facial recognition technology, to develop these tools. However, investigations, including one by Lighthouse Reports, have unveiled significant biases in their systems, particularly against sub-Saharan Africans, leading to an overestimation of minors’ ages.
A Call for Caution
The Refugee and Migrant Children’s Consortium has also raised alarms about the technology’s effectiveness for children who have endured traumatic experiences. The consortium noted that such trauma can significantly alter a child’s appearance, further complicating age assessments.
Petra Molnar, co-founder of Migration and Tech Monitor, called this initiative a continuation of a troubling trend across Europe, where AI-based tools have repeatedly failed to deliver reliable results in border management. “We’ve seen attempts at introducing similar technologies, like AI lie detectors, which have been labelled as ‘snake oil’ and never made it beyond the pilot phase,” she said.
Molnar further likened the use of age estimation technology to the discredited practices of 19th-century pseudoscience, which sought to categorise people based on physical traits. “Trauma, malnutrition, and the journey itself can age a child’s appearance. Relying on these imperfect tools is not the way forward,” she asserted.
Government’s Stance
Despite mounting criticism, the Home Office remains firm in its commitment to implementing these systems. A spokesperson defended the use of age assessments as essential for maintaining border security, stating that the government is exploring innovative AI technologies to enhance the process.
However, critics argue that prioritising technology over human judgement could have catastrophic consequences for the most vulnerable.
Why it Matters
The integration of AI into age assessments threatens to undermine the safety and wellbeing of child migrants at a time when they need protection the most. Misclassifying vulnerable individuals not only exposes them to potential harm but also raises ethical concerns about the reliance on flawed technology for critical decisions affecting human lives. As the debate unfolds, the implications of these policies will resonate far beyond the immediate borders, challenging the very principles of human rights and dignity in immigration practices.
