It will surprise no one that the Age runs a piece that is questioning the use of X-rays to determine the age of young men who are claiming to be minors so that they can avoid charges of people smuggling after they have crewed boats that have brought illegal immigrants to this country. The headline also tries to suggest that said testing applied to the “unaccompanied minors”is likewise unreliable:
So much hinges upon how old any individual may be when it comes to asylum seekers and their facilitators so the question of just how we query any claims that any particular individual is under the age of majority is of utmost importance. On this occasion the vast majority of scientific opinion is that the age of an individual can be determined by the forensic examination of skeletal development by the use of X-rays. Frankly if its good enough to determine the age of a murder victim it should be good enough to determine the age of these so called minors. This piece from the LA Times explains just how this long established method works I tend to think that we should have far more trust in the empirical evidence here than the self serving claims of the young men who want to avoid doing time for their crime.
Furthermore I think that when it comes to this sort of crime, if someone is old enough to pilot a boat full of illegal immigrants into our waters then morally and ethically they must be old enough to wear the consequences as well.