Social Work & Society ▪▪▪ A. Fili, V. Xythali: The Continuum of Neglect: Unaccompanied Minors in Greece The sections above highlight that despite legal protections for UAM in Greece, the situation on the ground is quite different. Many challenges remain in making a child protection system a functioning reality, while the institutional capacity to respond to their needs is yet to be improved. 4 Caring for Unaccompanied Minors The protection framework for UAM third country nationals, like the national protection system as a whole, is rudimentary at best. Years of austerity in Greece have severely tested the capacity of formal welfare provision, providing leeway for an informal family-based support system (Lyberaki & Tinios 2014). Recent case studies have shown that the severe recession has had a negative impact on Greece’s immigrant population (Maroukis 2012), as they lack both the access points to informal networks and the familial bonds and networks. The state of emergency imposed at the height of the so-called refugee crisis, means that comprehensive support and sustainable solutions for UAM are on hold, to be addressed after the crisis has rescinded. For example, financial aid is mainly funneled to cover first reception needs, with limited to no funding offered for vocational training for older UAM, integration strategies and facilitating their access to higher education and the labor market. While these were never the target of immigration policies, the large number of minors currently trapped in Greece points to an increasing need for an overhaul of the protection system. 4.1 Who decides what is best The legal responsibility for deciding for minors’ best interests lies with the Public Prosecutor. Yet, UAM might enter the official system of care at different points during their journey through Greece and might meet and get processed by a range of diverse actors, including state authorities, (I)NGO, volunteers, solidarity groups, etc. While it is assumed that these actors are operating with the best interest of the child in mind, no best interest determination (BID) procedure is adopted at a national level. This results in fragmented procedures, the aims of which are occasionally conflicting. This leads to high levels of confusion as to which authority is in place to take decisions about minors’ future each time, reflecting the confused and improvised nature of reactive EU and national immigration policies and their implementation (Fili forthcoming 2018). In the midst of this chaotic situation, children’s voices are often not heard. As it has been recently reported, “there is a clear absence of input from children when migration decisionmakers determine the ‘best interests’ of the child.” (INTERSOS 2017) Two factors can account for the disregard of UAM voices. Firstly, minors are seen as potential welfare abusers. Secondly, the conception of childhood that promotes dependency on international intervention is deeply embedded in the dominant approach to child protection. This lack of participation of UAM in decision-making that affects their lives, exacerbated by their lack of trust in state authorities and their unwillingness to share details of their experiences or plans, leads to services that do not respond to their actual needs. 4.2 Care Arrangements The following section provides a summary of care arrangements for UAM in Greece and the main challenges faced by those responsible for this vulnerable group. In so doing, it will highlight the systemic failures to protect UAM, thus, pointing to the thousands of lives that have been upended in the country. Social Work & Society, Volume 15, Issue 2, 2017 ISSN 1613-8953 ▪▪▪ http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:hbz:464-sws-1264 8