A SCOTTISH lawyer has hit out at the Home Office over a four-year delay in deciding whether or not to grant asylum to a vulnerable Pakistani woman whose 10-year-old son is in foster care and has been diagnosed as autistic.
Usman Aslam said Home Secretary Priti Patel had attempted to put the blame on lawyers, but here they were trying to help the woman – Nuzhat Hussain – while her office thought such a delay was acceptable.
Hussain’s case is a complex one. Her son was taken into care more than five years ago as the 30-year-old grappled with bureaucracy and her own vulnerabilities to be allowed to stay here.
An application for asylum was made in 2017 because she said she would be stigmatised over her son being taken into foster care.
Lawyer Usman Aslam
While she was initially allowed regular contact with him, this was stopped without a proper explanation, doing nothing to help her own mental health struggles.
The Sunday National has seen correspondence to the Home Office from senior social workers setting out Hussain’s vulnerabilities, and explaining that it was reasonable to expect that forced repatriation would have a severe impact on her mental health.
The child has been diagnosed as autistic, and his mother has undertaken a college course in autism awareness to help her understand his “complex” needs.
Hussain told The Sunday National: “They stopped the contact between us, but now they have said my son is autistic and has special needs.
“They’re saying it is going to take a long time but they are trying to make assessments and go through all their procedures.”
READ MORE: Home Office visa ruling delay leaves asylum seeker in Scotland in limbo
She said the delay had left her in poverty and homeless, which is also impacting her chances of being reunited with her son.
“I lost everything. I can’t do any work. I can’t get a home. I’m homeless, living with my friends. They are giving me money, they are giving me food. That’s no life. Then they say no, you need to be happy, you can’t be upset and can’t go into depression.”
All the Home Office appeared to want said Hussain, was more and more information about how she was getting along with her child in care.
“Last time the Home Office asked what was going on with my child’s case ... Social workers sent them a letter saying they were trying to balance everything and for that I had to live in this country. Social work can’t support me, they can’t give me contact with my boy because I don’t have a home, but they expect me to have one.”
Social workers have applauded Hussain’s commitment to her son and the work she has undertaken to understand his needs and regain contact, but Aslam said he had been “perplexed” by constant requests from the Home Office for further evidence about the circumstances surrounding the mother and child.
He said there were ongoing proceedings, which would be enough to grant leave to remain, but he was seeking refugee status in the first instance.
“Priti Patel has been trying to accuse lawyers of being the problem,” said Aslam. “Well here we have been helping her and trying to resolve this matter since 2017.
“In the meantime our client has attained [college] qualifications, and is fighting for her child in care.
“It is beyond belief that the Home Office think that over four years’ delay is acceptable.
“We have tried every avenue to avoid costly litigation to the public purse. They are aware of this and months ago advised they were ‘doing final checks’… four years later.
“Our client has been unbelievably patient as have we, however now it will costs thousands of pounds – unnecessarily – to bring the matter to court.
“I would also point out that around three of those years were pre Covid-19 so there is no excuse.
“This behaviour has to stop and I will be addressing this to those at the very top.”
A Home Office spokesperson said: “The Nationality and Borders Bill will deliver the Government’s New Plan for Immigration – the most comprehensive reform in decades. It will fix the broken asylum system so that it is fair but firm, helping those in genuine need through safe and legal routes while stopping those who abuse the system.
“All applications are carefully considered at the time on their individual merits, on the basis of the evidence provided and in accordance with the immigration rules.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel