Background Detained asylum seekers are at increased risk of self-harm, and the type of detention in which they are held may further exacerbate this risk. In Australia, there are four types of closed (or held) immigration detention for people seeking asylum, with varying levels of security and supports: Immigration Detention Centres [IDCs], Immigration Transit Accommodation [ITAs], Immigration Residential Housing [IRH], and Alternative Places of Detention [APODs]. The objective of this study was to examine the variation in the incidence and method(s) of self-harm among asylum seekers in Australian onshore immigration detention, according to the type of detention in which they are held. Methods We obtained data on all self-harm incidents reported among asylum seekers in Australian onshore immigration detention according to held detention type, as well as individual facility, between 1 August 2014 and 31 July 2015, by Freedom of Information. We calculated self-harm episode rates per 1000 asylum seekers using the average population figures for held detention type, as well as for each individual facility comprising the main types of held detention. Method(s) used to self-harm was also extracted for the main sub-populations. Results The study included 560 episodes of self-harm. Individual facility rates of self-harm ranged from 91 per 1000 asylum seekers (95% CI 72-110) in Yongah Hill IDC to 533 per 1000 asylum seekers (95% CI 487-578) in Perth IDC. On average, calculated self-harm episode rates were highest among asylum seekers in: Immigration Transit Accommodation facilities, 452/1000 (95% CI 410-493); Alternative Places of Detention, 265/1000 (95% CI 233-296); and Immigration Detention Centres, 225/1000 (95% CI 195-254). The most frequently reported methods of self-harm across the main types of held detention were: cutting (35.2%), self-battery (34.8%), and attempted hanging (11.1%). Conclusions Self-harm rates for asylum seekers in all types of closed immigration detention were many times higher than rates found in the general population. Average rates were not lower in facilities with lower security features.

BackgroundTemporal patterns in the frequency and characteristics of self-harm episodes across the Australian asylum seeker population may have implications for self-harm prevention and public health policy. The aim of this study was to examine how the distribution of self-harm episodes and method(s) of self-harm used across the Australian asylum seeker population vary according to the 24-hour cycle, day, and month, and to establish a basis for further research.Methods and findingsWe conducted an observational study of all 949 self-harm incidents reported across the Australian asylum seeker population (representing a monthly average of 28,992 adults) between 1 August 2014 and 31 July 2015, obtained by Freedom of Information (FOI) from the Department of Immigration. Time of self-harm, day, and month of occurrence were investigated across all five Australian asylum seeker populations (i.e., community-based arrangements, community detention, onshore immigration detention, offshore immigration detention [Nauru], and offshore immigration detention [Manus Island]). Significant variations in distributions over the 24-hour cycle were observed by processing arrangements. Compared with the average distribution across all other processing arrangements, self-harm more commonly occurred among community-based asylum seekers (36.3%) between 12:00 AM and 3:59 AM (p < 0.001), in asylum seekers on Manus Island (36.4%) between 4:00 PM and 7:59 PM (p = 0.02), and among asylum seekers in onshore detention (20.4%) between 8:00 PM and 11:59 PM (p < 0.001). Compared with the average distribution across all other methods, self-poisoning (by medication) (25%) was significantly more likely to occur between 12:00 AM and 3:59 AM (p = 0.009), and self-battery (42%) between 8:00 AM and 11:59 AM (p < 0.001). The highest and lowest monthly self-harm episode rates for the whole asylum seeker population were in August (2014) (5 episodes per 1,000 asylum seekers; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1-11) and in both January and February (2015) (2.1 episodes per 1,000 asylum seekers; 95% CI 0.6-7.2), respectively; however, the overlapping CIs indicate no statistically significant differences across the months. When examining monthly trends by processing arrangements, we observed that self-harm was significantly more likely to occur in August (2014) than other months of the year among asylum seekers in onshore detention (19%) (p < 0.001), in January (2015) on Manus Island (18%) (p = 0.002), and in October (2014) on Nauru (15%) (p < 0.001). The main study limitations were that we could not investigate certain characteristics associated with self-harm (e.g., gender, country of origin), as the Department of Immigration did not routinely collect such data. There was also the potential risk of making a type 1 error, given the exploratory nature of the comparisons we undertook; we minimised this by lowering our significance threshold from 0.05 to 0.01.ConclusionsSelf-harm in the Australian asylum seeker population was found to vary according to time of day and month of the year, by processing arrangements. A series of procedure-related and detention-related factors were observed to be associated with the temporal variations in self-harm. These findings should form the basis for further investigation into temporal variations in self-harm among asylum seekers, which may in turn lead to effective self-harm prevention strategies.

Background Asylum seekers are at elevated risk of self-harm, and the personal and public health costs of self-harm are high; yet the monitoring and reporting of self-harm has been limited and lacking in transparency. This study aims to evaluate the quality of self-harm incident reporting across the Australian asylum seeker population, including by processing arrangements (i.e. community-based, community detention, onshore detention, Nauru, and Manus Island). Methods All self-harm incidents reported across the entire Australian asylum seeker population between 1 August 2014 and 31 July 2015 were obtained via the Freedom of Information Act . We assessed the quality of self-harm incident reporting according to the World Health Organization (WHO)'s self-harm reporting guidelines. Results A total of 949 self-harm incident reports were assessed. Date, location (processing arrangement), and time of self-harm were routinely reported. Gender was recorded in less than two thirds (62.1%) of all incidents. Method(s) used to self-harm was reported in 81.5% of all incidents, though IDC-10 codes were not reported in any episodes. Psychological or psychiatric assessments were recorded after 4.0% of all incidents, most frequently on Manus Island (10.9%), and in Nauru (10.0%), and least frequently in community-based arrangements (1.7%) and in onshore detention (1.4%), and not at all in community detention. Ambulances were reported as attending 2.8% of all episodes. Hospital attendances were reported following 6.0% of all self-harm incidents, with attendances most commonly reported in incidents occurring in community detention (30.3%), and in community-based arrangements (19.4%). Medevac (air ambulances) were recorded as being utilised in 0.4% of all incidents (2.1% of episodes on Nauru, 1.8% on Manus Island). Conclusions The findings of our study indicate that the accessibility and quality of self-harm data is substandard and inconsistent with WHO self-harm reporting guidelines. Such variable reporting makes the identification of self-harm trends, the implementation of prevention strategies – including those at a policy level - and the clinical management of self-harm, extremely challenging. Improved self-harm reporting and monitoring is urgently needed for mitigating and responding to self-harm risk among asylum seekers.

BACKGROUND:Systematic research into self-harm in the Australian asylum seeker population is scarce, largely due to the lack of accessible data. The aim of this study was to examine the incidence and characteristics of self-harm across the Australian asylum seeker population, and to ascertain whether self-harm rates and characteristics vary by processing arrangements (i.e. community-based arrangements, community detention, onshore detention, offshore detention (Nauru), and offshore detention (Manus Island)), and gender.METHODS:Data relating to the incidence of self-harm, method(s) used to self-harm, processing arrangements, and gender were extracted from all self-harm incidents recorded as occurring among the Australian asylum seeker population between 1st August 2014 and 31st July 2015. Self-harm episode rates were calculated using the average estimated adult population figures for the 12-month period for each asylum seeker population.RESULTS:949 self-harm episodes were included in the analyses. Rates ranged from 5 per 1000 asylum seekers in community-based arrangements to 260 per 1000 asylum seekers in offshore detention in Nauru. Rates were highest among asylum seekers in offshore and onshore detention facilities, and lowest among asylum seekers in community-based arrangements and community detention. The most common methods of self-harm were cutting (37%), self-battery (26%), and attempted hanging (11%), with asylum seekers in held detention using a wider variety of methods than those in community-based arrangements and community detention.CONCLUSIONS:Our findings highlight the exceptionally high rates of self-harm among detained asylum seekers compared to rates observed in the general Australian population, and among asylum seekers in community-based settings. These findings point clearly to the deleterious impact of immigration detention, and warrant urgent attention.

The aim of the present research was to examine the experience of extended periods of immigration detention from the perspective of previously detained asylum seekers and to identify the consequences of these experiences for life after release. The study sample comprised seventeen adult refugees (sixteen male and one female; average age 42 years), who had been held in immigration detention funded by the Australian government for on average three years and two months. They were interviewed on average three years and eight months following their release and had been granted permanent visa status or such status was imminent. The study employed a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods to explore detention and post-detention experiences, and mental health some years after release. The qualitative component consisted of semi-structured interviews exploring psychological well-being, daily life, significant events, relationships, and ways of coping throughout these periods. This was supplemented with standardised quantitative measures of current mental health and quality of life. All participants were struggling to rebuild their lives in the years following release from immigration detention, and for the majority the difficulties experienced were pervasive. Participants suffered an ongoing sense of insecurity and injustice, difficulties with relationships, profound changes to view of self and poor mental health. Depression and demoralisation, concentration and memory disturbances, and persistent anxiety were very commonly reported. Standardised measures found high rates of depression, anxiety, PTSD and low quality of life scores. The results strongly suggest that the psychological and interpersonal difficulties participants were suffering at the time of interview were the legacy of their adverse experiences while detained. The current study assists in identifying the characteristics of prolonged immigration detention producing long-term psychological harm.