A/74/136 deprivation of liberty, as an exception to that rule, is unavoidable and strictly necessary in the light of the specific circumstances of the case, then it may be applied only for the shortest appropriate period of time. 20. Since children are in their formative years, when deprivation of liberty may have highly detrimental effects on their physical and mental health, their further development and their life, States are required to apply non -custodial solutions when dealing with children. Even with respect to children who have committed crimes, article 40 (4) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child provides that a “variety of dispositions, such as care, guidance and supervision orders; counsel ling; probation; foster care; education and vocational training programmes and other alternatives to institutional care shall be available to ensure that children are dealt with in a manner appropriate to their well-being and proportionate both to their circumstances and the offence”. With that comprehensive list of non-custodial solutions, the Convention on the Rights of the Child clearly indicates that detention of children shall be avoided as much as possible. If children are being referred from the criminal justice system to the welfare system, the principle of “measure of last resort” equally applies to protect children from deprivation of liberty in all types of institutions, including for children with disabilities. States shall make every effort to p lace children in the wider family, and failing that, in the community in a family-type environment. Since there are always other options available to States, detention of children for purely migration related reasons can never be considered a measure of last resort or in the best interests of the child and shall, therefore, always be prohibited. 21. Where deprivation of liberty of children can be exceptionally justified as necessary, they must be treated with humanity and respect for their inherent dignity, in a manner that takes into account their age and specific needs. They have the right to prompt legal and other assistance to challenge the legality of their detention. 22. The global study analyses the right to personal liberty of children in the context of six different situations of deprivation of liberty, for which the State bears direct or indirect responsibility, according to the specific requirements of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (e.g., guiding principles, measure of last resort, shor test appropriate period of time, procedural rights, child -appropriate conditions of detention). B. Views of children 23. Article 12 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child provides that children shall have the right to express their views freely in all matters affecting them and that their views shall be given due weight. During his fact -finding missions in all world regions, as a former United Nations Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the Independent Expert spoke to many children and witnessed their immense suffering in all situations of deprivation of liberty. The study is also informed by the testimonies of children during regional consultations and by the findings of a cross-national consultation, facilitated by an international group of child rights experts which, in partnership with non-governmental organizations, carried out face to face interviews with 274 children. 24. The consultation process identified the importance of hearing d irectly from children about their lived experiences. They reported that their rights were not protected, including being detained in poor conditions, being denied access to information, with poor health care and inadequate access to education and leisure. Many children also experienced barriers to contact with their families and struggled to access support for reintegration. They reported struggling to be heard in decisions 19-11838 7/23