European legal and policy framework on immigration detention of children priority”.244 In the Netherlands, unaccompanied children will be detained only under exceptional circumstances, and only based on limited grounds, one being that the deportation of the child can happen within 14 days.245 In addition, the Dublin Regulation contains reduced time limits for submitting and responding to transfer requests when asylum applicants are detained. Although not specifically directed at children, this mechanism contributes to reducing the periods of detention for all persons subject to a Dublin transfer.246 Conclusion Mandatory detention is prohibited under EU and human rights law; an individual examination is therefore always needed before ordering detention. Research findings indicate that detention decisions involving children are not necessarily based on a careful, individual assessment of necessity and proportionality, as required by Articles 6 and 52 (1) of the Charter. In addition, they do not always give primary consideration to the best interests of the child. At the same time, experience shows that protracted cases of child detention are rare and often linked to reasons of public order or national security, which should be regulated by criminal law rather than immigration law. The requirement to provide alternatives to detention is present in EU law, Council of Europe law and international human rights law. With respect to children, the ECtHR has been very firm in suggesting that respecting the best interests of the child requires states to adopt alternatives to detention. Where authorities fail to examine all alternatives to detention, the detention of a child will be considered arbitrary and a violation of their right to liberty and security. EU secondary law also requires Member States to examine first the viability of alternatives to detention before resorting to deprivation of liberty for asylum or return purposes. This requirement concerns everyone, including children. The right to respect for private and family life (Article 7 of the Charter and Article 8 of the ECHR) is an additional factor when national authorities decide on the necessity and proportionality of detaining families with children. In practice, when national authorities decide to detain the child with the parents or separate family members, they rarely assess the best interests and seldom involve the competent child protection authorities. Such an 244 Romania, Asylum Act, Article 16 (1). 245 The Netherlands, Aliens Act, Articles 59 and 59a. 246 Dublin Regulation, Article 28 (3). 62 approach is contrary to Article 24 of the Charter (rights of the child). Conflict between the right to respect for family life (non-separation from the parents, thus detaining the child together with the parents) and the best interests of the child (not detaining the child unless as a last resort) requires careful balancing. Regarding the length of detention, European and international law require that immigration detention be only as long as necessary and for the shortest appropriate period. EU Member States can use various measures to ensure that children are kept in detention for the shortest period. They include setting maximum time limits for the detention of children; establishing more regular reviews; and speeding up the asylum or return proceedings by giving priority to children. FRA opinion 5 Where they have not yet done so, EU  Member States should issue simple and practicable instructions to support officers responsible for preparing or issuing detention decisions. These instructions should advise officers on the steps to take to ensure that necessity and proportionality are adequately assessed in each individual case, giving primary consideration to the best interests of the child. EU Member States must take adequate legislative and policy measures to ensure that alternatives to detention are not only available on paper but also used in practice for families and children. In the absence of such measures, national authorities cannot justify the use of detention as a last resort. When deciding whether or not to detain a family with children, EU  Member States should always thoroughly assess the best interests of the child, which means being with the parents in open facilities that enable the family to live with dignity. If they are detained, detention has to take place in facilities adequately equipped to host families, also duly taking into account the length of the deprivation of liberty. EU  Member States that allow immigration detention of children should consider fixing a maximum length of child detention. This should be coupled with regular judicial reviews of the necessity and proportionality of detention, which should be based on an individual assessment of the child’s situation by the competent national child protection authorities.