Entry, Progression, Exit, and Service Provision for Survivors of Sex Trafficking: Implications for Effective Interventions

Abstract

Human trafficking continues to evolve as an issue of importance in many communities. The proliferation of human trafficking is worldwide and involves forced labor, often of young persons. This literature review focuses on the form of human trafficking that involves sex trafficking and prostitution. Terms also used to describe this situation include domestic minor sex trafficking (DMST), sex work, child sexual exploitation, and prostitution. This paper focuses on four points of interest: (1) the process of entry into sex trafficking, (2) the progression once one is trafficked/prostituted, (3) the process for exiting, and (4) services for victims/ survivors. The paper concludes with recommendations for service provision, including the arenas of healthcare, social services, child welfare, and law enforcement.

Getting Back to Society: Rehabilitation of Trafficking in Assam, India

“…Survivors of trafficking have shown depression, anxiety, PTSD, and other mental disorders (Hammond & McGlone, 2014;Shigekane, 2007) For effective rehabilitation, psychological treatment is very important (Shigekane, 2007). However, critics argue that these Western methods of dealing with psychological trauma are not always culturally appropriate (Gozdziak & Tuskan, 2000).…”

Influence of Survivors’ Entrapment Factors and Traffickers’ Characteristics on Perceptions of Interpersonal Social Power While Being Recruited To Be Trafficked

“…Literature focused on sex or labor trafficking often has nearly identical stages (Aronowitz & Dahal, 2014). Several scholars (Hammond & McGlone, 2014; Salt & Stein, 1997; Tota & Mecka, 2015; Tyldum & Brunovskis, 2005) have condensed the phases into three stages—recruitment, maintenance, and rescue/escape—which were used to conceptualize the phases of this study.…”

“…As mentioned, research has suggested that women flee abusive situations through migration (de Vries & Farrell, 2018; Hammond & McGlone, 2014; Owens et al, 2014; Rocha-Jimenez et al, 2018). Trafficking victims face other factors within their social and community networks, often associated with violent environments such as hunger, rape, homelessness, poverty, and neglect (Cwikel et al, 2004; Gajic-Veljanoski & Stewart, 2007), as well as violence against women (de Vries & Farrell, 2018; Owens et al, 2014; Rocha-Jimenez et al, 2018; Ugarte et al, 2003).…”

“…Self-displacement by migration increases vulnerability to isolation due to unfamiliarity with the geographic, cultural, economic, and social support systems that may exist within communities, which, in turn, may increase an individual’s predisposition to exploitation by would-be exploiters (Chauvin et al, 2009; Mo, 2018; Rocha-Jimenez et al, 2018; Zimmerman et al, 2008, 2011). A lack of stable living situations also has been attributed to risk for trafficking (Hammond & McGlone, 2014). In the absence of protective factors associated with social and human capital investments, individuals are likely to become susceptible to ploys of support, opportunities, and welcoming into groups feigning empowerment and allegiance to their well-being (Bhattacharjea, 2008; Mo, 2018; Raigrodski, 2015).…”

Youth Involved in Prostitution (YIP)

“…With these changes in the laws, social perceptions, and social services for YIP, there has been an increase in research on the risk factors and pathways into CSEC (Albanese, 2007; Curtis, Terry, Dank, Dombrowski, & Khan, 2008; Estes & Weiner, 2001; Reid, 2011; Reid & Piquero, 2013), the hardships, trauma, and negative effects of being “in the life” (Clawson & Grace, 2007; Cole et al, 2016; Edinburgh, Pape-Blabolil, Harpin, & Saewyc, 2015), and the resilience and coping/survival strategies utilized (Heilemann & Santhiverran, 2011; Williams, 2010). Additional research has focused on efforts by law enforcement and social services agencies to identify CSEC victims (Macy & Graham, 2012; Salisbury, Dabney, & Russell, 2015), the services available for CSEC victims (Clawson & Grace, 2007; Gibbs et al, 2015), barriers to services (Reid, 2010), and perceptions on “best practices” for working with CSEC victims (Hammond & McGlone, 2014; Sapiro, Johnson, Postmus, & Simmel, 2016). Despite this growth in research, researchers have yet to examine how the changes in the laws, social perceptions, and social services have impacted YIP.…”