Examining Recidivism in a Prostitution Diversion Program

Abstract

Street-based sex work is criminalized throughout much of the U.S. Diversion programs have shown mixed results. This study examined the effect a quasi-experimental intervention (prostitution diversion program, n = 149) had on prostitution rearrest compared with a waitlist control group ( n = 77) among N = 226 individuals arrested for prostitution in Baltimore. In both groups, n = 64 (28.32%) were rearrested for prostitution over 30 months. Tests of differences compared groups with a significant difference in gender only. A Cox proportional hazard model examined differences in survival time (to recidivist prostitution arrest) between individuals in the control and intervention groups at 6, 12, 18, 24, and 30 months. Results indicate that participation in the intervention did not have a significant effect on decreasing prostitution arrests over time. History of prior prostitution arrest was a significant predictor (hazard ration [HR] = 1.12, p = .02) of rearrest.Lack of program success suggests that barriers to exiting prostitution are substantial, despite availability of supportive services, and that diversion programs may not be the best intervention strategy for all sex workers. Future research should identify motivators for exiting and how to reduce exiting barriers.

A pilot study of a therapeutic workplace in women arrested for prostitution

“…The program included case management and counseling services, as well as drug testing. Enrollees who attended required meetings and supplied drug‐negative urine samples “graduated” the program, were free of further criminal justice consequences related to the charge, and were eligible to have their charge expunged (Koegler et al., 2020; Shdaimah, 2010). To be included in the present study, participants were required to be enrolled in medication‐assisted treatment (i.e., methadone or buprenorphine) for the treatment of opioid use disorder and referred to the study by social workers employed by the Baltimore City State's Attorneys' Office.…”

Reducing sex work by targeting ‘vulnerable’ sex workers: A post‐structural analysis of policies regulating Danish exit programmes directed at people involved in sex work

“…Concerning Western exit programmes, Wilson et al (2015) found that the methods applied to help the sex workers typically revolve around individual peer‐support, behaviour modification, and trauma support. In the USA, researchers have questioned the efficiency of the exit programmes (Koegler et al, 2020; Roe‐Sepowitz et al, 2011; Wahab, 2006) and the use of coercive and disempowering approaches against sex workers (Wahab & Panichelli, 2013). In the UK, researchers found that the exit programmes tended to individualise the problems of the sex workers (e.g., Carline & Scoular, 2015) at the same time as the programmes tended to offer insufficient help and support to find other sources of income (Scoular & O'Neill, 2007).…”

An Epidemic of Virtue: A Review of Social Work's Complicity in “Prostitution” Interventions

“…In addition, sex worker participants frequently report that they will continue trading sex, and research has shown that PDPs fail to curb recidivism, which means that PDPs do not achieve the criminal legal system's objectives (Koegler et al, 2019; Wahab, 2006). Some participants name the harmful ideology that underlies therapeutic intervention and mandated treatment more generally: workers consider these women troubled, pathological, or “fallen” and believe they must be “cleaned up” (Wahab, 2006, p. 79).…”