Violence prevention and municipal licensing of indoor sex work venues in the Greater Vancouver Area: narratives of migrant sex workers, managers and business owners

Abstract

Using a socio-ecological, structural determinants framework, this study assesses the impact of municipal licensing policies and related policing practices across the Greater Vancouver Area (Canada) on the risk of violence within indoor sex work venues. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 46 migrant/immigrant sex workers, managers and owners of licensed indoor sex work establishments and micro-brothels. Findings indicate that policing practices and licensing requirements increase sex workers’ risk of violence and conflict with clients, and result in heightened stress, an inability to rely on police support, lost income and the displacement of sex workers to more hidden informal work venues. Prohibitive licensing and policing practices prevent sex workers, managers and owners from adopting safer workplace measures and exacerbate health and safety risks for sex workers. This study provides critical evidence of the negative public health implications of prohibitive municipal licensing in the context of a criminalised and enforcement-based approach to sex work. Workplace safety recommendations include the decriminalisation of sex work and the elimination of disproportionately high fees for licenses, criminal record restrictions, door lock restrictions, employee registration requirements and the use of police as licensing inspectors.

The relationship between social, policy and physical venue features and social cohesion on condom use for pregnancy prevention among sex workers: a safer indoor work environment scale

“…These findings likely reflect SWs’ improved control over transactions, reduced fear of violence and enhanced ability to negotiate for condoms by clients in venues that prevent violence through safety features, policies and practices. Results from the current study also confirm findings from earlier qualitative research in this setting, in unsanctioned indoor venues within supportive women-only housing,22 as well as in licensed health enhancement and massage parlour venues 21…”

“…Early formative and qualitative research with SWs21 22 led to the inclusion of a diverse set of questions on the social, policy and physical features of indoor work environments (eg, in-call and out-call venues) within the AESHA questionnaire, which were then catalogued to develop the Safer Indoor Work Environment Scale (see table 2 for the list of venue features). To make use of longitudinal data, all factors were considered as time-updated variables at every 6-month interview, over the 3-year follow-up period.…”

“…Scale items were assigned scores based on a review of the literature from LMIC, in-depth qualitative research conducted with AESHA participants,21 22 and consultations with the AESHA staff and community partners. Work environment features found to be ‘supportive’ of condom use were given a score of 1 vs 0.…”

Recent im/migration to Canada linked to unmet health needs among sex workers in Vancouver, Canada: Findings of a longitudinal study

“…Specifically, institutional barriers that may affect obtainment of health services for im/migrant SWs include fear of disclosing sex work to health providers, foregoing care in order to continue earning income, denial or delay of public health insurance, high cost of private health insurance, and ineligibility for social assistance and subsidized housing (Anderson et al, 2015; Goldenberg, Duff, & Krusi, 2015; Oxman-Martinez et al, 2005). Not having a provincial health insurance card was strongly correlated with reporting institutional-level barriers to health care among SWs, as determined by a researcher in Vancouver (Socías et al, 2016).…”

Should US Physicians Support the Decriminalization of Commercial Sex?

“…The theoretical benefits of legalization are that neither buyers nor sellers risk criminal penalty, but there are nevertheless strategies in place to control STI transmission, improve sellers' safety, and quash trafficking. Primary objections are that trafficking increases [40,45] and that sellers remain at unacceptably heightened risk of violence whether commercial sex is criminalized or legalized and may be harassed by government agents [56] and exploited by brokers [57]. Like criminalization, legalization is not clearly consistent with beneficence; complying with government regulation can be oppressively burdensome for individual sellers and the benefit to the community in terms of reduced STI transmission remains questionable, given that there is still too little evidence demonstrating conclusively that legalization is an effective method of preventing epidemics.…”