Shared Hope International

Leading a worldwide effort to eradicate sexual slavery...one life at a time

Home>Archives for SHI Staff

by

Washington Scores a “C” Despite 2010 Strides

Today, Washington State Attorney General McKenna joined Shared Hope International to release the first Protected Innocence Report Card – Washington.  The Report Card is based on the Protected Innocence Legislative Frameworkand sets a national standard of protection against domestic minor sex trafficking.

Washington State is blazing a path to protect their children from child sex trafficking. First, bi-partisan leadership from across the state came together to amend the Promoting Commercial Sexual Abuse of a Minor law, which significantly increased penalties for traffickers and buyers of children.  Additionally, YouthCare opened the state’s first shelter specifically funded and programmatically designed as a safe haven for child victims of sex trafficking.  However, despite these great strides, Washington received a “C”, indicating that it still has significant legislative gaps to close in an effort to create safe environments for Washington’s children.

The embracing of the Report Card by Attorney General McKenna, in spite of the mediocre grade, shows his commitment to advancing Washington’s efforts in strengthening laws that would protect children from traffickers. In December at the National Association of Attorney’s General, Attorney General McKenna challenged his colleagues to take Protected Innocence Initiative back to their states and to make combating child sex trafficking a top priority in 2011.

The Washington Report Card outlines four critical legislative changes needed:

– Amend the state human trafficking law to align with the federal Trafficking Victims Protection Act by eliminate the requirement of force, fraud or coercion in cases of child sex trafficking.

– Amend the patronizing a prostitute law to distinguish the solicitation of a minor with reference to commercial sexual abuse of a minor and/or human trafficking law as the applicable crime and penalty.  Currently, the law on solicitation/patronizing a prostitute does not differentiate adults from a minor and is a misdemeanor – regardless of age.

– The Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) should amend their definition of caregiver to include a “person in control and possession of a sexually exploited child” to bring a child victim of trafficking within the protection of DSHS.

– Amend laws to increase investigative tools for law enforcement by allowing for audio-taping conversations with persons involved in sex trafficking without need for a court order.

Linda Smith commended the work done in 2010, which she recognizes for raising Washington’s grade to the resulting “C”.  However, Smith challenges: “We must ask ourselves, is a barely passing grade good enough for our children?” If barely passing isn’t good enough for you, take action by asking several key leaders to uphold their commitment to Washington’s children by strengthening the laws this legislative session!

by

Shared Hope Launches Protected Innocence Initiative Starting in Washington State

Child sex trafficking is happening in every community, city and state in America. Yes, even your city. Unfortunately, this crime is too often under-reported and under-identified – effectively silencing victims and empowering buyers to continue the cycle of exploitation. Training and awareness are vital in identifying victims of trafficking. Response, however, leans heavily on the strength (or weakness) of the laws used to protect victims and prosecute traffickers and buyers.

Tomorrow, on National Human Trafficking Awareness Day, we are launching the Protected Innocence Initiative. Under this initiative, we will release fifty-one individual Report Cards in Spring/Summer 2011 to measure the level of protection afforded by state laws regarding sex trafficking of children. The Report Cards are based on the Protected Innocence Legislative Framework, an analysis of state laws performed by the American Center for Law & Justice and Shared Hope International.

The Protected Innocence Legislative Framework outlines six areas of law critical to protecting children and responding to domestic minor sex trafficking.

  • Criminalization of domestic minor sex trafficking
  • Criminal provisions for demand (buyers)
  • Criminal provisions for traffickers (pimps)
  • Criminal provisions for facilitators (hotels, transports, websites, etc.)
  • Protective provisions for the child victims
  • Criminal justice tools for investigation and prosecutions

The Report Card is premised on the belief that the true measure of a state’s standing is how well it protects its children and provides them with access to justice. By exposing the legislative gaps within each state that fail to provide the cornerstone of strong law to victim advocates, prosecutors and law enforcement, we hope to spark innovative action to increase protection for the victims and punishment for the criminals who exploit them.

Does your state allow children’s bodies to be converted to cash and innocence sold by the hour?  Find out when we release the Protected Innocence Report Card for your state. Click here  to let your Governor know that the quality of your laws mean the difference between safety and danger for children in your state.

Read more about the Protected Innocence Initiative online at Change.org.

by

Political Asylum for Trafficking Victims in the TVPA: Rule or Exception?

Full of hopes and aspirations, thousands of women and children end up trafficked into the United States each year by false promises of a better opportunity, school or the fulfillment of a vocational dream, only to later realize that they have been forced into sex slavery. This is a story we hear too often, but what legal action has been put in place to prevent these foreign victims from being trafficked? The Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) has helped numerous trafficking victims, domestically and internationally, however, I believe this Act could be revised to generate more aid and programs for international trafficking victims. The TVPA allows immigrant women and children to report crimes committed against them to law enforcement and grants political asylum to victims of trafficking through a temporary T-VISA. This T-VISA allows the trafficked persons to receive aid from the Federal government. There are several limitations within the TVPA that facilitate the revolving door  for trafficking victims; when they are deported it is most likely they will inevitably be subjected to human trafficking and sexual exploitation again in their home country.

The most prevalent critiques of the TVPA are:

1.      Victims must qualify as a, “victim of severe trafficking.”

2.      The victims must testify against their traffickers to receive asylum.

3.      If the victim is not deemed eligible for the T-VISA they receive no protection, safe housing, and are ultimately deported.

To be considered a victim of severe trafficking, adult victims must prove they were coerced by fraud or force into sex trafficking. Language and education barriers prevent many trafficked victims from being able to convey their specific situation. The Honorable Mark P. Lagon states the specific shortfall of the differentiation between severely trafficked victims and trafficked women in the hearing before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Out of the Shadows: The Global Fight Against Human Trafficking. Lagon asserts, “Despite global trafficking foci and flashpoints, there are no “lesser” victims of trafficking. Since TIP’s essence is groups denied equal dignity, let us not in our anti-TIP policy privilege some victims over others. They are all of equal value in humankind.”

Testifying for trafficking victims can be dangerous. In most circumstances traffickers threaten to kill victims’ families if they tell authorities about their captivity, so most remain silent. This also draws a clear distinction between international victims and domestic victims in that they are unable to receive assistance for their sexual exploitation through organizations who provide safe housing, protection from traffickers, medical and psychological attention, and training so victims can become functioning members of society.

When a victim of human trafficking has been determined a “severe trafficking victim,” or a prostitute, the care provided is drastically different. If a victim is unwilling to cooperate with the prosecution of the trafficker or is determined a prostitute by the Attorney General only after cooperating with federal and local law enforcement officials, deportation is most often their fate. But at what point does a victim of severe trafficking and prostitution cross? Is it only minors that are victims of trafficking?

During the “Out of the Shadows” hearing Mark Lagon states, “First of all, if lured into the sex trade as a minor, does it suddenly become a choice the day someone turns 18? Moreover, we know that numerous adult females in the global sex trade are subject to force, fraud, or coercion – including subtle psychological terror and trickery – making them trafficking victims even under the strict standards of the Palermo Protocol.” Yet this standard does not extend to the TVPA.

Ambassador at large, Luis CdeBaca, from the Office to Monitor & Combat Trafficking in Persons of the U.S. State Department, declares the Office’s goal is to, “Strengthen trafficking victims’ protection and assistance by encouraging cooperation between governments and NGOs, and enhancing the capacity of civil society organizations so they might provide comprehensive services that fully address the needs of victims. We will support evidence-based research to evaluate the impact of our programs and fill core data gaps. We will partner with the private sector to leverage resources and expertise to develop innovative solutions to this age old problem.” To echo the advice of CdeBaca, Lagon also insists the utilization of services such as, “NGOs and more efficacious international organizations – like the International Organization of Migration (IOM)” to aid in the support and protection of sex trafficking victims.

To mirror the suggestions of the anti-sex trafficking movement, there needs to be more services available to victims of this tragedy. Turning away victims because they do not fit into specific criteria is counter-productive. The greatest majority of women and children do not choose this life; they are virtually always thrown into this situation by force, coercion, or economic disparities they cannot overcome. Currently, political asylum is not the rule it is the exception; this should be altered so we treat every sexually exploited human as a victim.

by

The Swedish Approach to Prostitution, Part II

The Swedish Approach to Prostitution: Could it work in the U.S.?

Since 1999, Sweden has taken a unique approach to prostitution.  In Sweden, it’s a crime to pay for sex. Prostitutes (mostly women and children) are referred to government funded programs aimed at getting them out of prostitution while customers (mostly men) who are paying for sex are charged and prosecuted.

Would that approach work here in the United States? What if we made it a crime to buy sex, and focused our attention on stopping the demand? What if instead of charging prostituted women and children with soliciting, we copied Sweden:  investing in support services to help them leave prostitution, and charging the person who is paying for sex?

Obviously, the US and Sweden are different countries.  So what are our differences in approaching prostitution?

The 1999 law makes it clear that Sweden sees prostitution as a women’s issue, and as a form of violence against women and children. This is very different from our current view in the U.S.

While both countries recognize women’s rights, Sweden has often led the U.S. in terms of timing.  Women in Sweden were given the right to vote in all municipal elections in 1909; in the United States, women gained the right to vote in 1920.  Sweden outlawed rape in marriage in 1965; in the U.S., marital rape was finally outlawed in all fifty states in 1994, when Texas enacted a law. Sweden also has more women in government than the U.S.  For several years, Sweden led the world with the highest female representation in government (close to 50%). And the female politicians were vocal supporters of Sweden’s legislation. To contrast Sweden and the U.S., at the end of 2009, Sweden had 46.4% women in government (second highest in the world); the U.S. had only 16.8% in the House of Reps; and 15.3% in the Senate.[i]

Perhaps the biggest difference between our two countries is our view of prostitution.  Here in the United States, prostitution is not seen as violence against women or children; and we do not view or treat prostituted persons as victims, even when the prostituted person is a child well under the age of consent.  As for the customers or “johns” who pay for sex, here in the US they remain largely faceless and outside the law.

Sweden is taking a fundamentally different view.  By looking at the whole situation, Sweden sees a larger picture where the customer who is paying for sex is the criminal and the prostituted woman or child is the victim.  Here in the U.S., we’re not seeing that bigger picture.  Our focus is solely on the prostitute, whether woman, man or child.  The nature of the exploitation isn’t named; and the person who is paying for sex (“customer”,“john”) remains largely outside our view.

There is no reason we couldn’t borrow from Sweden’s law and introduce legislation in the U.S. that shifts the crime from the prostituted child or woman to the person paying for sex.  But to change our legislation, we need to change the hearts and minds of our legislators. Changing our view to the bigger picture is a good way to start.

[i] Source: Women in National Parliaments. Info compiled by the Inter Parliamentary Union, based on information provided by National Parliaments as of Dec. 31, 2009 available at http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/classif.htm

Shared Hope International
Charity Navigator Four-Star Rating
STORE | WEBINARS | REPORTCARDS | JuST CONFERENCE
 
Donate

1-866-437-5433
Instagram YouTube Linkedin

Models Used to Protect Identities.