Shared Hope International

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

Home>Latest News

by

Safe Harbor – What’s in a Name?

Lack of Consistency in Child Sex Trafficking Laws May Hurt Our Children

By Christine Raino and Eliza Reock

What’s in a name? A lot, actually. In the area of anti-sex trafficking law and policy, words and definitions matter. They have the ability to affect thousands of lives of individuals who have survived sex trafficking. In recent years, policy makers and anti-trafficking advocates around the nation have been celebrating the success and passage of “Safe Harbor” laws . . . the problem? No one knows what that means.

After over 20 years in the fight to combat sex trafficking and protect victims, Shared Hope recognizes the importance of language. For instance, we see the vast difference between the response to a child thought to be a victim of sexual exploitation and that same child if he or she is instead labeled a “child prostitute.” A simple change in terminology–from “child prostitute” to “child sex trafficking victim”–alters subconscious impression. Since the release of our 2009 National Report on Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking, Shared Hope has been working with law enforcement, service providers and policy makers to imprint this understanding and assure that adults working with trafficked children recognize them as victims and not perpetrators of a crime. Yet, 23 states still have laws that allow children to be charged with prostitution and other crimes related to their trafficking abuse, effectively criminalizing them for the same conduct that makes them a victim of a crime. Laws matter. This conflict in the law is confusing and complicates our response.

Does this 23 state statistic surprise you? Well, you may be surprised because many states claim to have fixed the problem by enacting a “safe harbor” law. But what does it really mean to pass a “safe harbor” law? Unfortunately, this term has no single, clear meaning. Current “safe harbor” laws range all the way from an affirmative defense with no clear path to services, to comprehensive laws that respond to sex trafficked kids through various points of contact and mandate access to specialized services. As a result, the term “safe harbor” has become a catch-all phrase for any attempt to reduce criminalization of minors for prostitution—some of these laws are progressive and comprehensive and others fall far short of what is needed to truly protect child victims.

The term originates from the very first law enacted to protect juvenile sex trafficking victims from criminalization, the New York Safe Harbor law, enacted in 2008. This law allows minors to be charged with prostitution and directed into an adversarial court process in order to access services, and was definitely not the original goal of the bill. When survivor advocates set out to establish this new protection for sex trafficked youth and Assembly Bill 5258 was introduced, it would have eliminated criminal liability for minors for prostitution. Non-criminalization was the goal of the bill, and even though that’s not where the bill ended in 2008, that should still be the goal – for every state.  Unfortunately, this incomplete response became the jumping off point for other states’ attempts at protecting minors from criminal liability, many of which continued to use the “safe harbor” terminology.

One of the risks of continuing to utilize an ill-defined term, and giving states credit for “safe harbor” laws without closely examining the structure of those laws, is complacency–the sense that the issue has been addressed–yet there is not one single state that has worked out a highly effective response to juvenile sex trafficking. Nevertheless, the lack of a perfect model is not a reason to stop moving forward and it is exciting to see states taking initiative in the law to address the unfair penalization of juvenile sex trafficking victims.

This is not a simple process and it requires a long term commitment as well as the willingness to keep assessing, evaluating and improving the laws necessary to protect juvenile sex trafficking victims. It is critical to maintain two clear goals at the core of the effort to draft truly effective child protective responses: (1) comprehensive laws that eliminate criminal liability for minors for prostitution and other nonviolent offenses related to their victimization, and (2) provision of an avenue to specialized services for trafficked youth.

Shared Hope has created useful tools that help educate advocates to understand their state laws meant to protect children who have been trafficked. Even if your state has a “safe harbor” law, examine the law to see if it meets the above named goals and if not, let your officials know that a bill name is not a victory. Join us in demanding that all states have legislative frameworks that undeniably and unequivocally provide justice for all child sex trafficking victims

Related Research:

Trauma, Coercion, and the Tools of Trafficking Exploitation: Examining the Consequences for Children and Youth in the Justice System

Seeking Justice Report

JuST Response Council Protective Response Model Field Guidance

Justice for Juveniles Field Guidance

Non-Crimiminalization of Juvenile Sex Trafficking Victims Policy Paper

State Mapping Report

Learn More About Safe Harbor

by

Fact Sheet: Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act

Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act (S.4916/H.R.8948)

Approximately 4.2 million youth and young adults experience homelessness in the United States each year. Homeless and runaway youth are among those most susceptible to falling victim to human trafficking as their heightened state of vulnerability and the immediate nature of their needs create an ideal situation for perpetrators to exploit. Traffickers often use a youth’s basic needs as leverage to coerce them into exchanging sex acts for food, shelter, clothing, or other basic needs. In fact, recent studies show that nearly one third of homeless and runaway youth have had to engage in sex to survive. In one survey, 24% of youth living on the streets had exchanged sex for money, and 27.5% had exchanged sex for a place to stay. Furthermore, trafficking survivors indicated that shelter was the number one commodity traded in return for sexual activity because traffickers often loiter in areas where homeless youth are known to gather.

The Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act (“RHYTPA”) recently introduced by Congress updates the existing Runaway and Homeless Youth Act (“RHYA”), which has been the primary federal program addressing youth and young adult homelessness for the past 45 years. The RHYA authorizes federal funding for organizations that provide emergency services such as crisis housing, basic life necessities, and other supportive services for youth experiencing homelessness and youth victimized by trafficking. RHYTPA, the current bill before Congress, enhances these essential programs covered by RHYA in order to more comprehensively address the needs of homeless youth. The RHYTPA also specifically provides for resources and services to be directed to youth victims of human trafficking and youth at risk of being trafficked.

Key Provisions:

  • Requires grant recipients who provide temporary or longer-term housing and crisis intervention services to minors to include a statistical summary detailing the prevalence of human trafficking in their annual report.
  • Includes services and treatment programs for victims of sexual abuse, trafficking, and gender-based violence as programs that may be considered an acceptable transitional living program to refer a homeless youth to.
  • Provides that staff be trained specifically on human trafficking, trauma, sexual abuse, and sexual assault.
  • Improves the process for referring youth who have been victims of human trafficking to appropriate mental health services.

Take Action:

Additional Resources:

by

“My story can change things.” – Pieper Lewis, September 13, 2022

In sentencing child sex trafficking survivor, Pieper Lewis, on September 13, 2022, Judge David Porter stated, “Ms. Lewis, this is the second chance you asked for. You don’t get a third. Do you understand?”

The judge was alluding to his sentencing order that imposed a term of probation in lieu of immediate imprisonment, however the “second chance” he believed he was providing is nevertheless one rooted in punitive responses for trafficking survivors. If the anti-trafficking movement is committed to moving toward truly trauma-informed approaches, “second chances” must not include criminalizing survivors for trauma and offenses committed as a result of trafficking victimization; “second chances” must not include tools of control and punishment that resemble a survivor’s past exploitation, including incessant supervision, adherence to strict rules, placement in locked facilities, and debts to earn freedom.

Yet, in providing a “second chance” to Pieper, Judge Porter ordered Pieper to pay her exploiter’s family $150,000 in restitution,[1] the court an additional $4,000 for expenses incurred in her prosecution,[2] and, for the next five years, to wear an ankle monitor, remain on probation, and live in a facility managed by the Iowa Department of Corrections. Further, if Pieper violates any term of her probation, the court is authorized to reimpose a 20-year term of imprisonment.

Trafficking another person, raping them, exposing them to abuse after abuse is horrendous. While a person being trafficked is still breathing, and therefore technically alive, their life is no longer their own. Victims of human trafficking are subjected to a level of control that enslaves them fully, mind and body. They are subjected to abuses, assaults, and a commodification that reduces them to a product and shreds the soul.

Prosecutors argued that Brooks was asleep at the time he was stabbed and therefore not an immediate danger to Lewis. Such assertions can only be made by someone entirely disconnected from the intensity of trauma and human trafficking. Brooks had drugged and raped Pieper repeatedly, on more than one occasion, contributing to a pattern of sexual violence inflicted on her, as well as other harm, including homelessness and poverty.

Pieper Lewis, a 15-year-old child at the time of her arrest, has not been treated as such, nor has she been treated as the victim she was and, as she rightfully claimed in court, the survivor she is.  Indeed, Pieper powerfully demonstrated her resilience during her sentencing hearing, “Today, my voice will be heard. The story of Pieper Lewis holds power. The trauma of Pieper Lewis carries a ruptured beginning, tormented past and a delayed future. With perseverance, we have the ability to change the direction of our delayed and unknown futures.” But she also spoke to how the criminal justice system had overlooked and ignored her victimization as she was prosecuted for a crime that directly arose from the abuse and trauma she experienced through trafficking, “I wish the events that took place on June 1, 2020 never occurred, but to say there’s only one victim to this story is absurd.”

Even when imprisonment is avoided, criminal and juvenile justice responses are inherently punitive and often compound trauma, contribute to cycles of poverty and exploitation, and fail to positively contribute to the survivors’ healing. They also cement cultural beliefs and practices that blame victims for their own harm suffered. This is the reason more comprehensive approaches to preventing survivors from being criminalized are at the core of survivor-centered reforms.

As a judge in a state that continues to allow children to be charged with prostitution–conduct that is synonymous with their trafficking victimization–Judge Porter’s ruling cemented the victim-blaming beliefs that have undermined efforts to protect rather than punish child sex trafficking victims in Iowa.

Iowa currently joins 23 states that still criminalize children for prostitution, 34 states that still allow children to be charged and prosecuted for other non-violent crimes or trafficking charges that resulted from their trafficking victimization, and 42 states that still do not allow child sex trafficking victims, like Pieper Lewis, to assert a defense to violent felony charges that arose from trafficking victimization. We as a country have a long way to go to recognize, in our laws and within our judicial system, the harm that is caused by continuing to treat victims of trafficking as criminals while ignoring the impact of their victimization.

Together, The Genesis Project, Shared Hope International, and the Iowa Network Against Human Trafficking and Slavery seek just responses for trafficking survivors, including Pieper. We strongly urge dramatic change in how survivors of trafficking are treated in Iowa and beyond. We invite you to join us and help shift the status quo to one that protects survivors rather than blaming and punishing them for their own victimization.

Footnotes:

[1] https://www.gofundme.com/f/vxgt7q

[2]  The prosecution of Pieper Lewis was inherently unjust as the lack of legal protections (e.g., an affirmative defense, non-criminalization protection) available to human trafficking victims under Iowa state law and, thus, unavailable to Pieper, left her with no legal remedies. As a result, despite her status as a child sex trafficking victim, she was arrested, prosecuted, and sentenced for an offense that arose from her trafficking victimization. In response to the injustice of Pieper being prosecuted and sentenced in the death of her abuser, without access to legal protections, advocates and supporters of Pieper have raised over $550,000 (as of September 19, 2022) to pay her restitution order and court fees and provide additional funds to positively impact Pieper’s trajectory. To learn more about best practice for responding to sex trafficking victims engaged in criminal or delinquent conduct, please visit: https://reportcards.sharedhope.org/safeharbor/.

by

The WIN Program: Investing in the Women of Our Community

By Kayla Wolff
Growth Strategies Manager: Foundations/Grants/Donors /
Shared Hope International

Share Hope International’s domestic W.I.N. (Women’s Investment Network) program empowers women who have experienced difficult or traumatic circumstances through professional development and training. For 20-25 hours every week during the nine-month, three-phase program, these women learn basic office procedures and are equipped with skills to problem-solve in the workplace, as well as in their personal lives.  WIN women perform tasks in several different departments – from accounting to growth strategies – until they find an area they would like to expand their expertise in. After having the chance to contribute to meaningful projects in the Shared Hope office, each woman receives assistance in crafting a resume and exploring future career opportunities. The program provides a stipend, expanding the experience so each woman is able to get paid while learning.

[Read more…]

by

Legislative Update Series: Federal Legislation

Each year, Shared Hope International advocates for legislation aimed at preventing child and youth sex trafficking, while expanding protections and services for survivors. Through collaboration with legislators, survivor leaders, and advocates, we push for federal legislation that will ensure change across the nation. Learn more about some of the federal bills we’re focused on:

Debt Bondage Repair Act

In late 2021, Congress passed the Debt Bondage Repair Act (“DBRA”) as part of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2021 which was later signed by President Biden. The DBRA prohibits a consumer reporting agency from reporting adverse credit information about a consumer that is the result of severe human trafficking or sex trafficking. Traffickers control their victims through subtle or overt means, including financial control over victims’ income, access to money, or amount of debt. Specifically, traffickers often take out significant debt in their victims’ names or force victims to take out the loan themselves, resulting in default, judgements, and poor credit. Additionally, if a victim can exit the life, this debt often follows them around in the form of defaults, judgements, and poor credit scores, impacting their ability to get safe and stable housing, employment, and even some professional licenses. The DBRA directs the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau with promulgating a rule to implement a method by which the DBRA will be carried out. Shared Hope participated in providing comments for the rule making and a final rule was published in late June. To learn more about who is eligible under the DBRA, check out our resource.

Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act

Three additional Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (“TVPRA”) bills have been introduced this year, H.R. 6552, S. 3946, and S. 3949. The bills reauthorize and enhance programs, strengthen laws, and add accountability that reflects the critical need for prevention, protection, and prosecution to combat human trafficking domestically and abroad. Specifically, S. 3946 incorporates Sara’s Law and both S. 3946 and S. 3949 make grants to eligible states to develop, improve, or expand programs that assist child welfare programs with identifying and responding to human trafficking, including children trafficked by a third-party (i.e., not familial) trafficker. In July, the House passed H.R. 6552 and sent the bill to the Senate. You can visit Shared Hope’s campaign site for the TVPRA to ask your Senator to support this necessary legislation.

Trafficking Survivors Relief Act

Finally, in early August, Congress introduced H.R. 8672, the Trafficking Survivors Relief Act (“TSRA”), sponsored by Rep. Owens. The TSRA seeks to permit vacatur, or the complete removal from an individual’s record, for non-violent criminal offenses when the offense was directly related to having been a victim of trafficking. Additionally, the TSRA allows for a “human trafficking defense” so that survivors can assert as a defense to prosecution, that the criminal offense was committed as a result of force or coercion due to their trafficking. Although some states have taken action to address this by allowing trafficking victims to expunge or vacate unjust convictions, Congress has yet to take similar action on this issue, leaving victims with no Federal protection from unjust criminalization. Urge your Congresspeople to take action on the TSRA here.

To learn more about federal legislation that addresses the needs of sex trafficking victims and to take action in support of this critical issue, please visit Shared Hope’s Federal Advocacy Action Center.

If you are a lawmaker or advocate seeking to craft strong laws to fight juvenile sex trafficking and wish to speak with Shared Hope’s Policy Team for technical assistance, please visit request a consultation.

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.