This post was written by Heather Thornton.
Sex trafficking has rapidly become a massive human rights issue, affecting the lives of children, youth and families, both nationally and internationally. On March 25th, 2014, the Los Angeles Times published an article by writer Abby Sewell addressing the harsh reality that foster care providers and group home workers remain dangerously unaware that a large percentage of sexually exploited youth are those involved in the foster care system. Individuals looking to exploit youth often target vulnerable populations, such as youth in foster care. Therefore, it is unsettling that the foster care providers working closest to them are so uninformed and fail to recognize critical warning signs. Subsequently, the individuals responsible for protecting these vulnerable youth and ensuring their overall safety and wellbeing are blindly failing them.
County supervisors have recognized the dire need for education among foster parents and group home workers and have set in motion a relatively aggressive plan to remedy this issue. Throughout this article, Sewell clearly outlines the steps that have been taken, thus far, and the varying opinions involved in the decision-making process and execution of this plan. In 2012, county supervisors, Mark Ridley-Thomas and Don Knabe, developed a task force focused on the issue of foster youths involved in prostitution. With the hopes of implementing mandatory training programs for foster care providers and group home workers, the board enlisted the help of the county Department of Children and Family Services and Department of probation. On March 18, 2014 the board voted to ask these Departments to begin constructing agreements with local colleges and universities willing to facilitate and run training programs centered on ways to identify and work with youth who have been sexually exploited. All parties agreed that there is a need for enhanced education surrounding this issue; however, some questioned how the county would fund the training programs.
There is a fine line between the strengths and limitations of this article. While Sewell was able to capture a variety of viewpoints, the individuals she named have somewhat vague, non-descriptive titles, thus, making it difficult to determine the individual’s role or power in the decision-making process. Additionally, the article provides a concise synopsis of the plan’s progress, yet, the lack of detail leaves many questions unanswered. Sewell mentions the formation of a task force but neglects to explain what it is they do; she also fails to discuss the structure, content and requirements of the training programs.
The article concluded with a few comments from Rachel Thomas, a survivor of sex trafficking. Rachel addressed the board and encouraged the plan to increase caregiver training, stating that education is the most powerful form of prevention. Also, drawing from her personal and professional experience, she enlightened the board with a simple truth about the process of victimization. The majority of these girls are not kidnapped at random. They are lured and groomed, promised that they will be taken care of, and showered with gifts before they are ultimately coerced into sex trafficking. This is a process with “recognizable signs,” she stated. This statement, not only demonstrates how little decision makers know about the problem they are creating solutions for, but it also articulates that this problem is preventable. Whether it was intentional or not, Sewell ended this article in an incredibly impactful way. The article’s limitations are overshadowed by the author’s skillful showcase of the weaknesses within the systems and multi-systemic program planning.
As illustrated in this article, this issue has warning signs, and therefore, can be prevented. Providing foster parents and group home workers with education surrounding this topic enables them to identify signs of sex trafficking, prevent victimization and help promote placement stability. Having said that, in order to effectively address this issue and create policies and programs that will appropriately meet the needs of these vulnerable foster youth, education needs to take place on every level. In addition to incorporating education for direct service workers and policy makers, it is crucial that funding allocation also be reassessed.
It is suggested that securing funding for these training programs will be a challenge.
However, if a cost benefit analysis were to be completed comparing the proposed training programs and the current methods of intervention, which include: increased law enforcement and incarceration of pimps, as well as the aftercare expenses for victims that were unable to establish stability, maintain permanent connections or further their education, due to the victimization they experienced, policy makers may realize that preventative care is far less expensive.