How Do Providers Assess Young People for Risk of Sex Trafficking? Observed Indicators, Follow-Up, and Assessment Questions from a Sample of Social Service Providers
- PMID: 37065722
- PMCID: PMC10104439
- DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2023.106906
How Do Providers Assess Young People for Risk of Sex Trafficking? Observed Indicators, Follow-Up, and Assessment Questions from a Sample of Social Service Providers
Abstract
The extent to which service providers across systems identify and assess potentially sex trafficked youth is understudied. The purpose of this study is to determine whether and how providers observe relevant indicators and assess for sex trafficking risk among minors (ages 12-17), young adults (ages 18-29), and families of minors. A cross-sectional, web-based survey was disseminated to service providers, who represented child welfare, youth justice, and social services (e.g. runaway youth, sexual violence), in a region of a Midwestern state (United States). Participants (N=267) were asked whether they provided direct services to minors (ages 12-17, n=245), adults (ages 18-29, n=148), and/or families/foster families of minors (ages 12-17, n=163), resulting in three respective client groups. Survey items assessed the extent to which providers (1) identified possible sex trafficking indicators across 5 domains; (2) took follow up actions; and (3) asked risk assessment questions. T-tests were conducted to examine differences between those who reported receiving sex trafficking trainings, compared to those who did not. Results suggest that the most commonly identified indicators included depressive symptoms, shame and guilt, lack of social support. Least common indicators included torture, false IDs, hotel involvement. A third of minor-aged providers did not ask sex trafficking risk assessment questions. Providers reported asking fewer clients about online sex trading than in-person forms. There were statistically significant differences among providers who received training. Implications, including provider strategies for assessing online sex trading and organizational protocols to enhance sex trafficking identification, are discussed.
Keywords: assessments; service providers; sex trafficking; sex trafficking indicators; sex trafficking screening.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of Interests: none
References
-
- Andretta JR, Woodland MH, Watkins KM, & Barnes ME (2016). Towards the Discreet Identification of Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children ( CSEC ) Victims and Individualized Interventions : Science to Practice. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 22(3), 260–270.
-
- Campbell C, & Georgescu D (2000). Working with young people: Towards an agenda for sexual health. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 15(3).
-
- Chisolm-Straker M, Sze J, Einbond J, White J, & Stoklosa H (2019). Screening for human trafficking among homeless young adults. Children and Youth Services Review, 98, 72079. 10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.12.014 - DOI
-
- Contreras PM, Kallivayalil D, & Herman JL (2017). Psychotherapy in the Aftermath of Human Trafficking: Working Through the Consequences of Psychological Coercion. Women and Therapy, 40(1–2), 31–54. 10.1080/02703149.2016.1205908 - DOI
-
- Dank M, Yahner J, Yu L, Vasquez-Noriega C, Gelatt J, & Pergamit M (2017). Pretesting a Human Trafficking Screening Tool in the Child Welfare and Runaway and Homeless Youth Systems. Urban Institute, (October). Retrieved from https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/93596/pretesting_t...
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
