Human Service Providers' Perspectives on Sex Work: A Qualitative Study

Background/Purpose: Sex work is a controversial subject among human service professionals. While most human service workers agree that sex workers should not be penalized for their involvement in the sex trade, there is less agreement on whether a person can choose to be involved in the sex trade, as well as the appropriate solution to address the clients of sex workers. The hegemonic human service approach has been to advocate for the criminalization of the client while providing rehabilitative services for the sex worker, referred to as the End Demand approach. However, sex worker rights activists and allies have problematized this solution, noting that by criminalizing the client, one is irresponsibly involving the criminal justice system.

Although End Demand continues to be the main approach around sex work policy, we know little about how employees in human services think about services for sex workers, and what they think about End Demand policies. This paper helps to fill this gap.

Methods: Over fourteen months (July 2015-September 2016) I conducted thirty-eight interviews with human service employees in Chicago—all of whom indicated that they work with sex workers in some capacity. Employees worked in the following areas: homelessness, substance use, immigration, employment, gender-based violence, physical and mental health, sex trafficking and LGBTQ services. Interviews were professionally transcribed and coded using NVIVO qualitative software, and I used the principles of constructed grounded theory in analysis.

Findings: Findings show that although powerful actors in Chicago (politicians, law enforcement, etc.) champion End Demand approaches to sex work, employees of human service nonprofits are somewhat ambivalent and critical of this approach due to its association with increased criminalization. Thirty of thirty-eight respondents (79%) were critical of End Demand policies for three major reasons. First, criminalization of clients of sex workers provides more impetus for law enforcement to be involved in the lives of sex workers, which many human service employees are highly suspicious of. Second, many respondents indicated that the individuals they work with are involved in sex work for survival, and removing that mechanism for survival will serve to increase their clients’ vulnerability. Finally, many of these employees have contact with a social movement organization made up of current and former sex workers called the Sex Worker Outreach Project-Chicago (SWOP-Chicago), which has been providing trainings to human service nonprofits on non-carceral methods for working with sex workers, while addressing misconceptions about sex work.

Conclusion/Implications: Criticisms of End Demand approaches to prostitution are often associated with sex worker rights activists who are working towards the decriminalization of the sex trade. However, this project shows that human service employees are also critical of methods that serve to increase, rather than decrease criminal justice involvement with sex workers.  This paper concludes that social workers need to rethink our traditional mechanisms of working with this population, and engage the views of sex workers with lived experience who may have valuable insights on policy recommendations and appropriate ways to provide services to this population.