Cry of the Innocent

Today, I spoke at Cascade College in Portland. An auditorium full of students and a great morning of sharing the vision for the domestic trafficking shelter in Oregon. After making a number of great connections, we were getting ready to leave and a girl ran to the door and handed me a piece of paper. During the time I was up front speaking, she was in the back writing...the following is what she handed me:

Cry of the Innocent

On a street you know,

Not so far away

Stands a girl.

She stands there day and night

Except when she's not there;

Ominous absence.

And then when she returns

Nothing has changed. 

Nothing at all.

Fishnet stockings and pretty hair,

Eyes too big in her too-small face

She knows too much.

People walking by don't look at her

They don't see her, she doesn't matter.

They don't know her.

But she looks a them with her big eyes,

Dull, a frightening non-expression on her face,

And she asks them silently...

See me,

Help me,

Know me...please.

I was struck by this girl's brief poem...it brought up the trauma and pain of a young girl that we cared for at Transitions a couple of years back, who with tear filled eyes, asked me, "Why didn't you rescue me sooner?" How many people just didn't see her? In our busy lives, with our focus on so many things, do we take the time to look for those that are in need of rescue? 

Today, I have taken some time to reflect on the fact that victims only matter, when we do something to change their futures.

Thank you Rachael. Thank you for the reminder that seeing is more than what we take in with our eyes.

James

"Truthiness" and Domestic Trafficking Shelters

In 2005 Steve Cobert used a new term "truthiness" during his satirical report on Comedy Central. The term was defined to mean "truth that comes from the gut, not books." "We're not talking about truth, we're talking about something that seems like truth – the truth we want to exist," he explained. Something that seems like the truth - this is the air of honesty occurring within the human trafficking world.

In 2007, there were large questions surrounding the statistics being thrown around, with very wide variances. International victims in the United States has a margin of error, somewhere between 17, 500 and 50,000, without any explanation of the origin or methodology of these numbers. In SE Asia, there have been studies that put children in Cambodia being sexually exploited at anywhere from a meager 10,000 up to a sensational 100,000! Why such disparity? Well, there are probably many reasons. One, organizations seeking to get donors attention have felt the need to 'pad' the numbers to get a more urgent fiscal response. On the other hand, naysayers have wanted to quell the issue by throwing cold water disparity on the issue, taking a lower number to minimize the urgency.

Yet, on large - we really don't know. I feel fairly confident that the FBI's number of 300,000 domestically trafficked children is close. This number was extrapolated using numbers from homeless and runaway youth, youth agencies encountering unsafe youth, and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC). But, there is more at stake than just some inflated numbers.

Working in the United States, we are working carefully to approach domestic trafficking in an honest, intellectual, and non-sensational way. We have done this to our best ability in Cambodia and it has paid off. Intellectual engagement is really all there needs to be to communicate the horrors of sex trafficking. We don't need tear-filled eyes and dramatic images to get the point.

This means, we don't get to exaggerate, use suggestive marketing, and make outrageous claims. We need to work hard to respect our supporters and the public with the dignity and integrity of the actual work being done. There is no reason to make untrue claims on the basis that we think they will be true in the future. We have all heard the saying, "say what you mean and mean what you say."

So, what is going on with all of the sensationalism? One organization in California claims that they have shelters "located throughout the US...", but they haven't build a single thing - in a recent television interview the executive director said they are still in the 'dream phase'. On the website, they have a picture of a home, but its not the shelter they are claiming. So, why the deceptive language on the website? Well, truthiness - its the truth they want to exist. Another organization on the East Coast claims that they work in 12 countries (including Cambodia, but no one has ever heard of them), have a domestic trafficking shelter (described with photographs), but their most recent 990 says that their total income was around $90,000 dollars. For a point of reference, a quality aftercare program in Cambodia for 20 girls runs a little over $200,000. So what is going on?

Well, domestic trafficking is a flashy topic. It is inviting a large number of people to move quickly to get involved in establishing domestic trafficking shelters without any idea of what it will take to be successful. Look at a quality program like GEMS in New York and you will see that it is not about glitz and glamor or big dollars. It is about some very difficult and challenging work. Work that requires a lot more than great intentions and good ideas. This is a field in need of experienced organizations to take on this type of work.

But, we also need some truth in advertising. We, as organizations, are asking the American public to 'buy in' and help to provide the needed funds and support to establish shelter services for children being exploited in the commercial sex trade. As non-profit organizations, we need to understand the integrity of public trust. We have to be truthful and honest - eliminating 'truthiness' from our communication styles to allow the reality of sex trafficking and the need for shelter services to speak without clouding the issue.

Domestic Trafficking, Unicorns, and Faeries

If you live in the United States, depending upon which State you are in, domestic sex trafficking is probably overlooked or unrecognized. It's a national problem. It's not because it doesn't exist - its for much more insidious reasons. In New York and Texas, its a clearly recognized problem. New York has passed specific laws to ensure the safety and services of victims. Texas, particularly Houston and Dallas have taken measures to better identify victims, arrest traffickers, and properly prosecute cases of human trafficking. So, what about other States?

Well, it gets tricky. On a macro level, the United States generates the singular document used internationally to determine the level of effectiveness each country exercises in its anti-human trafficking efforts. Each year, the Trafficking in Persons Report (TIP) is generated through the US State Department and the report contains every country in the world - except the United States.

Until recently, the United States had only really considered human trafficking to an international issue. Our first estimates of foreign born trafficking victims in the United States was 17,500. That estimate has grown significantly to a more healthy 50,000 (though at the rate of immigration, this number must be higher). But, domestically, we have overlooked a population that is now (see TVPA 2005 and 2008 Reauthorization) federally recognized as victims of human trafficking - US Citizens. Domestic trafficking is primarily a sex trafficking issue.

In the United States, there is an estimated 300,000 girls that are enslaved in the commercial sex trade. But, how long has this been going on? For decades. This is not a 'new' problem. The difficulty is - it has taken us this long to properly label it. For the past 25 or so years, these girls have been identified as runaways, homeless youth, delinquent youth, throwaway youth, unsafe youth, and most frighteningly - youth or child prostitutes. Wow, when did we believe that a 15 year old girl was choosing prostitution as a career option?

So, how does your State view this population of young girls? Likely, child welfare and youth programs in your State still use an old paradigm to designate youth and still use terminology that is outdated. If this is true, then law enforcement is likely using the same terminology. The end result is that the State is not identifying victims, not prosecuting cases, and then ultimately believing that sex trafficking in their State is likened to unicorns and faeries.

There are three dynamics that contribute to this, but for now, we will address the first. The other two involve having appropriate laws in place (that contribute to a working system) and prosecuting cases (which involves organized crime, the RICO Act, and other elements of getting bad guys in jail).

I am not insinuating that States don't care about these youth - actually, I think its the contrary. Most law enforcement are frustrated in coming across a 16 year old girl that they know is unsafe and being forced into prostitution, but they don't have the needed infrastructure to ultimately help them. Child welfare, DHS, and the court system are equally flustered that they have a high risk population of girls that are unable to obtain appropriate services for the level of safety and trauma treatment they require. These girls are washing through State systems and people are unsure of how to best help them.

Transitions Global is looking at a number of other States and how they are addressing this problem. For the past year, we have been working with law enforcement, the court system, and other youth related agencies to develop a workable, efficient system to address the needs of sex trafficking victims. In the next weeks, I will address the other two contributing factors, as well as, writing more on the infrastructure needed to serve victims in a meaningful way.

In the meantime, I look forward to your comments, suggestions, and opinions. Thank you.