Intended for healthcare professionals

Editorials

Fears of an influx of sex workers to major sporting events are unfounded

BMJ 2012; 345 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e5845 (Published 03 September 2012) Cite this as: BMJ 2012;345:e5845
  1. Kathleen Deering, postdoctoral research fellow,
  2. Kate Shannon, assistant professor
  1. 1Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6Z 1Y6
  1. kdeering{at}cfenet.ubc.ca

No evidence supports these recurrent moral panics

Sensationalised public messaging and media reports raised alarms about the potential for a massive sex work boom, intensified people trafficking, and sexual exploitation in the lead up to the 2012 London Olympics Games.1 2 Fears of an influx of sex workers and increased demand for sex work during major sporting events are often raised in the context of increased public health risks for HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, both in terms of risk for local sex workers and for tourists. This was also seen in the lead up to other Olympic (Canada) and FIFA World Cup events (South Africa, Germany), and such concerns continue to be replicated despite a lack of public health evidence to support them.

Research that examined past events in Germany, South Africa, and Canada could not substantiate any of the myths about an increase in sex work and trafficking.3 The 2006 World Cup in Germany resulted in a negligible increase in sex workers, and concerns about trafficking were deemed groundless.4 No evidence of a mass influx of foreign sex workers advertising online and in local newspapers was seen during or after the 2010 World Cup in South Africa (compared with before). Furthermore, no increase in sex work (numbers of clients) or an increase in risk of HIV transmission (reduced condom use) was seen among sex workers.5 Similarly, a before-event versus post-event analysis found no evidence to support concerns of an influx of sex workers or reports of trafficking during the 2010 Olympics in Canada. Instead, these studies suggested that local planning and enforcement efforts (such as road closures, heightened security) had negative effects on the health and safety of sex workers, including increased police harassment, displacement of outdoor sex markets, and difficulty meeting clients.6

Despite having no basis in evidence, policies to counteract and “clean up” sex work were implemented in the lead up to London 2012, including the creation in 2010 of a new Scotland Yard task force to combat vice, human trafficking, and exploitation, with teams based in five host Olympic neighbourhoods.1 2 In the months before the Olympics, police in London were highly criticised by local organisations, local sex work and public health organisations, and an independent report for using heavy handed enforcement approaches.1 7 Numerous botched police raids on brothels to combat alleged increases in sex trafficking were reported, with a dismal estimated 1% success rate of finding people who had been trafficked.7 Accounts of street and indoor sex workers being targeted have been common as part of municipal clean-up efforts to hide visible homelessness and illegal substance use, with the most intensive policing occurring in east London in the vicinity of the Olympic Park.8

In England, sex work is quasi-criminalised: although the buying and selling of sex between consensual adults is not illegal, most key aspects of sex work are, which effectively makes the practice of sex work nearly impossible without breaking the law. The ramping up of policing and efforts to remove visible sex work are common practice during large scale sporting events, particularly in regions where sex work is criminalised or quasi-criminalised. Such tactics, rather than achieving the goals of reducing public harms, simply displaced sex workers in London to areas with no access to support and services, effectively placing sex workers at higher risk of violence, and increasing fear and mistrust of police.1 7

A growing body of peer reviewed research globally has linked criminalised and punitive approaches to sex work with increased risks for HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, violence (including murder), and reduced access to health and support service among sex workers.2 9 10 11 12 Enforcement approaches to sex work (for example, police crackdowns, harassment, and tactics that increase fear of violence or arrest) such as occurred in the lead up to London 2012 can have substantial negative effects on sex workers. These include the forcible displacement of visible public or street based sex workers as well as indoor sex workers outside of main and commercial areas to more isolated settings, including highways and lorry parks, as well as rural or industrial areas.11 12 Isolated sex workers are often more vulnerable to sexual or physical violence by clients. They are also less able to access safety services or health and harm reduction services, which can increase their chances of acquiring sexually transmitted infections through reduced ability to insist that clients use condoms.11

It is imperative that policy makers learn from research into past events and enact evidence based public health policies to reduce harms to sex workers,3 4 5 6 rather than supporting the sort of policies and tactics recently used in London that can negatively affect the health and safety of sex workers. Temporary moratoriums on policing and arrest of sex workers during large scale events, alongside support for scaled up access to peer informed safer indoor sex work spaces, as well as broader policy reforms such as decriminalisation of sex work, have all been proposed.8 Large scale sporting events such as the FIFA World Cup and Olympic Games provide an invaluable opportunity to create a legacy of promoting public health and safety through policy reforms focused on reducing harm to sex workers.

Notes

Cite this as: BMJ 2012;345:e5845

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: Both authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf (available on request from the corresponding author) and declare: both authors had financial support from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research for the submitted work; KS also had financial support from the National Institutes of Health; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

  • Provenance and peer review: Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

References

View Abstract