Written submission from Lara Murray (PTN0100)

What, if any, harms are associated with buying and selling sex? Who is affected? How?

In the UK where sex workers must work alone, the risks associated with buying and selling sex fall mainly on those selling sex. Those selling sex are harmed by the health and safety risks associated with lone working, such as the threat of physical danger (e.g. assault, rape, theft) and the psychological and emotional effects of social isolation (e.g. anxiety, depression).

Other harms associated with selling sex are: the risk of police prosecution, not being able to access banking and payment processing facilities and not having a safe place to work.

The criminalisation of sex work also creates a stigma for both clients and workers, which creates emotional pressures. In addition, anything that is ‘underground’, by virtue of it being criminalised, becomes inherently more dangerous.

How does buying and selling sex affect attitudes towards women more widely?

Women are already slut shamed; whorephobia is merely another layer of that.

In my opinion, it is not the buying and selling of sex that affects attitudes towards women but rather, the criminalisation of it.

If buying and selling sex were decriminalised that would begin to address the stigma and reduce the negative attitudes towards women who sell sex.

What local initiatives are you aware of that address these harms? Are they effective? Why?

I am not aware of any local initiatives that address these harm.

What, if any, are the challenges for those facing harm in accessing services (for example, healthcare; support services; advice; exit service)? What needs to change?

Those facing harm may be:

• scared to report crimes to the police for fear of prosecution; and/or
• reluctant to seek support services or advice because of shame; and/or
• too hopeless to approach exit services because of the reality of poverty, destitution and homelessness.

What relevance does the Public Sector Equality Duty have for the way that public authorities address prostitution in their area?

The PSED requires public bodies to have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations between different people when carrying out their activities. Accordingly, I would expect public authorities to consider the following when addressing prostitution in their area:

• the availability of first response/urgent facilities/support for women facing the threat of homelessness/women who are already homeless;
• the availability of education and employment support for women;
• the availability of subsidised therapy for women; and
• the availability of specialist sex worker clinics.

How does the law currently treat paying for sex? How could law and policy be improved to address harm?

The law is inconsistent and creates unnecessary barriers to the safe exchange of sexual services for money. Brothel keeping laws mean that sex workers must work alone and struggle find safe places to work.

If brothels were decriminalised and brought within the remit of existing employment legislation so that they became a legitimate workplace (after all, sex workers pay tax to HMRC on their labours like other workers), this would go a long way to improving the industry for all.

How effective are different international approaches at addressing any harms associated with buying and selling sex?

I refer to the English Collective of Prostitutes Report of parliamentary symposium, 3 November 2015, House of Commons (‘the Report’). The Report contains representations from organisations from all over the world with observations on the effectiveness of various international approaches to addressing any harms associated with buying and selling sex. I invite you to read the Report as I will not repeat its contents here.

What is evident, is that anti-prostitution laws in many countries are not effective at addressing the harms associated with buying and selling sex. It seems to be common that the criminalisation of prostitution creates situations where women worry about intimidation and arrest from law enforcement officials, in addition to the emotional burdens they already suffer.

In jurisdictions where raids are carried out to find trafficking victims (such as in USA and Scotland), there are very few trafficking victims found or trafficking arrests made but on the other hand there are increased arrests of prostitutes and for brothel keeping laws. Mostly adults are arrested though the stated purpose of the raids is to protect children.

Where there is a criminalisation of clients rather than prostitutes, this appears to drive the industry further underground and thus increases the danger for prostitutes.

Where there is licensing of workplaces, this may help to provide a degree of safety, such as increased access to health services but it is not without its problems. In my opinion, the licensing of sex work is ‘pimping’ by the State. To be blunt and state this in the first person, I will put it like this: no one has the right to tell me who I can have sex with and anyone who wants to decide who I can have sex with for money and in what circumstances, is a pimp. This is why the full decriminalisation of sex work is the only moral option as far as I can see. Sex workers are humans like anyone else and their bodily autonomy must be respected.

Where there has been decriminalisation, such as in New Zealand, the majority of workers reported that this gave them additional rights and quality of life.

October 2019