I have a SU with a moderate LD who wants to have sex. He's 21 and has no real social network, had 1 girlfriend but she didn't want sex, and he's conscious of his disability insofar as he compares himself to others. He's mentioned to me that he's heard that he could use his PB to go to Amsterdam with a carer, paying for sex through their licensed industry. Under personalisation this should theoretically be possible - and I read an article in CC some months back (in the 'SU Voice' section) which discussed this briefly. I know that the SW (and carer) couldn't be involved in negotiating money, and the SU would be able to do this himself, but where do people stand on this? Any suggestions?
It's a need which is more often than not completely ignored.
'He that is taught only by himself has a fool for a master' - HST.
Not sure if you're asking about the practicalities of whether personal budgets can be used in this way or whether you're thinking in terms of moral/safeguarding issues; my own feeling is that people with LD should be supported to achieve whatever they can - emotionally as well as materially. If we argue that it is a breach of human rights for someone to be sterilised without their consent because of their condition, then it follows that people have a right to and should not be prevented the enjoyment of other aspects of life, such as physical relationships. That said, I believe we have the responsibility as carers/SWs to support that person to make safe choices (just as we do with any person we are responsible for.
I guess the crux of the matter is whether his carer is happy to support him in this and whether his PB can be used - if he could use it to go on holiday (which I guess he could, and plenty if people go on holiday in the hope of having sex) then why not a hol to Amsterdam ); if sex is part of that I don't see it is anyone else's business (privacy and dignity?) - the only reason anyone else has to know is because he needs the extra support due to his LD.
I'm an NQSW and have a teenage son with MLD; he too is keen to have a girlfriend and it's difficult to see him struggling sometimes; he is apt to be a bit OTT with hugging and girls tend to get put off; like most teenagers, he doesn't like me giving him advice and it's harsh that he has (like your SU) an awareness of what he could have, but does not have the skills (yet) to achieve it. As his mother I hope that he will be able to experience and enjoy sex in the future.
Good luck to your SU - why shouldn't he be supported to enjoy this aspect of his life.
Good luck to him and I hope he enjoys his experiences, there are sex workers in Amsterdam who specialise in servicing clients with disabilities (physical and learning.
Apply O' Brien and Wolfensbergers principles of normalisation; your SU should be having sex a part of a normal life.
There is a website: outsiders.org.uk that has lots of useful info re sex and disabilities.
Thanks all - I'll post back when I have an update.
Sex may well be part of normal life (though not everyone is 'doing it', despite modern assumptions) but it's, I suggest with respect, a good deal more complicated than that. It involves more than one person and that other person' s rights matter as well. Mutually desired relationships are one thing and no-one should be putting unnecessary blocks in the way of those, but this discussion has, IMO, taken a distinctly uncomfortable turn.
I hesitate to touch the whole sex workers issue for fear of sounding like the feminazi I almost certainly am, but proposing that a male client has some kind of right to be "serviced" by women (for money or otherwise) seems fraught with all kinds of very iffy power dynamics [ hoping here iI don't get the 'it's a free market all sex workers have a choice" when I think we all know it's not nearly that simple]... Are we doing LD clients any favours by not pointing out the issue of other people's rights? I say this not only as someone who has worked with clients with LD but as the parent of an autistic son who would love a girlfriend but who I would never suggest has a right to impose himself on a woman.
what alternative would you propose for this person Mary?
The aforementioned specialist sex workers in Holland deal with their clients with sensitivity and respect preserving their clients and their own dignity,
Support to make more social relationships in the hope that he'll be able to form his own mutually agreed intimate relationship in due course. Or are you saying that any man whose girlfriend won't put out promptly has the right to buy sex?
However 'sensitive' and 'dignified' sex workers may be [allow me to doubt that it's necessarily anything like as dignified as you claim for the women, but I have no direct experience so have no more than doubt] , it's still fundamentally about the idea that men have the right to be serviced by women for money [ not just in this arena either, but that's another issue] and to me and many other women that is deeply patriarchal and problematic, and promoting this option IMO sends awful messages about gender to service users. If this guy somehow has picked up the idea that his former girlfriend or girls in general "owed" him sex (not to say he necessarily did, but it's a sadly common attitude amongst young men) and that in default of this he can buy it, should his PA etc be falling in with this or challenging it?
Wise words 'Maryeldon' - the right to have our desires gratified is indeed in this area very much a 2-way process. Is the Service User looking for 'sex' - no strings / emotions attached or 'love' and all that entails? Some delicate work needs to be undertaken with the SU or he may end up being able to have 'sex' but without the emotional gratification he may be seeking - and perhaps desperately seeking.
Whilst 'sex workers' in Amsterdam may be 'registered' and have 'special skills' with the disabled they are doing it for financial reward and are they too being exploited?
It is difficult to separate the moral / ethical dilemna from the 'rights' of the individual but in too many instances one person's rights are anothers exploitation.
Thanks, glad it's not just me and that a bloke [assuming from your handle] has also spoken up on this. And I so agree on the dilemma about promoting individual rights vs the consequences of exercising those rights. True of a number of other issues too, of course
Forget all the feminsta stuff. That's a whole other argument. If the guy wants to spend his money in his own way - which he has every right to do so - and has found out about the Amsterdam opportunities through his own research, who says he can't go over there and use his money to spend it on a licensed industry? Get over the British mentality to sex, to begin with. It's not something bad, or terrible, but I agree it needs to be done with educative elements. He's been to two different sexual health and sexual awareness courses and now basically wants to try it. Like anyone else wouldn't.
To the critics of this thread: would you rather he wasn't able to satisfy this need safely, and took it into his own hands? No? Wouldn't you prefer that we can control this, guide him, educate him, support him to understand the process and ultimately end up satisfy his needs in a secure, licensed place where his happiness and growth as a person is the most important thing?
Arguing against the idea of going to Amsterdam for this reason is tantamount of DoLS. Who says he can't do what he wants? Stop trying to place restrictions on a young man who wants to experience the world.
Purely as an aside - Robert I'm aware you're a broken, battered and burnt out social worker who can't think of anything positive to say about his job and so moans to all and sundry, dragging everyone else down to suffocate in your implatable woe. As a result I tend to ignore your input. Mary, what's your position? I'm not talking ideologies here. The girls in Amsterdam are far more protected than those on UK streets: tell me something, would you rather he had sex in a safe place in Amsterdam, or in some sordid car-related debacle which no doubt will be busted by the police entailing all the rigmarole which we know will result?
Let him have some fun - I'd want to. Put yourself in his shoes before you cut off his balls.
No, I'm not going to "forget all the feminista stuff" as you dismissively (and revealingly) put it. Women's rights matter, even if not, apparently, to you. The rights of others in general matter. Our service users have rights but they do not trump those of others. It applies to this situation as to, no doubt, a great many others. None of us who live in a social context get exactly what we want without having to consider others.
You speak as if the only two alternatives are paid sex or risky, dangerous sex. Not so. Consensual relationships and support to form same do not seem to be on your radar. Quick, apparent 'fixes' sound easy but seldom are and may cause unforeseen difficulties down the line.
As for what my position is, I have clearly stated it above - support to build genuine, reciprocal relationships, but you have chosen to ignore it because it does not allow you to rant on accusing me of being uptight ("British" - though of course I might not be for all you know), against 'fun' and trying to cut off someone's balls (charming). All the usual derailing tactics to avoid addressing the wider issues, in other words.
The issues are by no means limited to the rights of others, by the way: building social skills, capacity, social networks, the young man's expectations of relationships, many things which in my experience both as worker and parent cannot be condensed into a weekend should be part of everyone's education but have often been missed or truncated for people with LD. Part of social work is surely to bridge some of the gaps. If you honestly think that he will gain "happiness and growth" from paid sex then I repectfully submit you are kidding yourself. He might learn something, no doubt, but so would he from putting his finger in an electric socket.
Sex involves more than one person: therefore more than one person's wishes and freely given consent come into play and arguing that 'girls' (sic) who work in the sex industry are in some kind of heirarchy (also, what makes you so sure? Done the research have you? Or is it just more convenient to assume it?) does not solve the problem that paying for sex does not help this young man in the longer term. Simple as that. As for 'putting yourself in his shoes', projecting your own " I'd want to, sex is no strings fun for men, women who sell sex are just there to be used like a fairground ride" attitude onto him does what exactly - put him in your shoes rather than the other way round? As another poster remarked (and your ad homimen against him does you no credit) , if he really wants love (and it sees, would you not be denying him that by offering second best [because maybe he feels that is all he can now have - honestly, we just don't know enough about this situation and sending people on courses just doesn't cut it] and opening him up to confusion, disappointment and hurt?
As for envoking DOLS, please don't be silly. You know perfectly well that that is irrelevant here. No-one is shutting anyone away. All your extreme statements do is cloud the argument - although that may be what you intended
You appear to have made up your mind and are clearly unwilling to engage in thoughtful debate so I will leave it here. If you think concern about the structures of wider society and the rights of others is a sign of "burn out" we have nothing to say to each other, I fear.
"satisfy his needs in a secure, licensed place where his happiness and growth as a person is the most important thing?"
Umm i think the most important thing to a brothel is not his happiness and growth as a person, im pretty sure its his money.
This thread takes me back 25 years when myself and a colleague were working with social workers and support workers on the subject "The rights of people with learning difficulties to have sex". In those days it was all about the need for guidelines (which in my area have still to be written) now its about the abuse of sex workers!
As a disabled women in the later part of her life who is fortunate enough to have enjoyed many sexual experiences it is interesting to note that when sex rears its ugly head in the context of disability the relationship must be meaningful and have emotional content. Yes I am all for that but lets be honest how many non disabled people enter into relationships which are less than meaningful, have no emotional content and can often be based on power dynamics.
If we took a really honest approach to this subject surely we would be recognising that whilst it would be wonderful if the person in question found a meaningful relationship which was not merely physical but had emotional and two way support for each other - this is hard to find for many non disiabled people. This doesnt mean I dont want this to be the case and that the person supporting him should try to encourage this BUT if this proves out of the persons reach then he should be supported to have sexual experiences and if this means him going on holiday to Amsterdam, then so be it. Just in case you are wondering I feel this would be the same for a woman with learning difficulties.
Holland has allowed disabled people to use part of their care package for sex workers for many years and whilst I do recognize the rather empty content for the client surely disabled people must have a right to have sex!
for those of you with the "apparent" abonimable attitude questioning the right of people with disabilities to have sex and sex workers to engage withn them as clients can i point you in the direction of the following websites offering support, advice and research in ths matter:
http://www.outsiders.org.uk/news/sex-workers
www.touchingbase.org/about.html
sexuality.about.com/b/2007/01/19/sex-work-and-disability.htm
sexuality.about.com/b/.../sex-work-and-disability-reconsidered.htm
www.outsiders.org.uk/news/sex-workers
www.field.org.au/events/resources/disability_sexuality/
www.tlc-trust.org.uk/
women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/.../article5716226.ece
www.rsm.ac.uk/academ/sej101.php
www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/6533
www.bbc.co.uk › Home › Features
www.independent.co.uk › News › UK › This Britain
www.zoomerang.com/Survey/WEB228BX3BZR3X
www.informaworld.com/index/780900864.pdf
Or just put sex workers and disability into GOOGLE then read and learn
I would hope that anyone working with a client in such circumstances would explain the bit of using prostitutes that isn't about getting their jollies - the bits about the rights of the sex workers not to be exploited, about the risks of coercion and trafficing and disease and exploitation and about the difference between having sex because you want to (as part of a relationship or as a one night stand, or something else) and having sex because it's your job. And I would hope that someone would explain that although everyone has a right to a sex life, that right is not absolute and does not trump other people's right to not have sex with you. And if the client has had all of that explained and still wants to go, then I would hope the client would be supported to go, no matter how uncomfortable people are with the issue. We can't stop people who aren't service users going abroad to use prostitutes. We can talk to them about the issues, educate them, harangue them, try to persuade them and raise their consciousnesses, but ultimately it's their choice. It should be the same for service users too.
Cheaper than a trip to Amsterdam, but only really applicable if you already have a partner, online equipment store Spokz have started selling sex aids aimed at disabled people.
You can read my thoughts on our blog.
I have worked with prostitues in the past and I have also worked with traffic victims. Difficult to tell the difference between the two, I would argue there is none in most cases as the sex workers are discouraged from forming any other ambition and are all too aware that they will carry a stigma for the rest of their lives. Now for the pro Amsterdam brigade. If you feel that sex workers are not exploited and that sex industry is a legitimate business, this means you are prepared to treat the sex worker with the same respect with which you treat your SU. Hell, the same respect with which you treat yourself as you are both providing services to meet a human being's needs. This means you would not object to have a sex worker in your circle of friends or even in your family, right? It could be your daughter or even your partner. No? Then are you actually suggesting that those women deserve less than any other citizen because of theoir job? Then you are exploiting them and your argument does not stand.
Personally dont want my tax payers money spent on paying for anyone to have sex however justified the need allgedly is. The economy is in a bad enough state without spending valuable monies to enable clients to get a shag!
He would spending his own money
"I haven't contributed to these forums "
Sorry, I guess that should be 'fora'
Still dont want my tax payers money or anyone elses paid to him in whatever form to facilitate shagging. No need to be offensive. Only clients money if they have been given it but still a gift from the tax payer and will be rightly screened one would hope for sensible use.
escapee: Still dont want my tax payers money or anyone elses paid to him in whatever form to facilitate shagging. No need to be offensive. Only clients money if they have been given it but still a gift from the tax payer and will be rightly screened one would hope for sensible use.
I'm sorry but there is a need to be offensive; I guess it's OK for you, as a person without disabilities to facilitate your shagging out of your own pocket? But not OK for a person with disabiklities to get themselves a shag, one of lifes indeniable and inalienable human rights / needs.
I hope your pen name denotes that you are escaping from Social Work.
That should have read disabilities
Social workers identify needs and provide services to meet them. This lad is an angry young man, frustrated and anxious. The need is there. I identified it, assessed it, and am going to be providing a service to meet it.
To provide an update: management hated the idea of him going to Amsterdam. They were aghast at what I proposed. So I thought '*** 'em', did more research, built up a strong argument using outside sources, and now, guess what...
He's goin' to Amsterdam in September using his PB, supported 1:1 by a family member (his brother) who knows exactly the purpose. Capacity assessment done, best interest meeting held. Management hate me for this; colleagues are supportive. Bosses are petrified it's going to make the press and although I understand the rationale behind their concern, I personally think we should promote this even more.
And what's more: the lad has calmed a bit since he's been told. He's planning to do more than just get his end away anyway - he's having a holiday (the first time he's ever left the country) which he's funding partially by himself.
The lesson I've taken from this: *** management and their self-serving concerns. *** expectations. *** people's prejudicial belief that just because you have an LD, you don't need sex. There's a campaign in this story somewhere, but it ain't for me to champion it.
I just wanted to let everyone know the outcome of this. Sorry for the tirade but this has taken months to arrange. Glad some people on here (Voltaire etc) are seeing this like me and not limiting his life to remaining in a dead-end town with no prospect of doing what he wants most.
Any one who works in the care sector needs to respect the rights and choices of the service users. As a Support worker i have worked with alot of different groups. Whilst wrking with LD i was informed that one service user that had been there previously was now in a secure unit for rape. This may have been prevented if the service user were able to access a prositute ot release the sexual fustration. i dont in any way agree with prositition personally but, i respect peoples beliefs and idea's etc if that is what they want to do it is their human right and in the end it is their choice andshould be respected.
Tea, this is precisely my point. You do not agree with prostitution but are prepared to promote the use of prostitutes - you said yourself " This may have been prevented if the service user were able to access a prositute ot release the sexual fustration." This reads to me "somebody should have accepted to have paid sex with this person regardless of the discrimination they would encounter for doing this". That's not on! I fully accept that some prostitutes choose to do this, some have day time jobs and do this as a part time hobby, if you want. These are the very expensive ones that your service users are very unlikely to access. Many of them have children and cannot find other ways to pay for their support. Many of them are Eastern Europeans who would love to have decent jobs, but cannot because of the poverty in their countries and the restrictions on job markets everywhere else. If this job were viewed as a respectable job in this country, if it were legalized and the sex workers were treated with fairness and respect and would not be denied other employment opportunities on mor5al grounds, I would not have an issue with this. However, saying that "my patch ends here and i do not care if anybody else is oppressed if it suits my service user" is not OK. How would you feel if you discovered that maybe some affordable equipment for disabled people were cheap and available because it was produced by children in some very deprived country? Would you still promote them or would you consider the ethical implications of that?
I am not surprised that the management did not support the LA getting involved in this. No matter how you put it, this si sexual tourism because the choice of country is dictated by the legality and guarantee of paid sex. Which country would like to hear that the govenrment of another country is using them for sex tourism?? And isn't this saying " we do not think our girls should do it, but we are quite happy to use your own". Incidentally, sex tourism has been a longstanding issue in my country of origin, which had become at some point a "paedophile's paradise". If the guy chooses to use his money to go with family members to Amsterdam and contemplating the moral issues has decided this is still what he wishes, then that is his choice. But when the local administration of this country is involved, it is quite different I would say.
Well done AOGT for sticking with this despite management and some other people's discriminatory opinions - hope your lad has a great holiday and sexual experience :-)
CS
"going to make the press "
I don't see why it would make the press, this has been going on for decades. My nana worked in a home for adults with LD back in the 70s and 80s and certain 'volunteers' would occassionally do the rounds. And more recently an ex colleague of mine told me about a case where a 19 year saved up his DLA to go to Amsterdam. Pretty much everyone linked to this kind of social work has some second hand anecdote about clients getting their end away outside of a normal consentual non-paying shag, or thats my perception anyway. Personally i think paying for sex when we know that the majority of these girls are exploited and/ or trafficked is abhorrent and i want to make it clear that i would prefer for it to be not happening at all - but given that any other bloke is able to go and pay for sex i dont think theres any reason why this guy should be prevented from doing so. It can't be one rule one..
Funny that these kinds of discussions always centre around the sexual needs of male clients. What do we do about all the horny ladies?
on our LA safeguarding course we were told quite categorically that if a worker knowingly facilitates or commissions illegal sex services on service user's behalf it could be considered a criminal act, and we would not have the back-up of the LA should it go to court. it was suggested if we ring for a taxi and the service user then chooses to go off somewhere else for their needs, that is their own business and we will not be liaible. if we are more involved we are on shaky ground. not commenting from an ethical position, just the view of the LA here as i can see both sides of the argument.
duvetqueen2 paid sex is not illegal in Amsterdam. Nor would it be, for instance, to take a service user to a lapdance club. I fully appreciate that saying "it is the client's choice" is not as simple and straightforward when a service user relies heavily on support from the Local Authority to exercise his choices (would a support worker of either gender take such a service user to a lapdance club round the corner? would they buy them a sexually explicit magazine or take them to the sex shop? Would that maybe put pressure on their own adult relationship?). My frustration is, really, with the hypocrisy of our society which exploits these vulnerable women, considers them a "necessary evil" and then marginalizes them, takes their children away and slates them in tabloids. I oppose on principle this idea of "second hand citizens", doing something that should always be done by somebody else and never by our own. In my eyes, this is just as bad as slavery and the most horrific stories of abuse you have ever heard do not go even close to some of the stories I've heard from these women.
thinkpink: Funny that these kinds of discussions always centre around the sexual needs of male clients. What do we do about all the horny ladies?
That's because the thread is about a man; I guess horny women could access the services of an 'escort agency' or pay for sex too; maybe this isn't considered so exploitative; maybe we view exploitation as something done only by males to females, in view of the fact that men are the 'doers' and women are the passive recipients (which may well be true in the majority of cases).
I am working with service users with learning difficulties, the most concerning ones are victims of males that target them for their vulnerability and exploit them as well - so with them it is not as much of a matter whether they are sexually active, but are they safe enough? I do not have female service users with physical disabilities, but again I suspect that i many cases it would be the same concern. Not all of them, though. I do agree that males providing an escort service are being exploited as well, however the difference is that many of them are likely to be rather highly paid individuals, who are not beaten, raped and their lives and the lives of their loved ones threatened. They are also likely to be finding the experience more pleasurable than women, given that they must have some degree of arousal for the experience to be possible - not the case with women. Males are also not likely to experience repeated partners within minutes of each other to the levels of tens a day as in the case of some of the women with whom I've spoken. Also most sex services are performed by women, not males. So no, I am not suggesting that it is OK if males are exploited, but merely that women's sexual exploitation is wider, more severe, more humiliating and they had less way out of it than males and the repercussions on them are worse. And i do not think that just because able bodied males are able to access sex services which are exploitative it a good enough reason to say that disabled males should have their fair chance to do it. It's like saying if a disabled person sees a fight, they, too, should have the opportunity to throw a stone. Demand creates supply.
I read about this in todays Community Care and I honestly feel disgusted by the decision taken by the Social Worker in the article.
Yes sex should be given consideration as part of a care plan. Not only should disabled people be allowed to pursue sexual relationships, but sexual intimacy is something to be encouraged.
However the difference is here is that prostitution isn't about sex, its about abuse! Violence against women doesn't suddenly become acceptable because the perpetrators disabled. It would be like allowing mothers of disabled boys to put their sons on display in freak shows in the name of women's rights. I'd personally like to see a law brought through to stop this. Not just for disabled people, but for any Brits going abroad and for anyone arranging such trips.
Sex is good, but its not a need. I'm 28, male and a virgin. (waiting until I'm married due to my religious beliefs) Us blokes are not some uncontrollable animal that needs to have sex or we explode. That kind of thinking is demeaning to women and insulting to men.
SUs have rights but not at the expense of others. Should we support disabled people to attend events held by the National Front?
It was also around 25 years ago when as District Manager I was responsible for the Borough's Team for people with physical disabilities. The issue I had to decide with the Team manager wasw that they had provided supportive living with a couple who having met at a Day Centre decided they wish to be housed together. Both had severe forms of cerebral palsey requiring them to be dressed and undressed by their carers (a team of six carers provided 12 hours of daily care) and the only way they could indulge in sexual activity was for the carers to place them in close proximity to each other. The questions raised was it right for the carers to be expected to do this and what safeguards were needed? The decision we reached was that the carers must be fully in agreement to do this. Two carers to be involved. Having placed the couple into position they left the bedroom before any activity took place. There was already a buzzer system installed in the bedroom linked to the kitchen and when sexual activity had ceased the carers would be summoned back to dress and reposition the couple.
In relation to the general debate my view is that it is sad that prostitutes are the only recourse and it would be preferable that relationships should be encouraged which could lead as it is for the rest of the population by mutual consent to sexual fulfillment. However if there are no such outlets available then a prostitute may be the only option. Prostitution is not a criminal offence and to forbid a person using their allowance for this purpose could well be considered a violation of their human rights.
This is kind of a pointless post after reading all of the debates and opinions. But I would like to have my little input anyway.
Last year I went to Amsterdam and did some intensive care work with ex sex workers and current sex workers, as my dissertation was based on this subject, and the range of women is extensive, unfortuantly there were some women who had been trafficked and women being forced to do it by pimps, some who do it for financial gain ( One lady was a Mental Health Nurse ) and a fair few of the 75 women I spoke to sex worked because they enjoyed it. At the time it baffeled me because I was only thinknig about sex work in the UK. But they were happy, they pay thier taxes, earn a wage and once they have earned enough to pay the rent on the room ( between 100 to 250 euros) they could pretty much pick and choose who they wanted to have sex with. ( This is not my personal opinion, it came from them) i spoke to a very funny women of 24 who clamied she was a nymphomaniac and liked to dominate her clients!
If research was carried out effectivley before you SU went of to Amsterdam, he may be able to carryout his wish whilst respecting everybodies rights.
But again, given time he may welll develop a loivng relationship where it will happen naturally?
Good luck to all involved
A-biz, thanks for this, it is actually very useful for the debate (from my point of view at least). From your observation, how easy would it be for a client to spot the difference between the sex workers that were doing it by force, by necessity or by enjoyment? I'd say any of the workers that had to do it because they had no choice are victims of exploitation. I am also curious how well integrated the latter category is in the society. Do they enjoy good social relationships? is there an impact on their chance to secure a good and loving relationship with a significant other? What about their chances to make a living from other sources once they get to an age when realistically they will no longer be successful as sex workers? I would argue that any of the women that has their life chances spoilt even in the long run as an outcome of them being a sex worker is still exploited, regardless of their enjoyment at the peak of their success. Basically, if in 10 - 20 years time they end up dead in a ditch or end up lonely and drinking themselves to death it is still a stain on the conscience of the society that encouraged that by creating demand. If you want it is as immoral as McDonalds or the fags companies that kill people without actually holding the knife.
Long Tooth - that is brilliant and I take my hat off to the workers and the managers that supported two vulnerable people to enjoy the intimacy that able bodied people take for granted.
RP - From my observation, no a client cannot tell the difference, by my research found that a high proportion of the women who are being pimped of forced, are made to do so during the day rather than night due to the lack of tourist interest. Easier for these pimps to keep control without being notcied by the police? If the women are found to be trafficked, pimped or highly addicted to drugs or drink, they are shut down and tranfered to a hostel and provided with a service that is kind of like connexions for adults and retireve counselling, and intergrated back into thier home countries). Also, I visited a sex working museum run by an ex worker who told me that women now have to provide proof of identity and right to work in the Netherlands (although im sure it is very easy to get forge documents). Alot of the women had day jobs... some of the women were men, and some of the women were married with children. ( there is also a creche, free of charge, not sure how I felt about that)
All im trying to get across is that it is often the womens choice and they are happy to do that at that time in thier lives. The McDonalds thing, people know it is bad for them....if they continue to stuff thier faces with it all day... then thats thier problem, they can access a nutritioist to help them? If a sex working woman drinks to much and kills herself because she didnt accept the support offered to her ( there are consellors, sexual health experts and street pastors that offer support to the women) it would be them holding the knife.
Thanks for replying to me though, its the 1st time anyone ever has :)
I find your point of view very interesting and I think it does have a lot of value for this debate.