The utility of trauma evaluations in judicial decision‐making in child sex trafficking cases: A qualitative analysis

• Published date: 01 October 2023
• Author: Ginny Sprang,Sarah Ascienzo,Chelsea Atwater,Jennifer Cole
• Date: 01 October 2023
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12742

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

The utility of trauma evaluations in judicial

decision-making in child sex trafficking

cases: A qualitative analysis

Ginny Sprang

1

|Sarah Ascienzo

2

|Chelsea Atwater

3

|

Jennifer Cole

4

1

University of Kentucky Center on Trauma

and Children, Lexington, Kentucky, USA

2

North Carolina State University, Social Work,

NC State University, Raleigh,

North Carolina, USA

3

University of Kentucky, Psychiatry,

Lexington, Kentucky, USA

4

Center for Drug and Alcohol Research,

University of Kentucky, Lexington,

Kentucky, USA

Correspondence

Ginny Sprang,

Email: sprang@uky.edu

Abstract

Youth coerced into trafficking experience multiple forms of

abuse, and are deprived of basic human rights associated

with liberty and self‐determination, all of which can

adversely affect mental and psychological well‐being

(Ottisova et al., Behavioral Medicine, 44(3), 234‐241.). This

study uses a qualitative approach to exploring how judges

use trauma‐related information to make decisions about

how to adjudicate cases involving minors who have been

sexually trafficked. Additionally, the study identifies barriers

to receiving data, the court resources needed to effectively

respond, and potential remedies to address gaps in effective

case management. The study uses data from 82 juvenile

and family court judges from around the USA 27‐item struc-

tured interview was used to determine the availability and

utility of trauma services, needed resources, and solutions

to overcome gaps in effective case adjudication. Themes

emerged related to lack of access to and timing issues that

limited the utility of reports, lack of congruency between

recommendations and available resources and child and

family resistance to disclosures. Solutions to overcome bar-

riers are related to increased cross‐disciplinary collabora-

tion, awareness and responsiveness. Legal remedies such as

Safe Harbor laws can only be realized if the systemic

DOI: 10.1111/fcre.12742

© 2023 Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.

Family Court Rev. 2023;61:885–901. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/fcre 885

context is aligned and appropriately resourced toward

responsiveness.

KEYWORDS

child sex trafficking, commercial sexual exploitation of children,

family court, judicial response, juvenile court, qualitative analysis,

Safe Harbor Laws, trafficking Victim's protection act, trauma

evaluations, trauma-informed

Key points for the family court community

•Safe harbor lawshave shifted the criminal justiceresponse

to child sex trafficking cases away from punishment to

rehabilitation, putting judges on the front-line of identify-

ing needs and directing and ordering appropriate treat-

ment services.

•Legal remedies can only be realized if the systemic

context is aligned and appropriately resourced toward

responsiveness.

•Cross-system collaboration has utility with youth involved

in sex trafficking who need to interface with different

courts and multiple child serving systems of care (e.g., child

welfare, the courts, juvenile justice programs, etc…).

•Guardian ad litems and/or specialized court dockets

could be the conduits for ensuring a trauma-informed

approach is applied to CSEC cases

•Education on addressing child sex trafficking needs to

occur further upstream during undergraduate, graduate or

legal education and/or be mandated as part of required

professional development.

Over the past three decades, there has been a significant increase in perceived public interest in, and aware-

ness of, human trafficking, particularly sex trafficking, as anecdotally evidenced by the number of emerging

airport flyer campaigns, highway billboards, and Facebook discussion pages. This public shift in awareness has

possibly, in part, influenced changes in both federal and state laws regarding human trafficking (Barnert

et al., 2016).

The Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) of 2000 defines sex trafficking of minors (STM) as the “recruit-

ment, harboring, transportation, provision, obtaining, patronizing, or soliciting,”of a minor in a commercial sexual act.

It was meant to act as a catalyst for change in how the judicial system regarded youth involved in sex work, from

delinquents in need of punitive measures to victims in need of treatment and services. STM is often used inter-

changeably with the term CSEC, or commercial sexual exploitation of children. The World Congress Against Com-

mercial Sexual Exploitation of Children (2003) defines CSEC as “sexual abuse by an adult and remuneration in cash

or kind to the child or a third person or persons.”(Mutarbhorn, 1996, p. 3). As a result of the enactment of the TVPA,

886 FAMILY COURT REVIEW