Reflections on vulnerability and agency in the child sexual exploitation debate Kate Brown and Carol-Ann Hooper University of York

Introduction: The paradox of agency Victimisation accounts – naming previously normalised injustices? Social anxieties about childhood and sexuality? Agency unspeakable – blaming children. BUT: Agency appears. ‘children putting themselves at risk’ (Berelowitz, 2013) Some indications that agency is actually disciplined… “A lot of their attitude is ‘you’re just a little slapper – a slapper who likes sleeping with older men’ ” Pearce (2013; 52). Cf Rochdale case (2012) and Bradford case (2014) of imprisonment & forced testimony How to recognise agency without leaving young people to be abused?

Opening up the question of agency Policy shifts: expanding definitions, issues of consent Social and economic factors: the invisible context? The turn to vulnerability Making sense of agency in CSE Some implications for policy and practice

Politics of definition Questions of consent 1990s - ‘Child prostitution’ - prosecuted for sex YP could not consent to Grooming model rose to ascendance (Barnardos, 1998 and 2011) 2000: Safeguarding Children ‘Involved in Prostitution’ / ‘Commercial Sexual Exploitation’ (CSE) Policy responses: Child protection and criminal justice system Exploitative relationships and ‘Child Sexual Exploitation’ (CSE). Plus gangs (Berelowitz, 2013)

Expanding definitions Safeguarding Children and Young People from Sexual Exploitation (DfCSF, 2009; p.9): Sexual exploitation of children and young people under 18 involves exploitative situations, contexts and relationships where young people (or a third person or persons) receive ‘something’ (e.g. food, accommodation, drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, affection, gifts, money) as a result of them performing, and/or another or others performing on them, sexual activities. Child sexual exploitation can occur through the use of technology without the child’s immediate recognition; for example being persuaded to post sexual images on the Internet/mobile phones without immediate payment or gain. In all cases, those exploiting the child/young person have power over them by virtue of their age, gender, intellect, physical strength and/or economic or other resources.

Social and economic factors: The invisible context? Melrose et al (1999): ‘What makes young people stay in prostitution?’ Money, work... Barnardos (1998) ‘Whose Daughter’s Next’. Non-stigmatising… But obscured empirical realities? Socially and economically disadvantaged disproportionately represented (Phoenix, Pearce) Looked after (CEOP, 2011) – 350/900 Drug use, ASB, truanting - seen as ‘risk’ and ‘vulnerability’ factors Questions about welfare and disciplinary systems unanswered

The trouble with vulnerability CSE is apex of vulnerability (Brown, 2013) - policy and practice Behavioural conditionalities attached – associated with ‘deservingness’ and ‘lack of agency’ Young people who do not ‘perform’ vulnerability sufficiently (Brown, 2014) may not find entitlement as secure – and many not ‘well behaved’ Discipline of agency where it is not expressed ‘correctly’ (Frost and Hoggett, 2008)?

Opening up the question of agency Reluctance to name agency understandable given history of ‘blaming the victim’ across VAWG but absence of attention leaves gap in understanding contexts and implications for prevention Debates within feminism over ‘sex work’ as another form of VAWG – issue is space for agency Need new ways of thinking about responsibility, agency and choice Finkelhor (1984) on CSA – strengthening CYP’s supervision/care and capacity for self-protection Psychosocial perspectives on agency & impacts of trauma Consent rests on autonomy - develops in relational context Closed discourse on ‘abused consent’ risks YP feeling unheard by practitioners Limitations of rigid age boundaries

Concluding ideas, policy implications Risks in the current construction of CSE Voices of marginalised YP further marginalised YP’s agency disciplined where expressed Insufficient attention to developmental, relational, social and economic factors Complex realities of disadvantage, distress and desire obscured Little attention to secondary prevention Policy and practice Responses a matter for professional judgement but need understanding of complexity of contexts of YP’s ‘choices’ and awareness of limitations of set age boundaries CSE a matter for prosecution and protection and more – but perspective first, including recognition of YP’s agency, could make more space for reducing vulnerability of those most at risk