Call for end to draconian police cautions for sex workers
December 9, 2024 4:07 PM Subscribe
Call for end to draconian police cautions for sex workers that last until age of 100.
Police in England and Wales should be banned from issuing a draconian caution that exclusively targets sex workers, both politicians and campaigners have said. A "prostitute’s caution," unlike other police cautions, does not require a person to admit to an offence or agree to accept it. Police can issue them to anyone they have "reasonable cause" to believe has broken prostitution laws, meaning little evidence is required.
Police cautions, which are typically issued for minor crimes, are filtered out from someone’s record after six years and do not need to be disclosed to employers, but a prostitute’s caution will show up on a sex worker’s enhanced DBS check until they are 100 years old.
Hardy questioned some of the "reasonable causes" presented by police. "I remember one case where the officer said he’d seen her talking to a man," said Hardy. "When [the police officer] approached, the man walked away. That was the evidence. It’s not the sort of thing that would stand up in court."
Women told the ECP report that they had been issued with the cautions when they weren’t working, and in one case when the recipient wasn’t even a sex worker.
The research on how cautions affect employment opportunities looked at jobs that are more commonly done by women, as most sex workers are women. These jobs include carers, childminders, community centre workers, medical professionals, social workers and teachers. All of these jobs require enhanced DBS checks for employment.
"There are jobs I’ve been offered and had to say no to," one woman told the report. "Social services asked if I’d considered doing emergency respite. It’s excellent money and would have suited my life and skills. But I couldn’t even think about it as they would have done the checks and found out."
Police cautions, which are typically issued for minor crimes, are filtered out from someone’s record after six years and do not need to be disclosed to employers, but a prostitute’s caution will show up on a sex worker’s enhanced DBS check until they are 100 years old.
Hardy questioned some of the "reasonable causes" presented by police. "I remember one case where the officer said he’d seen her talking to a man," said Hardy. "When [the police officer] approached, the man walked away. That was the evidence. It’s not the sort of thing that would stand up in court."
Women told the ECP report that they had been issued with the cautions when they weren’t working, and in one case when the recipient wasn’t even a sex worker.
The research on how cautions affect employment opportunities looked at jobs that are more commonly done by women, as most sex workers are women. These jobs include carers, childminders, community centre workers, medical professionals, social workers and teachers. All of these jobs require enhanced DBS checks for employment.
"There are jobs I’ve been offered and had to say no to," one woman told the report. "Social services asked if I’d considered doing emergency respite. It’s excellent money and would have suited my life and skills. But I couldn’t even think about it as they would have done the checks and found out."
Since it serves to keep a woman from finding any work other than sex work, I think we must assume that’s its purpose.
I’d bet quite a few of these are handed out to women the policeman would like to have sex with, and I’d be very surprised if there isn’t often an implicit quid pro quo of 'if you’ll have sex with me — strictly pro bono, of course — I might just neglect to file the paperwork'.
posted by jamjam at 6:26 PM on December 9, 2024 [13 favorites]
I’d bet quite a few of these are handed out to women the policeman would like to have sex with, and I’d be very surprised if there isn’t often an implicit quid pro quo of 'if you’ll have sex with me — strictly pro bono, of course — I might just neglect to file the paperwork'.
posted by jamjam at 6:26 PM on December 9, 2024 [13 favorites]
Britain has so many legal ways to be be nasty, intolerant and evil. eyeofnewt - I've lived in the UK and it's an odd place in that even simple words have many meanings. Being 'nice' (and harbouring grudges) is an art form.
NZ decriminalised prostitution decades ago, it makes no sense for it to be criminalised.
posted by unearthed at 6:27 PM on December 9, 2024 [9 favorites]
NZ decriminalised prostitution decades ago, it makes no sense for it to be criminalised.
posted by unearthed at 6:27 PM on December 9, 2024 [9 favorites]
So what if tens of thousands of people demanded to have a sex worker caution put on their record, as just one step toward getting this off the books
Fuck we're dumb and shitty creatures sometimes. Sex work is work.
posted by ginger.beef at 6:31 PM on December 9, 2024 [3 favorites]
Fuck we're dumb and shitty creatures sometimes. Sex work is work.
posted by ginger.beef at 6:31 PM on December 9, 2024 [3 favorites]
Sex work is work, and being mistaken for doing sex work should be no worse than being mistaken as a law enforcement officer. Both can ruin your lifte…
posted by GenjiandProust at 6:58 PM on December 9, 2024 [3 favorites]
posted by GenjiandProust at 6:58 PM on December 9, 2024 [3 favorites]
That's a long caution!
posted by Captaintripps at 7:05 PM on December 9, 2024 [1 favorite]
posted by Captaintripps at 7:05 PM on December 9, 2024 [1 favorite]
Even if this is still 'on the books', there's no way it should be enforced by any right-thinking person. The idea that a caution sticks to a person's record for their entire life, banning them from a whole range of occupations, with no possible way to appeal it or have it rescinded is barbaric. Even more so that it's based on the unchallenged personal opinion of a police officer who may or may not have any idea what prostitution actually looks like.
posted by dg at 7:09 PM on December 9, 2024 [3 favorites]
posted by dg at 7:09 PM on December 9, 2024 [3 favorites]
Even more so that it's based on the unchallenged personal opinion of a police officer who may or may not have any idea what prostitution actually looks like
In Western Australia, around 1992/1993/1994/1995
police charged people with prostitution if
a) they were walking down the footpath in a particular geographical area that was experiencing a lot of street-based (car-based) sex work; and one or more of
b) bright red lipstick;
c) dramatic makeup;
d) fishnet stockings;
e) stockings and suspenders;
f) "nightclub attire";
g) condoms in their handbag.
As the geographical area in question was right next to the city's nightclub district, this resulted in A LOT of angry goths; A LOT of angry night club goers, a massive public outcry, and the law being changed.
The reason for this crackdown was people being upset about their young children witnessing car-based sex work and also finding used condoms/syringes in their front gardens - but the solution should have been to provide a designated safe, well-lit area for car-based sex work away from the houses of families with young kids, not to harass every person in sight.
posted by chariot pulled by cassowaries at 7:57 PM on December 9, 2024 [9 favorites]
In Western Australia, around 1992/1993/1994/1995
police charged people with prostitution if
a) they were walking down the footpath in a particular geographical area that was experiencing a lot of street-based (car-based) sex work; and one or more of
b) bright red lipstick;
c) dramatic makeup;
d) fishnet stockings;
e) stockings and suspenders;
f) "nightclub attire";
g) condoms in their handbag.
As the geographical area in question was right next to the city's nightclub district, this resulted in A LOT of angry goths; A LOT of angry night club goers, a massive public outcry, and the law being changed.
The reason for this crackdown was people being upset about their young children witnessing car-based sex work and also finding used condoms/syringes in their front gardens - but the solution should have been to provide a designated safe, well-lit area for car-based sex work away from the houses of families with young kids, not to harass every person in sight.
posted by chariot pulled by cassowaries at 7:57 PM on December 9, 2024 [9 favorites]
But what if it’s really fun to harass every person in sight? Makes you feel all important and shit, like you matter in the world.
posted by chasing at 8:40 PM on December 9, 2024 [5 favorites]
posted by chasing at 8:40 PM on December 9, 2024 [5 favorites]
Wow, this is an eye-opener. As a Canadian, I had never realized that a "Caution" was anything more than a "Tsk tsk!" Don't make me tell your father!"
Mind you, my primary exposure to this odd English legal process came from the song of one of my old buddies, Long John Baldrey.
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 8:48 PM on December 9, 2024 [1 favorite]
Mind you, my primary exposure to this odd English legal process came from the song of one of my old buddies, Long John Baldrey.
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 8:48 PM on December 9, 2024 [1 favorite]
In good faith I was recently asked if I believed women should be in combat, with the implied benevolent paternalism follow up “should they be drafted?” It’s a longer story than here (but includes this), I arrived at the position “ARM WOMEN!”
It’s incremental, “Surely they’re too compassionate. Can they be trusted under pressure?” The slippery slope to excluding them from the police, judgeships, MPs/PMs (strangely the UK has done better than most, while the US remains one of the few high-income countries who won’t do it), and diminish the role of women in every part of the power structure, decision making, and civic life.
I said “The paternalist society that denies women from combat, is the same society that subjugates women. It is hard to subjugate a class of people who are trained to defend themselves. Preventing women from combat is a tool in the toolbox of the oppressor to oppress women.” So yeah… I’m recruiting someone to design snazzy t-shirts.
posted by rubatan at 8:49 PM on December 9, 2024 [4 favorites]
It’s incremental, “Surely they’re too compassionate. Can they be trusted under pressure?” The slippery slope to excluding them from the police, judgeships, MPs/PMs (strangely the UK has done better than most, while the US remains one of the few high-income countries who won’t do it), and diminish the role of women in every part of the power structure, decision making, and civic life.
I said “The paternalist society that denies women from combat, is the same society that subjugates women. It is hard to subjugate a class of people who are trained to defend themselves. Preventing women from combat is a tool in the toolbox of the oppressor to oppress women.” So yeah… I’m recruiting someone to design snazzy t-shirts.
posted by rubatan at 8:49 PM on December 9, 2024 [4 favorites]
It’s an effective form of ensuring that a lower caste remains populated.
posted by Callisto Prime at 9:47 PM on December 9, 2024 [7 favorites]
posted by Callisto Prime at 9:47 PM on December 9, 2024 [7 favorites]
women should be in combat
Nobody should be in combat ideally, but if our armed forces are going into combat, the members that do go should not be chosen on the basis of their gender.
should they be drafted
If men are eligible for the draft then women should be too. Seems like basic equal rights to me.
posted by axiom at 9:48 PM on December 9, 2024 [3 favorites]
Nobody should be in combat ideally, but if our armed forces are going into combat, the members that do go should not be chosen on the basis of their gender.
should they be drafted
If men are eligible for the draft then women should be too. Seems like basic equal rights to me.
posted by axiom at 9:48 PM on December 9, 2024 [3 favorites]
Nobody should be in combat ideally
Agreed! Full stop.
But it brought home a disparity: women often aren’t exempted, they’re denied. Then extend that to diminished qualifications for making, interpreting, and enforcing laws.
posted by rubatan at 10:01 PM on December 9, 2024
Agreed! Full stop.
But it brought home a disparity: women often aren’t exempted, they’re denied. Then extend that to diminished qualifications for making, interpreting, and enforcing laws.
posted by rubatan at 10:01 PM on December 9, 2024
it serves to keep a woman from finding any work other than sex work
No it doesn’t
posted by ambrosen at 2:21 AM on December 10, 2024
No it doesn’t
posted by ambrosen at 2:21 AM on December 10, 2024
It's a slight overstatement - it disqualifies women from a lot of other forms of work they might otherwise consider, making it more likely they will stay in sex work.
posted by Dysk at 3:06 AM on December 10, 2024 [3 favorites]
posted by Dysk at 3:06 AM on December 10, 2024 [3 favorites]
Now imagine if not only the reasons for accusing someone of prostitution were bogus, but the accuser wasn't even a cop and could have you imprisoned in a private jail and you've got the Cambridge bulldogs and the Spinning House.
posted by Molesome at 4:12 AM on December 10, 2024 [3 favorites]
posted by Molesome at 4:12 AM on December 10, 2024 [3 favorites]
The Cambridge story, which after reading the other day I was literally shaking, needs its own FPP.
posted by lalochezia at 4:52 AM on December 10, 2024 [2 favorites]
posted by lalochezia at 4:52 AM on December 10, 2024 [2 favorites]
being mistaken for doing sex work should be no worse than being mistaken as a law enforcement officer.
ABRAM: No better?
SAMPSON: Well, sir.
GREGORY (aside to SAMPSON): Say “better.”Here comes one of my master’s kinsmen. Cops are the scum of the earth.
SAMPSON: (to ABRAM) Yes, better, sir.
posted by corb at 8:14 AM on December 10, 2024
ABRAM: No better?
SAMPSON: Well, sir.
GREGORY (aside to SAMPSON): Say “better.”
SAMPSON: (to ABRAM) Yes, better, sir.
posted by corb at 8:14 AM on December 10, 2024
No it doesn’t
the report that makes the claim is linked:
the report that makes the claim is linked:
Over two-thirds of the women interviewed said that a prostitute’s caution and/or conviction had been the reason they found it hard to leave sex work and find another job.posted by BungaDunga at 8:57 AM on December 10, 2024 [6 favorites]
Legalise sex work, and soft drugs while you're at it.
Starmer will never do it though, the coward.
posted by Acey at 9:12 AM on December 10, 2024 [3 favorites]
Starmer will never do it though, the coward.
posted by Acey at 9:12 AM on December 10, 2024 [3 favorites]
« Older “I could promise it is indeed possible to slip on... | A Good Cry Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
It is shocking that these warnings, which require little evidence to issue, can stay on someone's record for up to 100 years.
posted by eye of newt at 5:21 PM on December 9, 2024 [3 favorites]