No abstract

Trafficking in women has become a high profile issue during recent years. However, there is still relatively little attention being paid to assistance systems for the victims, more particularly to how assistance is conceptualized and implemented. In this article, the authors argue that there are attitudes and values inherent in many of these systems that are not necessarily conducive to the recovery of trafficking victims. Through an analysis of interviews with institutional representatives in Southeast Europe and victims of trafficking, the authors argue that there is a tendency to pathologize women's choices to migrate and to enter prostitution as a means of explaining this 'deviant' behavior. This, in turn, opens up the use of restrictions for victims of trafficking in the form of limitations in and supervision of communication with people outside the assistance system and also closed shelter facilities. Restrictions may infantilize program beneficiaries and impact their agency andability to dissent and negotiate within the program framework. Further, they reflect a focus on how these women and their behaviors seemingly need to be corrected to conform to a preconceived idea of a victim of trafficking and a 'rehabilitated victim'. To some extent, these beliefs are also adopted by trafficked women and girls who receive assistance.

This article presents challenges in family reintegration for returning Moldovan trafficking victims based on qualitative interviews with 19 victims of trafficking and 31 service providers, looking specifically at points of tension in reuniting with children and spouses. One main source of conflict is when migration expectations are unrealized; another is stressed behaviours of victims when they return. To avoid being stigmatized and blamed for association with prostitution and failed migration, most victims prefer to keep their trafficking a secret. However, this means that families may not understand or appreciate what they are going through in the post-trafficking stage and misinterpret stress, anxiety and trauma symptoms as aggression and hostility. Further, two additional factors – financial problems and stigma – add extra strain on family relationships. In terms of assistance needs, it is crucial to include a perspective on the family situation when working with trafficking victims.

Recent discussions of trafficking research have included calls for more innovative studies and new methodologies in order to move beyond the current trafficking narrative, which is often based on unrepresentative samples and overly simplified images. While new methods can potentially play a role in expanding the knowledge base on trafficking, this article argues that the solution is not entirely about applying new methods, but as much about using current methods to greater effect and with careful attention to their limitations and ethical constraints. Drawing on the authors' experience in researching trafficking issues in a number of projects over the past decade, the article outlines and exemplifies some of the methodological and ethical issues to be considered and accommodated when conducting research with trafficked persons -including unrepresentative samples; access to respondents; selection biases by ''gatekeepers'' and self selection by potential respondents. Such considerations should inform not only how research is undertaken but also how this information is read and understood. Moreover, many of these considerations equally apply when considering the application of new methods within this field. The article maintains that a better understanding of how these issues come into play and inform trafficking research will translate into tools for conducting improved research in this field and, by implication, new perspectives on human trafficking.

This article explores what we can learn about the identification of and assistance to trafficked persons from practitioners in Serbia on the front line of Europe's so-called Brefugee crisis^. Questions arise as to whether and to what extent the anti-trafficking framework is effective in offering protection to trafficked migrants/refugees in a mass migration setting, but also what is lost if the specific perspective of the anti-trafficking framework is set aside or given lower priority. It is important to discuss who is included and who is excluded; whether protection and assistance meet people's needs; and whether or how the existing framework can be used to greater effect. While it was challenging to operationalise the anti-trafficking framework, both conceptually and practically, during the Brefugee crisis^in the Balkans, it remains an important approach that should have been mobilised to a greater extent, both to secure individual protections and rights and to gather information about human trafficking in conflict and crisis, which, in turn, increases the ability to respond effectively.Crime, Law and Social Change (2019) 72:73-86 https://doi.