Identifying Best Practices for "Safe Harbor" Legislation to Protect Child Sex Trafficking Victims

Decriminalization Alone Is Not Sufficient

Published in: Child Abuse & Neglect, v. 51, Jan. 2016, p. 249-262

Posted on on January 22, 2016

by Elizabeth S. Barnert, Susan Abrams, Veronica F. Azzi, Gery W. Ryan, Robert H. Brook, Paul J. Chung

Read More

Access further information on this document at Child Abuse & Neglect

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

Research Questions

  1. What are considered the best practices of safe harbor legislation to protect child victims of commercial sexual exploitation?
  2. What are the barriers, or unintended consequences?

Several states have recently enacted "Safe Harbor" laws to redirect child victims of commercial sexual exploitation and child sex trafficking from the criminal justice system and into the child welfare system. No comprehensive studies of Safe Harbor law implementation exist. The nine state Safe Harbor laws enacted by 2012 were analyzed to guide state legislators, health professionals, law enforcement agents, child welfare providers, and other responders to the commercial sexual exploitation of children on the development and implementation of state Safe Harbor laws. The authors conducted 32 semi-structured interviews with Safe Harbor experts in these states. Participants conveyed that Safe Harbor legislation signified a critical paradigm shift, treating commercially sexually exploited youth not as criminals but as vulnerable children in need of services. However, Safe Harbor legislation varied widely and significant gaps in laws exist. Such laws alone were considered insufficient without adequate funding for necessary services. As a result, many well-meaning providers were going around the Safe Harbor laws by continuing to incarcerate commercially sexually exploited youth in the juvenile justice system regardless of Safe Harbor laws in place. This was done, to act, in their view, in what was the best interest of the victimized children. With imperfect laws and implementation, these findings suggest an important role for local and state responders to act together to protect victims from unnecessary criminalization and potential further traumatization.

Key Findings

  • Establishing an alternative path from the justice system with the use of well-funded supportive services is critical to success.
  • Services such as mental health care, case management, medical care, survivor-led mentoring programs, and education and job training need sustainable funding in order to serve this population well.
  • A central agency should coordinate safe harbor programs and provide oversight.
  • Delayed implementation from passage of legislation may be worthwhile.
  • In communities without sufficient services, juvenile detention is sometimes viewed as a mechanism to protect youths from their exploiters.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.