Document is current

Article History

Accepted: 13 September 2024

First Online: 2 October 2024

Declarations

:

: This study involves human participants, no animals. Firstly, all respondents, both sex workers, social workers and authorities, received the author’s email address and phone number in case they have questions or concerns, or if they want to withdraw. Aid agencies received the author’s email address and phone by email, and sex workers received them by phone call or via Whatsapp. During all the observations, the role and intentions of the author were made publicly (overt observations). Here, the author’s name and contact details were provided as well, in case a participant of the observation wanted to contact the author afterwards. This has not happened so far. Secondly, due to the nature of the topic, the anonymity and privacy of respondents and the confidentiality of the gathered data are worthy of ethical consideration. Given sex workers’ legal and social situation, absolutely no information could be included in the analysis that may reveal their identity. All the information was saved anonymously, and potentially sensitive or tracible information was not transcribed or noted. This included standard information such as names, ages, and addresses, but also information that indirectly might lead to recognition, for example, specific places a respondent often visits. Anonymity was also ensured by using abbreviations, instead of using their “real” names. Regarding the internship, since the Municipality is a local government authority and closes unlawful sex establishments, it would be unethical to upload any personal information of unlawful working sex workers in the municipality’s environment. Moreover, employees of the Municipality, but also other authorities and aid organizations that have connections with the municipality, have been interviewed as well and they needed to be able to speak freely; they needed the guarantee of anonymity too. Therefore, all documents and files (such as recordings) were stored on a private phone and private laptop with multiple passwords, to which the Municipality of Rotterdam did not have access. All measures for anonymity and privacy were communicated to the respondents, and their questions about this were honestly and extensively answered.

: This study was performed in line with the principles of and was approved by Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

: Respondents have been informed as precisely and as fully as possible; this refers to the goal of the study, but also how the interview or observation would be conducted, how the data would be used and their confidentiality assured. When contacting the aid agencies and authorities, therefore, these elements were included in the email by which they were approached for participation. Regarding the sex workers, these elements were put in the text and sent to them, or this information was given by phone before the interview. By having a phone call before the interview, sex workers could ask questions and express their doubts. During the fieldwork with Door2Door and AVIM, the information about the research and researcher was given verbally. Informed consent was asked verbally as well, by explicitly asking whether they wanted to answer some questions and whether I was allowed to use the information they gave to the social worker or the police officer as data in this study. During these two observations, all sex workers were given a flyer with my name, the goals of the study and the author’s phone number and e-mail address, so they could contact the author afterwards in case they had questions or doubts. All respondents have been provided still up-to-date contact details, but so far, no respondents have contacted the author.

: The author affirms that human research participants approved the usage of their data for future research projects.

: The author has no relevant financial interests to disclose. Regarding non-financial disclosure, a research internship was carried out at the Department of Safety of the Municipality of Rotterdam during the whole study. Due to careful consideration regarding the privacy of respondents and that absolutely no restrictions regarding carrying out the research, writing the report and publishing (parts of) it were given, this does not form a conflict of interest but should nevertheless be mentioned.