Executive Summary In Australia, the high and ongoing demand for young Asian sex workers, in excess of local supply, creates a market opportunity for sex traffickers in women and children from countries like Thailand, Philippines, China and Cambodia. One reliable source estimates the Australian trafficking industry nets approximately Australian $1 million per week to the organizers’ of the trade. This term paper examines the global trade of the trafficking of women into the sex industry from a business ethics standpoint.
The subject of sex trafficking is analyzed not as a topic in itself but with the use of the only known case of a conviction related to trafficking in Australia: that of Gary Glazner. This sex trafficker and brothel keeper was convicted of importing and imprisoning Thai women until they repaid their debt to him for sponsoring their illegal entry into Australia through the provision of sexual services. The paper opens with a case history, the purpose of which is to give the reader an overview of the nature of the sex trafficking industry in Australia.
The paper then analyzes the problem of sex trafficking with the use of ethical reasoning, the Stakeholder Management Approach, the five ethical decision-making principles and lastly, the four ethical decision making styles. The third portion of the paper, entitled “limitations and assumptions” sets out the various boundaries under which the analysis was informed by, including various definitions of what composes of sex trafficking and sexual slavery with respect to the laws of Australia.
It also discusses the difficulties in reaching consensus on the extent of the problem in Australia; explains the difference between prostitution, which is legal in Australia and slavery and sexual servitude and suggests reasons why, to date, there have been no prosecutions of traffickers under the Commonwealth Criminal Code. Lastly, conclusions and recommendations are formed in light of the analysis of the issue of sex trafficking. The conclusion refers briefly to strategies adopted in the US and in Europe to combat this crime.
These latest developments suggest that a comprehensive approach designed to meet the interrelated goals of the prosecution of traffickers and the protection and support of victims is required to combat the crime of sex trafficking. Existing Australian law and policy is assessed in light of these developments. Case History The majority of the women who immigrate do not do so voluntarily, but to follow the flow of resources out of their countries where they become exploitable commodities. Often, They are denied citizenship and worker rights, and then they are disposed of when no longer needed.
A study done in 1994 indicated that significant numbers of Asian women began entering the Sydney sex industry in the mid 1980’s (Brockett and Murray 1994). Also in this report it was noted that ninety (90) percent of these women were trafficked, arriving debt-bonded, with increasing debts. Some of these women were being forced to have sex with ‘clients’ to pay back debts of up to $30,000 (Brockett and Murray 1994: 191-2). The head of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) in 1995, investigated into sex trafficking and estimated that there were up to 500 women, trafficked in debt-bonded prostitution at any one time.
However, apart from the Immigration Compliance records of the Department of Immigration, Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (DIMIA), there was little research to indicate the scale of trafficking in Australia. A total of two hundred and forty three (243) people, of which two hundred and thirty seven (237) were women in 1998-1999 compared to fifty-six (56) in 1996-1997 were deported, having been located in brothels (Maltzahn 2002a cited in DIMIA 2000).
These figures nonetheless, cannot represent the exact numbers of women being trafficked as a result of the following issues: Firstly, it cannot be assumed that all foreigners without visas located in brothels had originally being trafficked (Scarlet Alliance 2003) and secondly, International Research indicates that approximately ninety (90) percent of trafficked women go undetected by immigration authorities (Maltzahn 2002a, cited Dillon 2000).
It wasn’t until the late 1990’s during the trial of Melbourne trafficker, Gary Glazner that researchers gained insight on how trafficking was operating in Australia. Until this time, there was very little in Australian legislation or policy directly addressing the issue of trafficking in women for sexual exploitation. In 1999, federal legislation was introduced in the form of the Criminal Code Amendment (Slavery and Sexual Servitude) Act, which repeated old Imperial Acts relating to slavery and introduced the new offences of slavery and sexual servitude.
The Act defines “slavery” as “the condition of a person over whom any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership are exercised, including where such a condition results from a debt or contract made by the person” (criminal code section 270(1); and “sexual servitude as “the condition of a person who provides sexual services and who, because of the use of force or threats is not free to cease providing sexual services; or is not free to leave the place or area where the person provides sexual services. (Criminal Code Amendment- Slavery and Sexual Servitude Act 1999, adding to the offences set out in Division 270 of the Code. There were no prosecutions under these new laws following their introduction, because there existed no provision for treating victims of trafficking as anything other than illegal immigrants, or to offer them any support or protections (Carrington and Hearn 2003). Victims going to the police were likely to face immediate deportation. In 2003, following media reports of the Glazner case and lobbying by nongovernmental organizations, various policy and legislative initiatives were developed at a federal level.
In May 2003, a Parliamentary Current Issues Brief examined the lack of any prosecutions of traffickers under existing Commonwealth laws and came to the conclusion that “Australia’s emphasis on border control is working against the prosecution of traffickers and the human rights of trafficking victims” (Carrington and Hearn 2003). In June 2003 a Parliamentary Joint Committee (PJC) to examine the Australian Crime Commission’s response to trafficking in women for sexual servitude was established.
In July the Australasian Police Ministers’ Council meeting called for the development of a National Action Plan on trafficking and subsequently in October 2003, the Australian Government announced a package of $20 million over four years to combat people trafficking. Women in the sex industries have long felt targeted and over-surveilled by law enforcement agencies, and some have raised concerns that anti-trafficking laws will increase this surveillance (Scarlet Alliance 2004). The Australian Government launched its Action Plan to Eradicate Trafficking in Persons in June 2004.
The UN Commission on the status of Women (CSW) at its Review and Appraisal of the Beijing Platform for Action (28 February-11 March 2005) noted that it is “convinced that eliminating demand for all forms of exploitation, is the key element to combating trafficking women and girls” (CSW 2005: PP10), and calls upon governments to “undertake research on best practices, methods and strategies, information and mass media campaigns, social and economic initiatives to prevent and combat trafficking in women and girls, in particular to eliminate demand” (CSW 2005: OP2c).
Trafficking in people passed from third-largest to second-largest international crime with profits equal to the trade weapon (March Bell 2005). Case Analysis Ethical traps are more common now than a generation ago… In a volatile world, it is easy to step over moral boundaries. [John P. Kotter (1947 – )U. S. academic. The New Rules]. According to Laura Nash, business ethics is defined as “as the study of how personal moral norms apply to the activities and goals of the commercial enterprise.
It is not a separate moral standard, but the study of how the business context poses its own unique problems for the moral person who acts as an agent of this system”. In the rapidly changing business environment there are a number of ethical dilemmas that arise. An ethical dilemma is a situation that will often involve an apparent conflict between moral imperatives, in which to obey one would result in transgressing another .
There are twelve questions that were developed by Laura Nash to assist in clarifying ethical problems, which would be utilized in our decision making process. These questions include- 1)Have you defined the problem accurately? 2)How would you define the problem if you stood on the other side of the fence? 3)How did this situation occur in the first place? 4)To whom and to what do you give your loyalty as a person and as a member of the corporation? 5) What is your intention in making this decision? 6)How does this intention compare with the probable results? )Who could your decision or action injure? 8)Can you discuss the problem with the affected parties before you make your decision? 9)Are you confident that your decision will be as valid over a long period as it seems now? 10)Could you disclose, without qualm, your decision or action to your boss, your chief executive officer, the board of directors, your family, or society as a whole? 11)What is the symbolic potential of your action if understood? If misunderstood? 12)Under what conditions would you allow exceptions to your stand?
The dilemma that arises in the analysis of the case in Australia is whether it is ethical for sex traders to withhold passports, restrict the movement, and keep female immigrant workers in debt bondage that primarily came to Australia to work as prostitutes to pay off their debts. Before continuing with our analysis it is necessary to identify the stakeholders in the case. A stakeholder is a party that has an interest in a firm or a situation or “any individual or group who can affect or is affected by the actions, decisions, policies, practices, or goals of the organisation”.
There are two main types of stakeholders, primary stakeholders and secondary stakeholders. Primary stakeholders can be defined as those with a direct interest in the resource; either because they depend on it for their livelihoods or they are directly involved in its exploitation in some way. Secondary stakeholders would be those with a more indirect interest, such as those involved in institutions or agencies concerned with managing the resource or those who depend at least partially on wealth or business generated by the resource.
The stakeholders are identified in step one (1) of the stakeholder management approach and in the diagram below. THE STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT APPROACH The Stakeholder Management Approach advocates that an attempt be made to understand the ethical effects of an action on all real-time stakeholders and their welfare. Part of the general stakeholder approach, Stakeholder Analysis follows various steps, which we now undertake in order to identify and understand the various relationships of stakeholders in the situation of sex trafficking and multiple (often competing) claims of many constituencies.
STEP ONE: MAP STAKEHOLDER RELATIONSHIPS: For the purposes of decision-making, there is a need to identify the “focal”, “primary” and “secondary” stakeholders. Given that the resource in this case is the sexual services of the migrant women, the focal stakeholder is the sex trafficking, slavery and sexual servitude operation which Gary Glazner ran, which is akin to a firm or business enterprise. Primary stakeholders can be identified as the sex trafficker and pimp (Gary Glazner), the migrant women being trafficked for trafficked for the purpose of slavery and sexual servitude including Michelle.
Secondary stakeholders include, but are not limited to the clients, the families of the migrant sex slaves and the families of the clients; those who sold the women into the trade (their owners in the country of their origin, Thailand); Glazner’s associates who facilitated the slavery and sexual servitude of the women, such as the owners of the rented house in which the women were kept and the associate who drove the women to their jobs; special interest groups such as Project Respect, an organization that promotes the rights of trafficked sex workers, governmental agencies, such as Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (DIEA) of Australia, society at large, amongst others. It should be noted that even the Thai sex workers allowed themselves to be trafficked to Australia under the presumption that they would simply be engaging in prostitution, which is legal in Australia, and appear to not suspect that they would be imprisoned and their movements restricted by Glazner. Therefore, initially, from their standpoint, before being subjected to imprisonment, slavery and sexual servitude, they viewed the focal stakeholder as being a sex trafficking and prostitution operation Diagram distinguishing primary and secondary stakeholders STEP TWO: MAP STAKEHOLDER COALITIONS:
Step Two of Stakeholder Analysis involves mapping the coalitions that stakeholders form around stakes that they have or seek to have in common. Stakes can be identified with respect to each stakeholder and what they stood to gain or lose from the sex trafficking and prostitution of the migrant women. Glazner’s obvious stake in the operation of a sex trafficking and slavery and sexual servitude business was the profit that he garnered: Detective Senior Sergeant Ivan McKinney noted that Glazner made approximately $32,000 in profit from each woman, after deduction of their “purchase costs” The migrant Thai women that were subject to slavery and sexual servitude had various stakes that they could give priority to:
The women had to choose between making a living by prostitution long term after their “debt bondage” was paid out, (“First condition was 500 jobs, after I finish 500 jobs I would receive $40 or $50, and that within a year) and never being truly free; paying out the debt bondage contract wholly by prostitution, and thus gaining the freedom to do as they please, or paying the debt bondage contract by cash, after which they would be free. Of course, it is not to be taken as actuality that Glazner would have actually kept his word according to the debt bondage contracts that he presented. His subsequent abuse of the women, speaks volumes that it is highly unlikely that the women would have ever been able to escape sexual servitude. Importantly, the very lives of the migrant sex workers appeared to be at stake.
As “Michelle’s” translator stated for her at the trial, “She said if she is here, maybe she will die. If she goes back to Thailand , she will die” (Police vs Gary Galzner and Paul Donato Marino 1999: 48). Glazner offered a service in high demand by clients prepared to pay substantial sums of money: the commercial sex services of the “exotic” Thai women. This outlines the stake that clients had in the sex trafficking, slavery and sexual servitude operation that Glazner ran. With respect to the secondary stakeholders, the following stakes can be identified: Women trafficked for prostitution usually wished to earn enough money to send home to family in their country of origin.
The families of the migrant women sex slaves thus stand to gain financially IF the women do make any money to send back home. Husbands, or family members, boyfriends, or acquaintances may recruit and trade women into the international prostitution industry for profit, or to repay debts or to support a family. Glazner’s sex slaves made little if any money under the operations of his “debt bondage contracts. ” They also feared reprisals against themselves or their families back in Thailand. Thus, the very safety of the families of the women appeared to be a high priority stake. It has been identified that stakes can also be present, past or future oriented.
Unsafe sexual practices are regularly imposed on migrant women sex workers and as a consequence they live under the constant fear of contracting HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases. Thus, with respect to the families of the clients, and of society at large, the spread of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases, now and in the future is a major hazard. Those who facilitated sex trafficking and the selling of the sexual services of the women, for example, guards or agents overseeing the movements of the women, as well as the owners of the houses and brothels in which the women stayed and worked stood to gain or lose financially, as they were paid for their services and for the rental of the facilities.
The last secondary stakeholders that we examine are interest groups such as Project Respect and the Coalition against Trafficking in Women (CATW). Although not as self seeking as the stakes that we have associated with the other stakeholders, these groups have a viable interest in what goes on when sex trafficking and the prostitution of migrant women takes place, in that they wish to minimize the instances in which “women in the sex industry sustain the same kind of injuries as women who are battered, raped and sexually assaulted”. Thus, groups such as these often gather information, analyze, and disseminated their findings to the public, garnering their support, and lobbying against activities which result in the abuse and exploitation of migrant female sex workers.
It can be said that the stakes of special interest groups and that of the various governmental agencies involved in the analysis of sex trafficking are closely matched. Both stakeholders wish to minimize, or to a greater extent eradicate the exploitation, whether sexual or otherwise of women. In summary, in addition to Special Interest groups and governmental agencies, as well as the families of clients and society at large having similar stakes, Glazner, the women, the families of the women, and Glazner’s associate the comparable stake of financial gain, while the women and their families appear to have the similar stake of survival, as their lives appear to be threatened.
Step 3: Assess the Nature of Each Stakeholder’s Interest: Stakeholder interest can be categorized into following four classes according to the stakeholder management approach of analysis: 1)Supportive – stakeholders that support sex trafficking. 2)Nonsupportive – stakeholders that do not support sex trafficking. 3)Mixed blessing and – stakeholders that may/may not support sex trafficking. 4)Marginal – stakeholders that may not be interested in sex trafficking. They can become interested and move to a supportive, nonsupportive or marginal stakeholder. Note that the following diagram categorises each stakeholders’ interest BEFORE and AFTER slavery and sexual servitude occurs.
The difference lays in the fact that initially, the Thai sex workers, and their families possibly believed that they would prostitute themselves for a profit in Australia, and that their movements would not be restricted. However, the “After” diagram shows the nature of their interest after being subject to slavery and sexual servitude. BEFORE STAKEHOLDERSCATEGORIES OF STAKEHOLDER INTEREST SUPPORTIVENONSUPPORTIVEMIXED BLESSINGMARGINAL Interest Groups? Government Agencies? Gary Glazner ? Clients? Society at large? Sex Workers’ Families? Glazner’s Associates? Sex Workers? Clients Families? AFTER STAKEHOLDERSCATEGORIES OF STAKEHOLDER INTEREST SUPPORTIVENONSUPPORTIVEMIXED BLESSINGMARGINAL Interest Groups? Government Agencies? Gary Glazner ? Clients? Society at large? Sex Workers’ Families? Glazner’s Associates? Sex Workers? Clients Families?
The diagrams indicate that after undergoing slavery and sexual servitude, the Thai women resisted the conditions that they were kept under and became non supportive. The sex workers’ families, after finding that it was hardly likely that they would gain financially, and that their lives were often at stake, also often changed support for sex trafficking. On the other hand, Glazner and his associates did not change support for sex trafficking because they stood to gain profit wise if sex trafficking continues. In addition, special interest groups, as well as governmental agencies are often formed wholly or partially with the goal of curbing sex trafficking and so remain unsupportive or even more so, after sex trafficking occurs, as the instances of abuse increase.
Society at large, as well as the families of the clients also remained “mixed blessings” as they may or may not have been affected by the actions of the clients, or may or may not have felt any personal opinion regarding the issue. All indications still point to the fact that the trade in the sexual services of “exotic women” is well on the rise, and so we may deduce that clients support sex trafficking both before and after it occurs. Step 4: Assess the Nature of Each Stakeholder’s Power: The fourth step of stakeholder analysis entails asking “What’s in it for each stakeholder? Who stood to win, lose or draw when Gary Glazner decided to traffic Thai sex workers into Australia and operate a slavery and sexual servitude operation?
The stakeholders are thus catergorized according to the type of power that they held, which are: (1) Political Power (2)Voting Power (3)Economic Power The following table displays the types of power possessed each stakeholder VOTINGPOLITICALECONOMIC Interest Groups? Government Agencies ? Gary Glazner ? Clients ? Society at large? Sex Workers’ Families? Glazner’s Associates? Sex Workers ? Clients families? It can be said that all of the primary stakeholders, as well as secondary stakeholders such as Glazner’s associates and the families of the Thai sex workers chose to facilitate sex trafficking, slavery and sexual servitude because they stood to gain financially or economically from their actions.
Interest groups could exercise their political power indirectly by becoming affiliated with and influencing various governmental agencies, which could then exercise their political power directly by voting on the privileges and responsibilities of brothel owners and by creating and amending laws that would result in the prevention of and ultimate ruin of the sex trafficking industry. Society at large and the families of the clients also held, to a certain extent political power, as it is possible that if given the opportunity, they would vote in various political parties into government based (at least partially) on their political strategies concerning sex trafficking and prostitution on the whole.
It is important to note that it is the demand for “exotic women” selling their sexual services which fuels the sex trafficking industry. Clients exercised their power economically by buying the services of the women. If they had not done so, and to an extent that Gary Glazner stood to gain tremendously in terms of profits, then Glazner would not have been encouraged to enslave the women so that they had no choice but to continue sexual servitude. Step 5: Identify Stakeholder Ethics and Moral Responsibilities: The fifth step in conducting this stakeholder analysis entails looking at the responsibilities and moral obligations Glazner’s sex trafficking, slavery and sexual servitude operations had to each stakeholder.
It is important to note again, that initially, before being subjected to imprisonment, slavery and sexual servitude, the Thai sex workers, as well as possibly, their families, were under the impression that they (the workers) had come to Australia to prostitute themselves for a profit and that they would not be subjected by Glazner to the conditions that they subsequently bore. Stakeholder Moral Responsibility Matrix STAKEHOLDERSTYPES OF STAKEHOLDER RESPONSIBILITIES LEGALECONOMICETHICALVOLUNTARY Interest Groups??? Government Agencies???? Gary Glazner ???? Clients??? Society at large??? Sex Workers’ Families??? Glazner’s Associates???? Sex Workers???? Clients families??? Step 6: Developing Specific Strategies and Tactics:
From the results garnered above, we can now outline various strategies and tactics that Glazner should have possibly used with each stakeholder, given that he had operated his brothel in a manner in which most stakeholders had been satisfied with. Stakeholders’ Potential for threat to the organization High Low Hi Lo While prostitution is legal in Victoria and other parts of Australia, illegally migrating to Australia to work in the sex industry is frowned upon by governmental authorities. Thus, government would not approve of Glazner’s actions unless the sex workers had legally migrated to work in that country.
As well, Special interest groups like Project Respect’s main goal is to eliminate sex trafficking and prostitution on the whole, thus, it would have been near possible for Glazner to gain their support even if the Thai workers had legally migrated to work in the sex industry. Stakeholders’ Potential for threat to the organization High Low Hi Lo The above diagram is a diagnostic typology of each stakeholder after it became clear that Glazner ran a slavery and sexual servitude operation. We now see that, on realising that they more to lose by their actions (their lives now being at stake) and that they have almost nothing, if that to gain from Glazner’s operations, the Thai sex workers and their families now switch support for sex trafficking, and Glazner must now defend his actions. Step 7: Monitor Shifting Coalitions:
The second portion of step six clearly shows that shifting coalitions among stakeholders occurred due to the fact that Glazner, it appears conned his Thai sex workers into believing that they would be prostituting themselves, if not immediately, but within a reasonable length of time. Along with the fact that Glazner locked up the workers, threatened their lives and that of their families, it is no surprise that the workers would become non-supportive of is sex trafficking, slavery and sexual servitude operation. According to Weiss, ethical reasoning in the stakeholder analysis involves asking: “What is equitable, just, fair and good for those who affect and are affected by business decisions? Who are the weaker stakeholders in terms of power and influence?
Who can, who will, and who should help weaker stakeholders make their voices heard and encourages their participation the decision process? ” Lastly, the stakeholder analysis requires the principle stakeholders to define and fulfil their ethical obligations to the affected constituencies. ” Ethical theories can be classified into groups. They are theology and deontology. Theology is defined as reasoned discourse about God or the gods, or more generally about religion or spirituality . Whereas deontology, derived from the Greek word “Deon”, refers to an approach to ethics that focuses on the rightness or wrongness of actions themselves, as opposed to the rightness or wrongness of the consequences of those actions
Theological theorists believe that acts are to be determined in relation to the greatest consequences that they give rise to. An example of one of the theories that are theological is utilitarianism. On the other hand, deontological theorists are of the opposite orientation. Deontology or duty ethics was developed by Emmanuel Kant (1724-1804). Deontological theorists do not look at the consequences of the act but rather they look at the nature of the act itself. They view the act as a duty to perform actions. Whether the act results in a positive benefit to oneself or others are not of concern to deontologist theorists. We can then apply the five ethical principles to the different situations, which exist.
The five ethical principles are Utilitarianism, Universalism, Rights, Ethical Relativism or Virtue Ethic, and Justice. Universalism Universalism: [A deontological (duty based) approach]: This principle whose principal proponent was Immanuel Kant states that the right thing must be done even if the wrong would do the most good for the most people. This approach is based on the principle of justice, rights, fairness, honesty and respect regardless of the consequences. Unlike utilitarianism principles, which place the moral duty on individuals and humanity while taking action, this theory is non-consequentiality and an absolutist view as it places emphasis on the nature of the act. Kant would say that sexually exploiting women is an immoral act.
If we say that sexually exploiting women is similar to sexual slavery, then sexual slavery can be viewed as an act that imprisons women, takes away their rights and needs justice and attention, either by imposing laws to punish those that sexually exploit women or treat them unfairly. Gary Glazer had a duty to protect the lives of Michelle and the other sex prostitutes. He also has a duty to treat them fairly by not imposing restriction of movement on them and by not taking away the sex trafficked slaves’ passports. Gary failed to meet his duty. As Mark Forbes, reporting on the trial for the Age newspaper, wrote that Glazner had verbally abused and intimidated the women, and kept a loaded gun in clear view of the women at the hotel (Forbes 1999). He also had a duty to satisfice rather than maximize his profits, since maximizing his profits may entail imposing deplorable conditions on his workers. Mr.
Glazer also had a duty to ensure that clients were satisfied with the sexual services given by Michelle and the other sex workers. Last, he had a duty to the brothel owners to pay them honestly for using their brothel to conduct his business. Michelle and the other sex prostitutes initially had a duty to themselves to protect their rights and integrity by seeking an alternative occupation. They also had a duty to work for Gary Glazer under the terms contracted to her. Furthermore, they had a duty to safeguard her relatives from Gary Glazers treat by obeying the contract terms so that she could pay off her debts. As stated at the trial “The women feared for their lives and of reprisals against themselves or their families back in Thailand”.
As “Michelle’s” translator stated for her at the trial: “She said if she is here, maybe she will die if she goes back to Thailand maybe she’ll die”. Michelle and the other sex workers had a duty to the immigration officers not to over stay her time when she came to Australia and to upkeep the law in Australia by abiding to it. In summary Michelle, the other sex workers and Gary Glazer had a universal moral duty. Kant’s deontological theory is not a perfect theory. The theory has several flaws. The main criticism is that the theory is an absolutist view. That is, it does not look at other factors in the decision. In Michelle’s case, the theory would not consider Michelle’s drive and the drive of the other sex workers to prostitute (i. e. o pay off her debts) nor would the theory consider if Michelle preferred prostitution rather than paying off her debts by finding another type of job. Additionally the theory does not consider that universal rules may differ in terms of cultural variation, religious and societal differences. Last, it is difficult to resolve conflict of interest since each party must be treated equally. Therefore the sex trader, Gary Glazner must be treated equally as Michelle (a sexually exploited prostitute) and the other prostitutes. Hence, we must be careful not to place too much emphasis on Michelle’s case since Gary Glazner purchased her on a contract. Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism is a consequentialist or results based approached developed by Jeremy Bentham (1748 – 1832) and John Stuart Mill (1806 – 1873). The Utilitarianism theory states that an action is determined as right or wrong based on its consequences. In addition this theory states that people should choose an action that provides the greatest good for the greatest number of people. From the Utilitarianism perspective sexually exploiting female migrants can be viewed as acceptable if it provides the greatest monetary benefits when compared to monetary benefits available in the migrant’s home country if they were to gain employment in a job other than in prostitution.
Consequently, if Michelle and the other sex workers accept the deplorable contract terms and conditions, then in the eyes of the utilitarian, the ability to pay off large debts, take care of one’s family and not being exposed to sexually transmitted diseases can cause these benefits to exceed the cost. The cost to the prostitutes would include the restriction of their movement in the Australia, the taking away of their passport by Gary Glazner and working a twelve hour shift seven days a week. Therefore, the Utilitarianism principle is evident in the case. Also, if Gary Glazner uses this approach he may think that his actions are right if the greatest collective profits accrue to him, Mr. Chang (Michelle’s owner), Michelle and the other sexually exploited women who have gained employment to pay off their debts. Also he may think that his actions are right if the law upholding body, policemen, does not catch him.
In addition, if there are no laws against trafficking immigrant sex workers and treating them under inhumane conditions, Gary Glazer may think that his actions are right. As stated in the case the federal slavery and sexual servitude legislation had not been introduced before the year 1998. Like Universalism, Utilitarianism has major weaknesses. First, there is no agreement on the definition of good for all concerned. Does it mean profits? As in the case does it mean the greatest profit for Gary Glazner, Michelle and the other parties involved? Or does it mean truth? In this case does it mean explaining to Michelle and the other immigrant the true conditions under which they would be working? Second, Utilitarianism does not consider the individual.
This theory would not consider the consequences to Michelle and the other sex workers independently such as exposure to diseases such a HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases. Instead the theory would consider the collective consequences. In other words, would the majority of the immigrant sex workers be affected? Also, the theory would not consider the consequences to Michelle and the other sex workers such as the fear that she has for their lives against Gary Glazner. Last, the principles of justice of right and wrong are ignored. Therefore the theory would not consider whether justice needs to be served to Michelle and the other sex workers for the fear and conditions under which they have to work. Rights Moral rights and legal rights are sources of authority upon which rights are based.
Moral rights apply to the universe and are based on societal norms, whereas legal rights and contractual rights are based upon a particular legal system and jurisdiction. In addition, an individual can restore rights unto others if they have the resources to do so. In Australia, prostitution is a legal right. Brothel prostitution was legalised in Victoria in 1984. It was decriminalised in New South Wales in 1995. There is now also legal brothel prostitution in the Australian Capital Territory in which the capital Canberra is situated, and in Queensland . When Michelle and the other sex workers are working as prostitutes in Australia, they have a legal right to this type of occupation since it is embedded as a right in that constitution. In addition, Mr.
Glazer has a legal right to sexual slavery and sexual servitude since laws against these acts were not implemented before 1998. Thailand and Australia are generally secular states. Prostitution is legal in Thailand and many regions of Australia and is a major money earner for many individuals. Since moral rights are usually based upon religious and societal beliefs, prostitution would be seen as moral in Thailand and Victoria, Australia where Michelle worked and the other sex workers worked. As a result, the society in Victoria Australia accepted prostitution as a moral behaviour. Based upon this legal and moral right, Michelle and the other sex workers have a moral right to engage in prostitution in Thailand. The rights principle also has certain limitations.
First, the justification that individuals are entitled to rights can be used to disguise and manipulate selfish, unjust political claims and interest. As such Mr. Glazer may believe that he is entitled to trafficking the immigrant prostitutes although he may be treating them unjust. Second, protection of rights can exaggerate certain entitlements in society at the expense of others. For instance, Gary Glazner may claim that his rights takes precedent over the rights of the sex trafficked workers since there were few laws in Australia addressing trafficking in women for sexual exploitation. Last, there are limits on the extent to which rights that benefit society but threaten certain rights should be permitted. Ethical Relativism
This ethical principle states that the principle proponent or authority for deciding what is right or wrong is the individual. What might be moral for one individual may not be moral for another individual. Under the broad heading of ethical relativism is cultural relativism. Cultural relativism refers to decision-making relating to the culture of a particular place. If Gary Glazner, along with his various associates, and the various family members and associates of the women, considered their actions to be an honest and fair way to make a profit or pay off a debt, by either causing and facilitating the sex trafficking and sexual servitude of the women.
Also, given that their self interest lay in the profits and wages earned, and debts paid out, ethical relativism would support their actions. However, if the above named stakeholders had instead supposed that sex trafficking and the sexual servitude of migrant women went against their beliefs, and were not in their self interest, then ethical relativism would have supported their lack or withdrawal of support for sex trafficking and the sexual servitude of migrant women. If the women being trafficked were fully aware of their action AND the conditions under which they would prostitute themselves and accepted as morally acceptable, in their self interest, financially or otherwise, and in line with their personal beliefs, then ethical relativism support their actions.
On the other hand, given that the women may have held the practise of sex trafficking and the prostitution of themselves as personally acceptable, but may not have been aware of the conditions under which these acts would take place, then this presents a problem, as they may not have held the conditions to be morally acceptable and in their self interest, although they may have held the actual acts of sex trafficking, slavery and sexual servitude, to be acceptable. The dilemma thus arises that ethical relativism may not actually support their actions of allowing themselves to be trafficked and their sexual services sold. With respect to the clients of these women, if they considered it the norm, morally tolerable to themselves and in their self interest to buy the sexual services of the women then ethical relativism supports their actions.
On the other hand, if they viewed their actions to be morally unacceptable and harmful to their self-interest, for example, if they had viewed the buying of such services as harmful to their health as it may put them at risk for the contraction of sexually transmitted diseases, then the principle of ethical relativism would support their choice. Ethical relativism does not permit for the existence of a supreme set of ethics. Understandably, if there are not absolute ethics, then there can be no Divine Absolute Ethics Giver. Requiring an absolute set ethics implies an Absolute Ethics Giver, which can easily be extrapolated as being God. This would be opposed to ethical relativism. Therefore, ethical relativism would not support the idea of an absolute God and it would exclude religious systems based upon absolute morals; that is, it would be absolute in its condemnation of absolute ethics. In this, relativism would be inconsistent since it would deny beliefs of absolute values.
Thus, whether or not the religions of the primary stakeholders involved in sex trafficking would support or undermine their actions, as well as the conditions under which the actions were committed does not come into play. The reasoning of ethical relativism also branches out to that of Cultural relativism. In the opening vignette of Chapter 3, of Weiss’s handbook (Business Ethics, A stakeholder and Issues Management Approach), entitled, Ethical Principles, Quick Tests and Decision- Making Guidelines, the writer speaks of Louise Simms. Simms, with minimal training was sent to join a company partner to negotiate with a high-ranking Middle Eastern government official. Simms was told by the official that her firm had an “excellent chance to get the contract” if the official’s nephew could be assured “a good piece of the action. The official subsequently went on to say, “That’s how we do business here; take it or leave it. ” This last statement illustrates the proponents of Cultural Relativism, which holds that the values and moral customs of all cultures should be observed and respected. As the saying goes, “When in Rome……, do as the Romans do. ” Thus, what is morally right for one society or culture may be not be perceived as right in another. Right and wrong are based on social norms, rather than individual values and customs. If Michelle uses this principle she would continue working as a prostitute while in Victoria, Australia. In Victoria, Australia, prostitution has been normalized and this practice is seen as normal .
One advantage of cultural relativism is that it tolerates a wide variety of cultures and practices. Social norms and values are seen in a cultural context. The implications of this theory are that people doing business in a foreign country are obliged to follow that country’s social values, norms, and customs (and laws, of course). It seems to be universal among cultures that it is wrong to murder, to steal, and to lie. However, the issue of prostitution and the conditions under which it takes place has always been a “when in Rome do as the Romans issue. ” The disadvantage of cultural relativism is that truth, right and wrong, and justices are all relative. Just because a group of people thinks that something is right does not make it so.
This being said, with respect to sex trafficking, if the women being trafficked are fully aware of their actions and the conditions under which they would prostitute themselves and accept them as the social norm and morally acceptable, then cultural relativism support their actions. The same can be said for the sex traffickers and the clients of these women: If sex traffickers consider their actions to be honest and fair, but most importantly, a normal way in their society, to make a living, as well as if the clients of the women considered it the norm in their social circle to buy the sexual services of the women then ethical relativism supports their actions. As well, if the conditions under which the women were kept were considered to be customary according to social customs, then cultural relativism would support these conditions.
Ethical relativism and by extension, Cultural Relativism contains some additional pitfalls: Both theories may suggest an underlying moral laziness. With respect to ethical relativism, individuals who justify their morality only from their personal beliefs, without consideration of other ethical principles may use the logic of relativism as excuse for not having or developing moral standards that can be argued and tested against other claims, opinions and standards. Thus, what the individual, in the case of ethical relativism, and what society, in the case of cultural relativism, accepts as normal is viewed as ethical with no rationale being given to the consequences of actions on other stakeholders.
Thus, with respect to ethical relativism, neither the women and their supporting families and associates, nor Glazner and his associates, and the clients may have considered the effects of facilitating, performing and buying sexual services on other members of society, or even amongst themselves. Glazner and the women may not have considered the spread of sexually transmitted diseases to and from the clients, as well as the clients may not have considered the spreading of sexually transmitted diseases to their family members and from the women. With respect to cultural relativism, In Australia, within the society that Glazner lived, his actions, if considered the norm are ethical, and if the women did indeed knowingly go to Australia to work as prostitutes, and this was considered the norm in their homeland, then their actions are ethical.
Lucinda Peach, a noted feminist, has concluded that in countries like Cambodia and Thailand, cultural and religious values and a lack of legal protection create environments conducive to human trafficking. However, with regards to the conditions under which the women were prostituted, Gary Glazner’s actions were obviously not considered the norm in society given that he was prosecuted and found guilty on seven charges related to keeping the women in “debt bondage” amongst other things. Also, it is obvious that the women were not aware that their passports would be taken away, their movements restricted and that they would be kept in debt bondage. From this t can be deduced that it was not the norm in Thailand to prostitute themselves under these conditions, therefore they did not expect to do so in Australia. The theories of Ethical relativism and cultural relativism, also contradicts everyday experience. Moral reasoning is developed from conversation, interaction, and argument. An individual may believe in certain “facts” and depend on those facts to rationalize his moral values and customs. How could that person validate or disprove his reasoning if he does not communicate, share and remain open to changing his own standards. This may have been the case of Glazner, his associates and the women.
In particular, Glazner and his associates may not have remained open to changing their standards, given that their self interest lay in the profits and financial gains that they made. With respect to cultural relativism, what the majority view as ethical is assumed to be just that: ethical. So, did the majority of the society within which the sex trafficking slavery and sexual servitude of the women occur accept it as being the norm? If we take the answer to this question as being yes, then ethical relativism dictates that we view this action ethical. However, we must answer, under what conditions exactly is sex trafficking considered being the norm.
An interesting issue to be considered is that if ethics have changed overtime there is the problem of self contradiction within the relativistic perspective. Within ethical relativism and by extension, cultural relativism, right and wrong are not absolute and must be determined in society by a combination of observation, logic, social preferences and patterns, experience, emotions, and “rules” that seem to bring the most benefit. It goes without saying that a society involved in constant moral conflict would not be able to survive for very long. Morality is the glue that holds a society together. There must be a consensus of right and wrong for a society to function well.
Ethical and cultural relativism undermines that glue. Thus, if sex trafficking is initially considered to be acceptable, then it becomes unacceptable for perhaps a period of 200 years, after which it becomes acceptable again, who is to say if it is right or wrong? We would have a contradictory set of right and wrong regarding the same issue. To this we ask the question, does truth contradict itself? JUSTICE: The principle of justice addresses fairness and equality. Thus, the moral authority that decides what is right and wrong concerns the fair distribution of opportunities, as well as hardships, to all. The principle also pertains to punishment for wrong done to the undeserving.
In this case the undeserving can be approximated to be the Thai migrant sex workers, as although they were aware that they were going to Australia to conduct sex work they were not expecting and it was not morally acceptable to them, evidently that Glazner verbally abused and intimidated them, and kept a loaded gun in clear view of them at the hotel (Forbes 1999). As well, as his trial revealed, they were not expecting, evidently, that Glazner withhold their passports, restricted their movements, and kept them in debt bondage (Police vs Gary Galzner and Paul Donato Marino 1999). John Rawls, a contemporary philosopher, expounds on several components and principles that uphold the principle of Justice.
Rawls argues that self-interested rational persons behind the veil of ignorance would choose two general principles of justice to structure society in the real world: 1)Principle of Equal Liberty: Each person has an equal right to the most extensive liberties compatible with similar liberties for all. (Egalitarian. ) 2) Difference Principle: Social and economic inequalities should be arranged so that they are both (a) to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged persons, and (b) attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of equality of opportunity. The difference principle means that society may undertake projects that require giving some persons more power, income, status, etc. than others, e. g. paying accountants and upper-level managers more than assembly-line operatives, provided that certain conditions are met: (a) the project will make life better off for the people who are now worst off, for example, by raising the living standards of everyone in the community and empowered the least advantaged persons to the extent consistent with their well-being, and, (b) access to the privileged positions is not blocked by discrimination according to irrelevant criteria. The Difference Principle does not support either partially nor wholly, sex trafficking and the prostitution of migrant women, as they fulfil neither of the above conditions.
Instead the women were made worst of by the constant sexual, physical, mental and emotional abuse that they suffered, and their freedom taken away by restricting their movements and confiscating their passports, as well as the well -being of society made worst of by the greater threat and spread of sexually transmitted diseases. Requirements are moral rules that govern the conduct of individuals. Obligations, as Rawls defines the category, arise from the application of The Principle of Fairness. The principle of fairness (PF as BP) holds that a person is required to do his part as defined by the rules of an institution when two conditions are met: first, the institution is just . . . hat is, it satisfies the two principles of justice; and second, one has voluntarily accepted the benefits of the arrangement or taken advantage of the opportunities it offers to further one’s interests (111-12; see 342-43) The principle of fairness should not be confused with the two principles of justice, which are at the heart of Rawls’ theory of (social) “justice as fairness,” or what Rawls calls in his recent writing “a political conception of justice. ” The writer, Richard DeGeorge identifies four types of justice, which are as follows: 1)Compensatory justice which concerns compensating someone for a past harm or injustice. Thus, compensation for the physical, sexual, mental an emotional harm done to the women in the act of sex trafficking and sexual slavery is addressed by this type of justice. 2)Retributive justice means serving punishment to someone who has inflicted harm on another.
Thus, what punishment should Glazner, as well as his aiders and abettors receive for the harms that they have afflicted or caused to be afflicted to the Thai migrant sex workers. 3)Distributive justice addresses the fair distribution of benefits and burdens. In her case study of the Glazner trial, Victoria University researcher Marnie Ford noted that “although the offences carried maximum sentences of four and five years, Glazner only received a penalty of 18 months imprisonment (fully suspended for two years) and a $31,000 fine” (Ford 2001: 24). 13. Did his associates also receive a punishment deserving of their role in the sex trafficking and sexual slavery of the women. 4)Procedural justice designates fair decision practises, procedures, and arrangements among parties.
As it was noted above, Glazner received a relatively light sentence with respect to the crimes which he committed. Thus, were the rules and processes that governed the distribution of punishment in this case fair? Marnie Ford seems to think not. 5)It should be noted that the above types of justices are part of the larger principle of justice, and how they are formulated and applied varies with societies and governmental systems. Criticisms of the justice theory include: 1. Outside of the jurisdiction of the state (the government), who decides what is right and what is wrong? What is fair? Although prostitution is legally accepted in Australia, under what conditions is it accepted? Who determines the conditions under which it is accepted? 2.
Under what circumstances can individuals disagree with the government, and what can they do about it? How do we take into consideration those sex workers who knowingly enter the profession, fully aware that they will be abused, and willing to accept the abuse as an occupational hazard. 3. Related to both of the above, can opportunities and burdens be equally shared when it is not in the interest of those in power to do so? When taken into consideration together, how can it be assured that the owners of brothels are made to provide conditions of work for sex workers which prevent them from being physically, sexually, mentally and emotionally abused?
Michelle, the other sex workers and Gary Glazner would adopt different decision making styles based on the ethical principle they choose to follow. The four ethical decision making styles include individualism, altruism, pragmatism and idealism. If Gary adopts an individualist decision making style his reasoning process would be based on self-interest or the ethical relativism principle. Gary Glazner may then decide to sexually exploit Michelle and the other sex workers by paying them the lowest possible wage so that he could make maximum profit. He would not consider other parties at stake such as the health of the immigrant sex workers before he makes his decision.
On the other hand, if Michelle or any of the other sex workers adopt an individualistic decision making style they may primarily be concerned with paying off their debts and may not be concerned with the effects that this would have on their families, their clients and the members of society at large. In adopting an altruistic decision making style Michelle, the other sex workers and Gary’s major motivation would be the benefits that would accrue to others. This decision making style is akin to universalism. Unlike the utilitarianism principle, which looks at the cost and benefits of an action, altruists are primarily concerned with the benefits alone. Altruists justify their actions by upholding the integrity of the community.
In using this decision making style Michelle or any of the other sex workers may decide that they would work as prostitutes so that they could satisfy their clients by giving them their money’s worth. In addition they may decide to work as prostitutes so that their families lives would not be threatened once her debt is not paid off. However, Michelle and the other sex workers may not consider the cost to themselves such as contracting HIV or sexually transmitted diseases or being away form her family for a period of time and having her freedom taken away. On the other hand Gary may decide to impose better working conditions on Michelle and the other sex workers and pay them a higher wage so that the trafficked women would not feel sexually exploited.
Or he may decide to continue treating them the same way since they would be benefiting from gaining legal employment so that they could pay off their debts. In examining altruism we need to examine the motive of secondary stakeholders such as the special interest group Project Respect. It is obvious that the group took into great consideration that altruism means first need to care about others before one can even be motivated to help them out of problems such as war and poverty. Altruists need to be open-minded if they want to understand this world, and do something to change it for the benefit of everyone. Project Respect appears to be attempting to do so by conducting extensive research into the sex trafficking industry. Pragmatism takes into consideration, primarily the situation at hand.
Pragmatists base moral authority and motivation on the perceived needs of the moment and the potential consequences of a decision in a specific context. The needs of the moment dictate the importance of self interest, concern for others, rules and values. Philosophically, they are the closest to utilitarianism. If Michelle and the other sex prostitutes use this principle they may decide to work as prostitutes in Australia since the perceived need at the moment would be to pay off their debts once they are not greatly exposed to sexually transmitted diseases. In addition the sex workers may also adopt this decision making style if their families as a whole will benefit from their venture.
On the other hand, if Gary Glazner uses this decision making principle he may decide to continue trafficking the sex workers once he recognizes that there is a high demand for the business enterprise (providing sex services) and once he is not caught by the law enforcement agency (the police) for treating the sex workers under the conditions of sexual servitude and slavery and trafficking them. Idealism refers to decision making that is driven by principles and rules. Reason, relationships, or desired consequences of an action don not substitute for the idealist’s adherence to principles. They would consider their duties- whatever they may be- to be absolute. In this instance they would be acting like Universalists. Seen as people with high moral standards, and thus, a high moral status, idealists can also be rigid and inflexible. Moral status is a measure of conformity within a given system of morality.
A high degree of conformity gives one high moral status, and means that, in general, one engages in activities prescribed by that system, and avoids activities prohibited in that system. Low moral status entails the opposite. Common wisdom holds that people have a set standard of morality that never wavers. Yet studies of people, who do unpalatable things, by choice or for reasons of duty or economic necessity, find that their moral codes are more flexible than generally understood. To buffer themselves from their own consciences, people often adjust their moral judgments in a process some psychologists call moral disengagement, or moral distancing.
We can presume that this was the case, initially, for all of the primary stakeholders, as well as secondary stakeholders, such as the families of the Thai sex slaves and Glazner’s associates. However, both Government agencies and special interest groups such as Project Respect, which we catergorized as secondary stakeholders held on to high moral standards, which would ultimately mean that they strongly rejected sex trafficking, slavery and sexual servitude and generally prostitution as being wrong and against their morals. Fro example Project Respect says on their website: “Project Respect believes that prostitution results from and strengthens structural inequalities of gender; in that the ‘clients’ are overwhelmingly men, and the ‘workers’ are overwhelmingly women.
Project Respect believes that legalisation institutionalises prostitution and the exploitation of women. Project Respect believes that the purchase, not the supply, of prostitution should be criminalised. ” This statement signifies their high moral standards and indicates that as a result of these standards, that they would vehemently reject sex trafficking, slavery and sexual servitude as being morally acceptable. Limitations and Assumptions Trafficking in human beings is large –scale and growing. It is a human rights abuse as well as a crime crossing international, national and regional jurisdictions. Trafficking is used for a wide variety of purposes, such as domestic, agricultural or sweatshop labour, marriage and prostitution.
Australia is a destination country for victims of trafficking and evidence suggests the majority are women trafficked into debt- bonded prostitution. Debt bondage – The status or condition of a debtor arising from a pledge by the debtor of his or her personal services or those of a person under his or her control as a security for debt, if the value of those services as reasonably assessed is not applied toward the liquidation of the debt or the length and nature of those services are not respectively limited and defined (United Nations General Assembly 1957: Article 1) Limitations: 1. It is reiterated that the subject of sex trafficking is analyzed not as a opic in itself but with the use of the only known case of a conviction related to trafficking in Australia: that of Gary Glazner. Thus, this case study involves only a small representation of the stakeholders 0f sex trafficking, sexual servitude and slavery in there entirety. This means that the situation described in this case study may not be a representative of what generally takes place when sex trafficking, sexual servitude and slavery takes place. In addition, the stakeholders used and described in this case study may not be representative of what generally constitutes the group or population of stakeholders with respect to sex trafficking, sexual servitude and slavery.
Thus, this case is limited to the following characteristics pertaining to its stakeholder: •The sex slaves in this case were all Thai. BBC’s Phil Mercer in Sydney, in a report entitled “Sydney police free sex captives” on www. bbcnews. com states that “A business owner near one of the brothels said it was staffed by Chinese, Japanese and Korean women and was always busy. ” Therefore the experience of sex trafficking, sexual servitude and slavery may be unique to different stakeholders generally speaking, depending on their country of origin. •Glazner prostituted the women first out of the Clifton Hotel in Kew, then, when he ran out of space, out of a rented house in South Melbourne, then out of two legal brothels in South Melbourne (McKinney 2001).
This term paper does not take a “district by district” approach to identifying how sex trafficking, sexual servitude and slavery operated in Australia; it simply looks at Glazner’s operations. It may have been that the culture in different parts of Australia dictated that migrant sex workers be treated differently, or even that different sex traffickers and pimps may have run their operations differently. Thus, we cannot say that Gary Glazner’s sex trafficking, slavery and sexual servitude operations is typical of an Australian sex trafficking, slavery and sexual servitude operation •Research on the age group(s) of Glazner’s sex slaves proved fruitless.
Thus, we cannot say for certainty if he engaged in the sexual exploitation of children as dictated by the law (under the age of 18), or simply just adults. If we had garnered evidence as to the age groups of Glazner’s victims, again we cannot say for sure if this would have proved to be typical of sex slaves in Australia in general. 2. In this term paper, and in the social sciences, generally speaking, case studies often rely on descriptive information provided by different people. This leaves room for important details to be left out. Also, much of the information collected is retrospective data, recollections of past events, and is therefore subject to the pr
