AbstractBackground
Despite extensive research on vulnerabilities to commercial sexual exploitation (CSE) of minors, knowledge gaps remain in understanding the broader contextual conditions that put young people at risk for CSE. Individual risk factors alone are insufficient to capture the broader context of risk; ‘contextual vulnerability’ to CSE requires further exploration.
Objective
This study provides an empirically-driven theoretical framework that unpacks vulnerability and resilience to CSE, focusing on the socioecological context of minors, including family, friends, schools, neighborhoods, institutions, and others.
Participants and setting
Data were obtained from an online platform in the Netherlands, where young people anonymously shared experiences of CSE by engaging in conversations with online care providers. The sample included conversations from 240 minors with CSE experiences between 2019 and 2022.
Methods
Show moreAbstractBackground
Despite extensive research on vulnerabilities to commercial sexual exploitation (CSE) of minors, knowledge gaps remain in understanding the broader contextual conditions that put young people at risk for CSE. Individual risk factors alone are insufficient to capture the broader context of risk; ‘contextual vulnerability’ to CSE requires further exploration.
Objective
This study provides an empirically-driven theoretical framework that unpacks vulnerability and resilience to CSE, focusing on the socioecological context of minors, including family, friends, schools, neighborhoods, institutions, and others.
Participants and setting
Data were obtained from an online platform in the Netherlands, where young people anonymously shared experiences of CSE by engaging in conversations with online care providers. The sample included conversations from 240 minors with CSE experiences between 2019 and 2022.
Methods
A constructivist grounded theory method was used, combining inductive coding to identify patterns and themes in the data with deductive reasoning to link themes to theoretical concepts, generating new theoretical insights into the socioecological aspects of vulnerability.
Results
Three key themes emerged from the findings: (1) minors often faced social isolation within unsafe or unstable family environments, with limited external support; (2) relationships beyond the family, when unsafe or unstable, contributed to minors' social vulnerability due to withdrawal, heightened exposure to harm, and distrust in formal institutions; and (3) positive experiences and supportive relationships across socioecological levels fostered social resilience and mitigated harm.
Conclusions
A socioecological approach is needed to unpack contextual vulnerability to CSE and should guide prevention and intervention strategies.
Show less
