Jump to content

Talk:Human trafficking/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

Some questions and remarks

I think it an injustice that the sex trade article redirects to a broader subject article. Opinions? Hi, am a criminal justice student and my research paper is on human trafficking, specificly, victims from Asia. Any help or referrel would be appreciated. in prayer, donna scott dscott2_at_lhup.edu

I find it odd (and funny) that the website from which the material was stolen actually referred readers to the (nonexistant) wikipedia article on Trafficking in human beings.

"Visit the Trafficking in Human Beings entry from the Wikipedia for more information."

- Gawka

NPOV disputed

Reading through the article there is an overemphasis on sex trafficking with other forms of trafficking being downplayed or excluded. Some editors have mentioned the debate around definition being confused have pointed to research which expands on this (Augustin et al). Other editors simply remove this or any mention to the debates. The casual reader would believe there was no such debate which would be misleading. I think it essential that we at least highlight the fact that a debate exists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Catherinebrown (talk • contribs) 16:20, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Human Trafficking is often conflated with people smuggling, which is not necessarily exploitative, but it suits anti-immigrant Government politicians to deliberately conflate the two. Getting refugees from unpleasant regimes (such as Ba'athist Iraq under Saddam Huissein), even if for payment, is not necessarily exploitative, but often life-saving, especially when there are no other alternatives.--Streona (talk) 16:33, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
I will not contest the removal of the NPOV tag at the moment but I think we need to ensure data is added to illustrate growing discomfort in a number of disciplines - sexual health, gay rights, immigrant/refugee rights, sex worker rights, sex positive feminists. The key themes are that :-
1. the issue has been hijacked by the christian right and gender feminists to generate public support for repressive policies.
2. That governments conflate trafficking with migration (as Streona points out) in order to deny people the right to migrate or seek refuge.
3. That the disproportionate concentration on sex trafficking in terms of resources has been at the expense of measures to tackle other forms of slavery. Some commentators believe that this is because many western economies benefit massively from trafficked labour - dwelling on sex trafficking diverts attention away from exploitation which they would rather turn a blind eye to.Catherinebrown (talk) 00:38, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Need to be careful though that exaggerated claims by anti-prostitution lobbies like CATW are not countered by false claims that sex-trafficking is a myth. I could write in a book that chocolate is a myth. Does not make it so. You don’t counter exaggerated claims with exaggerated (or false) claims. Bad data with bad data.
There is a claim that there is a ‘rescue industry’ that exaggerates data. This may be true. But often these days, there is a tendency by writers to exaggerate claims as the only way to get published. To make a name for themselves. To get paid to write columns in news journals. Bad data vs bad data again. And there are political agendas at work in both directions. Governments may exaggerate trafficking data, confuse it, or deny its existence.
Few mainstream human rights groups or international media like the BBC ignore trafficked labour. But yes, there is too much focus on sex-trafficking. But you don’t counter too much focus on sex-trafficking by claiming it’s a myth. Of course there is voluntary international movement of sex-workers. But again, mainstream human rights groups don’t deny that. And it seems that sex-work liberalisers get over-defensive on this issue. As if everyone discussing sex-trafficking is out to ban prostitution. I’m all for information about writers who point out the criticisms on this issue. But not ones who make false claims like its all a myth (or a conspiracy). Chwyatt (talk) 09:07, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Very few of the critics mentioned say it doesn't exist merely that it has been massively overestimated. In terms of retaining balance, I think you have nothing to worry about... the vast majority of the content on the page illustrates the theories of the anti trafficking NGO's and very little illustrates the wider perspective (sexual health, refugee rights etc). To selectively priviledge only data which supports one perspective on an emotive and complex issue would be misleading to say the least. Sadly, providing evidence derived from rigorous research is exceptionally difficult as a lot of the "research" in the field has been carried out by gender feminists (such as Melissa Farley). Not that the research is useless, merely a little one dimensional. For example, the testimony of sex workers and professionals who work with them is regularly excluded where it does not illustrate the pre-emptive theory.
Chywyatt, I am sure you are genuinely trying to represent a balanced perspective on an issue which is by its nature emotive. It's therefore crucial we present data from all perspectives (apart from that which is blatantly dishonest or manipulative) and allow people to make up their own minds based on how what they read resonates with their own, lived experience.Catherinebrown (talk) 23:16, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
I agree. I fully support this article discussing the issues of poor data, focus on sex trafficking rather than labour trafficking and other issues. I’ve moved the criticisms you have added to the criticism without removing or editing them (in line with Wikipedia articles of a similar nature). I’ve added criticism sub-sections (poor data/over-estimation and excessive focus on sex trafficking (would welcome better titles)). I believe that this will actually highlight criticisms better visually, and therefore help achieve balance.
One thing though. You said that Fiona Mactaggart “admitted that the UK government concentrated on disrupting sex trafficking as they believe trafficking and prostitution are the same thing”. I don’t think she said that. She implies that legalised prostitution facilitates trafficking. But that is not the same as saying it’s the same thing. Chwyatt (talk) 08:15, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Recursive references

I find it odd (and funny) that the website from which the material was stolen actually referred readers to the (nonexistant) wikipedia article on Trafficking in human beings.

"Visit the Trafficking in Human Beings entry from the Wikipedia for more information."

- Gawka

This has been resolved now. Foant 20:05, 2005 May 11 (UTC)

I rewrote some text that was copied directly from a human rights watch page[1]. I'm not sure if it needs to be posted on copyright problems or not.

  • This would not be a copyright violation, provided that the source is quoted. It is clearly fair use (subject to sourcing). Zingi 05:43, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC) s

There appears to be some material in this article that is identical to material on the High Road for Human rights web site<http://www.highroadforhumanrights.org/education/slavery.htm>, so I am not sure who is infringing on whom. However, the High Roads for Human Rights web site cites as its source the Encyclopedia Brittanica, and an article in the Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, June 2007, "Globalization and human trafficking" by Loring Jones, Daqvid Engstrom, Tricia Hillaird, and Mariel Diaz <http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0CYZ/is_2_34/ai_n27265537>. This leads me to believe that the Wikipedia article, useful as it is, has not only plagiarized material, but also violated copyright. I am sorry I don't have more time to correct this, but I am grading student papers.Vriley2 (talk) 20:07, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Abuse tag

I have removed the {{abuse}} tage. I think it is uninformative in this article. The Land 14:33, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Recently in the UK many trafficked children from Vietnam made to work as 'gardeners' in 'cannabis factories' were discovered. The Vietnamese are quietly taking over the illegal cannabis and vice trades in the UK.


Fact check

Recently in the UK many trafficked children from Vietnam made to work as 'gardeners' in 'cannabis factories' were discovered. The Vietnamese are quietly taking over the illegal cannabis and vice trades in the UK.


I recently heard a quote from National Geographic that "more people today are sold into slavery than were sold in the entire 400 year history of the trans-atlantic slave trade." Anyone have a cite for this? scazza 20:31, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

There is a major controversy regarding how statistics are being cooked about sex trafficking. Here is one of many articles from Jack Shafer of Slate.com.

Anyone reading this, please do your homework and keep this article completely neutral. I am not touching it myself.

If you read the above cited link to the slate article, there is postscript note at the bottom citing that the "cooked statistics" were misquoted, not a fantasy. this is a very serious and underreported worldwide issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.68.0.68 (talk) 22:17, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Another question: Did Wikipedia editors fact-check that the cute woman in the Canada Government photo was an actress posing for an advertisement or a real sex slave?84.56.26.19 13:18, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Why not just add your article rather than deciding yourself what people can and cannot see? Otherwise you are just censoring. Give people the benefit of the doubt that they can make up their own opinion. I've added it to the article's section and removed the word 'fact book'. The article is based on many studies done over many years in many countries. And it says that there are no accurate figures for trafficking, which Jack Shafer says is “real and horrific”.
The reliability of the statistics has been discussed on this talk page. Some of the articles you decided to stop other people seeing included detailed empirical studies. It is also worth bearing in mind that there are huge regional differences in trafficking trends between into Europe, North America, and Asia. And of course something is not necessarily a fact just because of an opinion from Jack Shafer. Like most areas, there is room for interpretation regarding the extent of trafficking. But there is plenty of evidence it exists in significant numbers.
And yes the woman in the poster is most likely a model. Just as children in posters raising awareness about child abuse are also models. That does not mean that child abuse does not exist. Chwyatt 13:23, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Why should we fact-check a claim we are not making? WP does not claim that the girl is really a sex slave. WP claims that the poster was released by the government of Canada. Since that claim is fairly well-supported, I think we're done here. Kasreyn 19:32, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Re Fact Check:

As the number of victims of trafficking can not, by no means, be varified, you can not prove anything like that. To claim something like that (or, as I read in an article in the Germany 'Spiegel', to say that what happens to the (female) victims of trafficking would be 'much worse than anything anyone has suffered in the trans-atlantic slave trade') is highly problematic. - Anonymous

You can prove that there are "at least" a certain level of slave trafficking, you just can't prove an exact or maximum number. - Centrx 17:02, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Dont forget African soccer players

12 year olds from Africa coming to Europe with promises of fame and soccer glory by agents, and often abandoned and left to fend for themselves if they dont meet expectations.

If they are abandoned, then that has nothing to do with slavery and doesn't belong in this article. Edrigu 18:56, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Merge of People Smuggling and Human Trafficking

  • Do not mergeI am against the merging of the two articles. Human Smuggling and Human Trafficking are two separate activities. The United Nations views the two as separate issues, as so I believe Wikipedia should as well. Briefly, Human smuggling is the moving of people across borders, where as human trafficking is the buying and selling of people. [2]—Preceding unsigned comment added by Joelee (talk • contribs)
  • Do not mergeI am against the merge as well. Those being smuggled across borders usually agree to be smuggled, whilst human trafficking, those being moved are usually forced (hence the comparisons with slavery). They are different activities. Chwyatt
  • Do not mergeI vote do not merge. Human smuggling and trafficking are two different things, done for different reasons. Kasreyn 17:50, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Do not mergeI vote NO -- do not merge the articles. Human trafficking involves exchanging the "ownership" of human beings for money; Human smuggling involves illegally transporting human beings for money (e.g. illegal aliens being brought across the southwestern U.S. border by coyotes in exchange for money). Very big difference. --TrustTruth 21:11, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Do not merge MPS 21:33, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Do Not Merge! Human Trafficking and People Smuggling are two completely different issues. As stated above, smuggling refers to crossing a national border illegally. In this case, both the smuggler and the person smuggled are committing a crime, and can be prosecuted accordingly. However, Human Trafficking is a crime committed by a trafficker to a victim, and thus only the trafficker has committed a crime.

Some victims of human trafficking knew they would be working in prostitution

I like to refer to this document: Research based on case studies of victims of trafficking in human beings in 3 EU member states, i.e. Belgium, Italy and The Netherlands. It mentions that a big minority of the victims of human trafficking who were researched knew they would be working as prostitutes. I also like to refer to this article: Happy hookers of Eastern Europe It mentions two (former) police officers who have dealt a lot with victims of human trafficking. What they say is that the overwhelming majority of the prostitutes who work abroad knew that they would be working in prostitution. This article is heavily biased though because the author of this article refuses to see women who knew they would be working as prostitutes as victims of human trafficking. There's also another Dutch report written by Judith Vocks and Jan Nijboer. You can find a English translation here. Of a sample of 72 women, a small majority knew they would be working as prostitutes, most of them already worked in prostitution in their home countries. That is not to say that they are not victims of human trafficking! I miss this important fact in this article, and I hope you can appreciate my small contribution.--Bruno Junqueira 17:57, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


You are right to point out that some trafficking victims know they are entering prostitution or are prostitutes already.

As you mentioned, the Spectator article is heavily biased, the tone of the article wants to portray sex trafficking as a myth, regardless of evidence. The Spectator has a record of controversial articles based only on the writers opinion and little evidence. And the Spectator is a publication with an anti immigration agenda (which is behind its attempts to rubbish the overwhelming evidence of human trafficking). It claims that media coverage of trafficking in Romania is widespread when it is not, and media coverage is even less in Bulgaria and Moldova, other sources of women to the UK. And of course, former police officers can also have their own agendas. And also in this Wikipedia article, there are links to the nature of organized crime in trafficking. The Spectator article claims that there is ‘no huge criminal structure with a mafia godfather running it’. But no one is saying there is. There is some organization, but no one is suggesting it is something like the level of organization is the drug cartels. The EC report on the three case studies you site suggest a degree of organization. The EC report also concludes the majority of cases involve debt bondage and physical violence. Hardly happy hookers.

There are three scenarios in sex trafficking. One, some women will not know they are being trafficked. There are plenty of accounts (with links) on this Wikipedia article of young women thinking they will be working in bars or hotels, but are then forced into prostitution. Two, some women may know they will work in prostitution but as you say ‘have a too rosy picture’. And three, some are prostitutes already.

The report shows that only a minority of women, not prostitutes already, are looking to work as prostitutes in the west. Most of the work offered is bar/restaurant/hotel or au pair or to just bring them to the West.

In one study, 34% in bar/restaurant/hotel or au pair, 8% marriage, 8% transport or study, 28% no offers of work at all and 13% prostitution.

In another study, 58% in bar/restaurant/hotel or au pair, 1% marriage, 13% forced and kidnapping and 23% prostitution.

It mentions a case study where the majority of Chinese victims are offered hotel and catering work (62%).

Most of this is in contrary to what the Spectator suggests. I recommend that the Spectator article is moved down with the other articles as it is heavily biased with no empirical research.--Chwyatt 13:33, 13 May 2006(UTC)


Interesting comment. But what about ex-prostitute Jo Doezema?
Loose Women or Lost Women?
.......there are emerging indications that it is sex workers, rather than 'coerced innocents' that form the majority of this 'traffic'. GAATW, whose report is based for a large part on responses of organisations that work directly with 'trafficking victims', found that the majority of 'trafficking' cases involve women who know they are going to work in the sex industry, but are lied to about the conditions they will work under, such as the amount of money they will receive (Weijers and Lap-Chew 1997: 99). They also conclude that abduction for purposes of 'trafficking' into the sex industry is very rare (p.99).......
She said it well, but I'm having difficulties with her opinions though. She doesn't question the clients who use the prostitutes. But from a client's point of view, every prostitute could be a victim of human trafficking. But that's just an opinion.--Bruno Junqueira 23:00, 14 May 2006 (UTC)


As you know, this is a difficult area to find accurate statistics, the traffickers are criminals, and the women, be they willing or forced into prostitution, often live in fear (the EC report [3]mentions that in most cases, women involved often experience violence). So finding out how many enter prostitution willingly is difficult. The EC report (there is another empirical study in the ‘Government and international governmental organizations’ links section of the wikipedia article looking at Costa Rica, Thailand and Ukraine) is one of the few detailed studies. A testimony of a prostitute is useful, but in one of the EC report case studies, that is based on the testimonies of 62 trafficking victims.--Chwyatt 15 May 2006


I don not agree with you. I believe there's no empirical evidence that a "minority" of the victims of human trafficking knew they would be working as prostitutes. Some statistics say a (big) minority knew it, other statistics will tell you that most knew. I think it's better to replace "a minority" by "many".--Bruno Junqueira 23:52, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


I think we agree that statistics are difficult in this issue, and exact statistics are impossible, especially as this is an illegal activity. However, the two empirical case studies on this wikipedia article where trafficking victims have been surveyed do show that it is a minority, albeit a significant minority. The example of Belgium of 13% seems typical. I have not seen an empirical study that shows that a majority know they would be working as prostitutes. The problem with anecdotal ‘evidence’ is that it is difficult to draw overall conclusions, and there are plenty of anecdotal already in the articles section that do not suggest that most know they would be working as prostitutes.

I read all the case studies in the EU empirical study and the largest group (40%) involved the victims believing they will be doing ‘legitimate’ work (waitress, bar, hotel, au pair, office), 25% knowing they will be prostitutes and 25% other (marriage, ‘feigned love’, forced/kidnapped, or not stated). Also what complicates matters is that there are different trends amongst, for example, trafficking of Chinese victims to Belgium compared to Albanians to Netherlands, or Nigerians to Italy. And that is before considering trafficking to the United States or trafficking in SE Asia. So drawing conclusions is difficult.

I have a problem with this word ‘many’, as it could imply ‘majority’, which would be inaccurate. As a compromise, I have swapped it for ‘some’. A reference to studying, kidnapping and marriage should also stay in (kidnapping and marriage are used in a larger number of cases in SE Asia). In one case study, 5% of victims were looking to study, 8% marriage was involved, and 8% were forced/kidnapped. Also, in the case studies, simply transport to the West, with no job offer, ‘legitimate’ or prostitution, is common. Chwyatt 11:28, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I know one report which states that most women know. I referred to it earlier. It's on the internet but you have to pay for it. I mean this report. I own a Dutch version of this report. Jo Doezema refers to another report by Marjan Wijers and Lap-Chew from 1997, but I've never seen that report, and I don't know how to lay my hands on it.
I believe also many women who already worked as prostitutes on their own become trafficked. I refer to the TAMPEP-reports:
[4][5][6]
for instance: I quote the first TAMPEP-report:
page 20:We register that majority of migrant sex workers worked in at least two - three EU countries and in two - three countries within their geographical region. This pattern of mobility is determined by pimps/traffickers because they place and move the women into and between different countries, because the women are sold to different pimps/traffickers in various countries but also because they escape from their perpetrators.
page 270: Ninety percent of the women from Central and Eastern Europe are - some way or the other - in the power of pimps, madams or traffickers. Many women accept it without much protest, but some of them want to change the situation. This means that the TAMPEP worker is regularly asked for advice on how to be liberated from the power of pimps.

Oh and can you show me a link to the SE Asian report? I don't know where it is.--Bruno Junqueira 12:20, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Organ selling?

In former Soviet republics, mothers are afraid to let their kids play out of their sight. They say they hear stories about children stolen, taken to a rich country, and killed for their organs. I don't know whether this really happens, but I know that the fear is real. Is this a form of human trafficking? Can anyone with more expertise or a little time to research contribute a paragraph on this? Thanks. BrainyBabe 10:44, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Kids can get kidnappedn, but who will take their organs? Wouldn't those countries have a well-estabolished law that prevent un-named source of organs? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.126.75.181 (talk) 05:45, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Other comments

  • There is a sentence saying `she commits the ultimate act of escaping from them` I am changing this to simply she commits suicide, it is far too romantic to be an encyclopedia phrase.

I agree with that Chwyatt 10:34, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Someone referred to the Canadian government poster as a ‘propaganda’ poster. I reverted it back to ‘Human trafficking awareness poster’ because calling it a ‘propaganda’ poster suggests some sort of deceit, that there is no trafficking in Canada, but trafficking cases are well reported. Chwyatt 10:34, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
But is it not propaganda? "Propaganda is a specific type of message presentation directly aimed at influencing the opinions of people, rather than impartially providing information." It displays a weeping woman! And it says 'Trafficking is bad' Of course it is propaganda. I know that the word "propaganda" is used as a pejorative sometimes,butbutbut... it is used as NPOV on wikipedia elsewere. And, what else should it be called? "Awareness" is kind of silly. It isn't simple information - it's blatant appeal to pity. --CAD6DEE2E8DAD95A (hello!) 22:49, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
I suppose it could be described as a "political" poster as well. But methinks propaganda is more suitable. --CAD6DEE2E8DAD95A (hello!) 11:38, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
In that case, almost everything could be argued as ‘propaganda’. Which undermines the use of the word ‘propaganda’, making it meaningless. And it does not say trafficking is bad, it says it is a crime, which under Canadian law it is. I don’t think there is any argument that trafficking produces victims. That is not to say all people who have been trafficked are victims, but many are, most going by the evidence. As your reasons for objecting to the word ‘awareness’ are almost the same as my objections to the word ‘propaganda’ (but from a different angle), how about we go for ‘political’ or simply ‘A poster from the Canadian Department of Justice’ if we are not going to agree on this? Fair compromise? Let people make their own mind up if it is ‘propaganda’. - Chwyatt 09:29, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Okay. --CAD6DEE2E8DAD95A (hello!) 14:25, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Australian and international anti-trafficking laws

Would it be a good idea to include a short mention of the different anti-trafficking legislation in place in different countries? Perhaps a dot-point list of how different countries treat the trafficking threat, or major laws that have been passed. The page seems quite American-centric when in reality the trafficking threat is a global one.

Vietnamese people smuggling activities in the UK

Recent UK Police Operations Pentameter and Keymer discovered the extent of Vietnamese people smuggling. Vietnamese are smuggled into the country to work in Vietnamese cannabis factories and nail salons. Recently the UK authorities planned to deport over 500 children, who were smuggled into the country, back to Vietnam. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.122.47.127 (talk • contribs)

This is great info, thanks for adding it. Could you please cite the source you found it in, like a news article or book? Thanks very much, delldot | talk 05:01, 9 November 2006 (UTC)


news.bbc.co.uk
www.ukcia.org
www.guardian.co.uk

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4757023.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/3965035.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5316664.stm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,,1939328,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/drugs/Story/0,,1860305,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,,1772195,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,,1772195,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/drugs/Story/0,,1731843,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,,1567386,00.html

http://www.ukcia.org/news/shownewsarticle.php?articleid=12256

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6445201.stm

http://www.eveningstar.co.uk/search/story.aspx?brand=EADOnline&category=News&itemid=IPED16%20Mar%202007%2017:52:52:483&tBrand=EADOnline&tCategory=search

http://www.ukcia.org/news/shownewsarticle.php?articleid=12545

http://www.ukcia.org/news/shownewsarticle.php?articleid=12841 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.157.100.44 (talk) 00:35, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

http://www.ukcia.org/news/shownewsarticle.php?articleid=12850 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.157.100.44 (talk) 00:43, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

http://www.ukcia.org/news/shownewsarticle.php?articleid=12861 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.157.100.44 (talk) 22:39, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Ummmm the external links and articles section is almost as long as the article. Any help trimming them down would be appreciated. Sethie 04:59, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

In the articles section, I have left some articles and made a start in cutting news stories, subscription links and only loosely related links to reduce length. I’ll edit a bit more later. Chwyatt 10:39, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Should ‘organisations’ be limited to just ‘well known’ groups like Amnesty International (and a couple of others) or should it be more extensive than that? Chwyatt 10:53, 11 December 2006 (UTC)


You know, I just realized that maybe as we are cutting, we can scan the sources for things to put in the article... just an idea. As for organizations, no they don't need to be well known, and I think we need to cut them down some. Sethie 17:16, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I would like to propose deleting the "non-governmental organizations" section altogether. Limiting the list to just "well known" groups would be very difficult. What or who is well known to one may not be well known to another. There are literally hundreds of NGOs that address human trafficking on a domestic and global scale. One suggestion would be starting a new page listing the various organizations, along with hyperlinks to their specific Web sites or Wiki pages. Here's an example of another Wiki page presenting the idea in concrete form. list of opponents of slavery Thoughts? Cindamuse (talk) 17:39, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

From so many countries in the world that thrive in human trafficking you have focused only on Kosovo and Bosnia? Trafficking of human beings is global problem.

What about Cambodgia, US, Middle East, Canada, other European countries and Asia?

Why haven't you mentioned all countries from Amnesty International? Trafficking of human beings is global problem. [7]


—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 147.126.95.146 (talk) 05:18, 11 December 2006 (UTC). SIGNATURE: "Reader"

The article does say it is a global problem. Russia and Thailand have been mentioned and there are articles on other parts of the world. Chwyatt 10:39, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

"Reasons"

The reasons listed for human trafficking, which is defined as involuntary... include motives that would benefit the person being trafficked. These should not be listed as reasons why people are trafficked (again, involuntary). They instead belong in the linked to article of people smuggling.

  1. Discrimination in employment against women
  2. Anti-child labor laws eliminating employment for people under the age of 18
  3. Anti-marriage laws for people under the age of 18, resulting in single motherhood and a desperate need for income
  4. Restrictive immigration laws that motivate people to take greater risks

Mouse 09:45, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks mouse, I removed it.Sethie 16:37, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Human_trafficking/Archive_1&oldid=1183034871"