Prostitution and public health in New South Wales: reply to Egger and Harcourt

Abstract

Egger and Harcourt have formulated their response to my paper with regard to apparent 'conclusions concerning the impact of the law on the policing of prostitution and the structure and size of the sex industry' in New South Wales (NSW). It is with some difficulty that I respond to their criticisms, as my original article was neither concerned with the 'size' or 'structure' of the sex industry in NSW: at least, not in the narrow and positivistic sense the authors would indicate. Put simply, the paper was not concerned with measurement or producing specific 'facts' about the sex industry. To challenge the validity of my statements because I have not attempted to comprehend the 'structure and size' of the sex industry demonstrates a crude misunderstanding of the core thrust of the paper, which was framed according to a 'problem analysis' approach, as opposed to 'problem solving' approach (see Schneider 1985). In fact, the paper was concerned with documenting how the sex industry is governed and the relationship between regulation and public perceptions of the sex industry. That said, there seems to be little of value in engaging the authors in an unnecessary polemical exercise by systematically addressing each of the points they have raised. To do so would only further remove the paper from its original context, which the authors have either deliberately ignored or failed to comprehend. It would be more constructive to restate and further clarify the objectives of the original paper with some reference to recent events in NSW, while urging readers to carefully re-read the paper with reference to the response.