Challenor showing off their 'new' birth certificate

Italics fail!

Worrying reply from the DBS:

^Thank you for your email

A transgender applicant does not need to disclose their previous identity to their employer if they don’t wish to, but they do need to disclose all previous names/identity to the sensitive applications team.

An applicant will have to supply ID evidence when submitting an application to support it. They will show their ID to the application evidence checker. However, we have found that some applicants may not have sufficient ID evidence required by the evidence checker to support their DBS application. If this is the case then, the applicant would need to advise the sensitive applications team they don’t have enough ID and the team will be able to help with the options available to them.

The sensitive applications team can remove the applicants previous identity from the DBS Certificate if the applicant wishes use the sensitive route, otherwise the DBS certificate will display all names.

All convictions will be disclosed on a DBS certificate, and if a transgender applicant does have convictions in their previous identity, and if the applicant has chosen to use the sensitive route i.e previous names removed from the certificate, the team will give the applicant the option as to whether they are happy to have the convictions on the certificate in their previous name or if they would like them to be displayed on their certificate in their now name.

You can find out more about how we use and protect your personal information online. Please visit our privacy policies on our website at:

www.gov.uk/government/publications/dbs-privacy-policies

If you require any further assistance please don’t hesitate to get in touch.^

Here is my reply:

^Thank you for your email explaining what happens if a transgender applicant DOES contact the Sensitive Applications Team regarding their DBS application.

But please will you clarify what would happen if a transgender applicant provides their prospective employer with identity documents relating to their new identity only, and NEITHER informs the employer about their previous identity, NOR contacts the Sensitive Applications Team?

Is there any process by which convictions or safeguarding issues relating to the previous identity will be flagged up to the prospective employer?^

If I was presented with a ‘female’ birth certificate by an obviously male bodied person for a role that required DBS checking i’d not bother unless they were forthcoming with their genuine information.

The thread has moved on some but to return to this point, it relies on the appointing manager/panel to do due diligence. Some parts of healthcare, social care and the third sector have a rather large proportion of liberal minded people who would rather be seen to be inclusive.

And I'm afraid a small number of people with a less innocent agenda.

It’s harder to get a rescue cat!

This is true!

It’s harder to get a rescue cat!

Strikes me that it's harder to get a mortgage than a GRC.

I have to prove my income to get a mortgage. The banks are careful about that sort of thing.

Curious.

You can get a new birth certificate any time you want.

You can get a copy of anyone’s birth certificate anytime you want. So if you have a spare tenner you could get yourself a copy of Aimee’s birth certificate (hence why it cannot be used for id)

Don't think GRC has been mentioned, bottom surgery has been mentioned before but AC has been busy and hasn't mentioned that either.

You can't get a BC without a GRC, can you? And if no GRC has been mentioned, boasted about, screenshotted, maybe the BC isn't genuine after all.

It's a piece of piss

Quite. It's your gas bill plus a diagnosis of a condition that is subject to a memorandum of understanding that means doctors have no choice but to make on request.

Most oppressed™, my arse.

In case you're wondering, no reply received so far today from second email to DBS.....

Don't think GRC has been mentioned, bottom surgery has been mentioned before but AC has been busy and hasn't mentioned that either.

I'm interested to know if the Bullring crime was recorded under Ashton or Aimee as BC would have been Ashton at the time so must have been that rather than preferred name I'm guessing.

Has Challoner boasted about their GRC? You can't get a new birth certificate without one, can you?

Why is it onerous? It's a piece of piss.

From upthread.

"Proof you’ve lived in your acquired gender

This proof must cover the required time that you’ve lived in your acquired gender. It could include copies of your:

passport
driving licence
payslips or benefit documents
utility bills or other documents of an official nature

All documents should be in your acquired name and gender. The earliest document must be dated before the beginning of the required time."

The earlier post about the fact that A.C. went through the current 'onerous' procedure to obtain a GRC and that it still wasn't good enough for us, showing that we didn't understand what we were protesting about wrt the GRA proposals.

Yes - it's true that the proposals to change the GRA brought its actual implications as it stands into the light. And for some of us including me, it has been a journey to understanding those implications, and therefore to come to the conclusion that, although I don't want the GRA changed to reduce gatekeeping, ultimately the process is not the point. There IS no process that causes a human to change sex.

Given that, how can we make the lives of trans people better, without making the lives of other people worse? Because the GRA is poison. For those who follow its rules, it's too onerous apparently. For those that don't, clashes of rights are occurring anyway as policy drifts ahead of legal change. All because the GRA made a lie into law.

Ah, I see my earlier posts have been deleted. Never mind, it's all info publicly available via Google

Me too littlecabbage, clearly pointing out what people are saying on Twitter in compliment to what they’re saying here wasn’t acceptable. It’s interesting the way people claim they’re “attacked”, but what that means is they are unable to justify or explain the illogicality of their arguments and get the hump.

This thread is genuinely terrifying

Won't it look a bit odd to have been born in 1997 and have had a birth certificate issued in 2019?

You can get a new birth certificate any time you want. I had to get one for my DD's passport as the long version was required and DH had only got the short one cheapskate

It is a 'Certified Copy' of the entry in the Register.

Yes. It's a "criminal offence" to sexually assault and rape children, too and yet...

Well quite, that is true - so why don't we just rely on that?

Why do we need DBS again?

Won't it look a bit odd to have been born in 1997 and have had a birth certificate issued in 2019?

Placemarking as there’s so much of interest on this thread.

"it's a criminal offence not to disclose previous identities" is not an acceptable answer. People with criminal intent will not be deterred by this.

Yes. It's a "criminal offence" to sexually assault and rape children, too and yet...

Yes, I totally agree zebra.

Hi littlecabbage - yes, please do. We must ensure they follow up - you have asked the "awkward" question that exposes the loophole.

As I said earlier, "it's a criminal offence not to disclose previous identities" is not an acceptable answer. People with criminal intent will not be deterred by this.

Ah, I see my earlier posts have been deleted. Never mind, it's all info publicly available via Google.

I am very interested in the answer to this thanks for asking so clearly

No problem. I have unsurprisingly (being the weekend) not heard further but hopefully can update on Monday.

blows my mind that you can get a new birth certificate, changing your sex from the actual truth to a preferred reality. It's an arrogant denial of reality, an actual bona fide lie.