Does theDBS Sensitve Application Route for trans applicants undermines the value of a DBS check and pose a safeguarding issue

We quickly become adept at identifying and avoiding threats - any stealth trans woman who spots a vibe check failure will reflexively give that person a very wide berth. We get it beaten into us early on and it stays with us for life - it's just part of our everyday existence and is added to all the other threat management considerations that in an ideal world nobody would have to worry about.

Yeah because women never go through life risk assessing threats to us do we? (whose lived experience you've clearly cribbed this from)

Trans people fill out the same forms.

They actually have to give more information in order to raise a sensitive case file.

The process is simply adjusted so it won't automatically out every one of the thousands of trans people who need to have DBS checks for work by default.

I'm certain that women's history of discrimination in the workplace, sexism, pregnancy discrimination etc, means that most women understand how discrimination works. But no matter how sad the stories, safeguarding children takes precedence over individual demands for special rules just for them.

No exceptions, no loopholes. The same safeguarding standards must apply to all adults.

Do you understand the significance of being outed in a transphobic workplace?

Employers feeling any kind of obligation to treat trans people fairly is still only a comparatively recent phenomenon. Prior to the introduction of legal protections, it was pretty much open season on us if we were discovered, and the media periodically featured chilling stories of trans people being outed, harassed and driven from public life.

It was bad enough just hearing how non-trans people speak idly when they think nobody is listening; it was outright hellish to be Known To Be Trans.

The GRA2004 and EA2010 were part of an active, hard-fought process of making life a little safer and less miserable.

So yes, automatic harm.

"automatic harm"

That's a new one

I dont know why you decided to comment on the purpose of a GRA?

Any man who claims to be a woman can use the sensitive route, regardless of GRC status.

The GRA is, among other things, designed to protect members of a vulnerable minority from automatic harm when they engage in good faith with an important and necessary safeguarding process that serves to protect children and vulnerable adults.

It's a compassionate safeguarding measure that exists to enhance an existing safeguarding process in order for it to not automatically harm every trans person who uses it.

The DBS is designed to safeguard children and vulnerable adults, not men who want to hide their sex and previous names from employees.

No exceptions. Organisations demanding exemptions to standard safeguarding guidelines raise too many red flags. Long overdue that society starts saying NO to those demanding to be exceptions from the social contract, the law and guidance - especially in relation to children.

As Mumsnetters understand - NO is a complete sentence.

You are required to provide previous names to the DBS sensitive applications team to set up a case file.

Criminals are well known for being trustworthy, I am sure nobody has changed name and not informed authorities. DBS needs to make NI number a mandatory field and the government needs to make it not possible for someone to change it. That way it doesn't matter if someone changes their name, their real identity will be found.

Sentencing for relevant crimes already covers informing the authorities in the event of a name change.

Hiding information about yourself is a safeguarding issue. Transwomen commit sex offences at least as frequently as other men, probably more so how can hiding the fact that you're male NOT avoid safeguarding? Women very rarely commit sex offences which is why transwoman cannot be risk assessed the same as women, they have to be risk assessed like their fellow men. Anyone who gives a shit about safeguarding would understand and accept that, the ones that fight against it are precisely the ones that need to be considered unsuitable for the job.

Wrong.
Have a read of this. Change of identity creates a loophole.
No exceptions to safeguarding. Children & the vulnerable matter much more than the personal demands of any group or individual.

kpssinfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/DBS-Checks-and-Identity-Verification.pdf

It doesn't allow adults to avoid fundamental safeguarding procedures - that's precisely why it exists.

No sacred castes. No exceptions allowing adults to avoid fundamental safeguarding procedures. If you want to work with children / vulnerable people and need a DBS, then openness and transparency are critical.

The safety of the vulnerable always takes priority over the personal wishes / feelings of adults. Safeguarding 101.

"You never know if you can trust your HR department - again, all it takes is one person with a hostile ideology and a need to see you suffer to make your life a misery"

Yes, gender ideology is hostile to women and many of us have been harmed by it. Making women change in front of men is abusive and HR are cheering it on.

We quickly become adept at identifying and avoiding threats - any stealth trans woman who spots a vibe check failure will reflexively give that person a very wide berth. We get it beaten into us early on and it stays with us for life - it's just part of our everyday existence and is added to all the other threat management considerations that in an ideal world nobody would have to worry about.

The DBS sensitive route exists so that trans people do not have to disclose previous names and identities to an employer. It's a compassionate safeguarding measure that exists to enhance an existing safeguarding process in order for it to not automatically harm every trans person who uses it.

You never know if you can trust your HR department - again, all it takes is one person with a hostile ideology and a need to see you suffer to make your life a misery. The DBS sensitive check process removes the risk of this happening.

You need to give your date of birth and name at birth, place of birth and nationality etc and provide official ID not photocopies.
If this changed and you are now using a new name this would show up.

The initial application form has the NI number.

You need to provide the last 5 years of addresses and any gaps in your employment would be followed up via your references or queried following the safer recruitment processes.

There is a range of background checks and if there are unexplained gaps then you don't emply that person.

The change of name doesn't change any of the processes you have to follow.

The sensitive route means you have to tell whoever is carrying out the check your previous name, but you can request that this name is not given to the prospective employer.

And sex. This is another government id that allows men to declare themselves as female without a grc.

Thats why men use the service, even when they know no crimes are going to be listed, they use the service because its government id that hides their sex.

Someone with a conviction for rape isnt likely going to apply for work needing a dbs check.

These institutions were captured a long time ago.

And when challenged for the legal basis of their guidance they get VERY snippy !

Yes that's my point, @Talkinpeace. They shouldn't.