How does it even affect you? Just be kind.

I came back to have a look at this thread. Still going off on the same branch line.

I thought your actual thread idea was a useful one, @Shedmistress There are so many ways this affects people, and it would be helpful to have a resource reference, which it won't be if there are dozens of pages on one detail of one aspect of one area. Do the MN rules about thread subjects allow you to try again?

What did OP explain? Because she keeps repeating that they have the legal right to not have their old name checked. They do not have that right. At all. She also keeps repeated that they have the legal right to hide their criminal history. They do not have that right. At all.

She did agree with things others posted, as do I. But those are separate to the above, which she keeps repeating.

Do you actually think it’s true?

What history is being kept secret?

Their old name is taken off. If they call up and ask for that.

What else is kept secret?

No, some posters did agree with the OP as the OP explained what she had meant and just so you know I won't be brown beaten by you like you have the OP and if you try that shit with me I will ignore you.

Seriously you are now becoming so annoying you have ruined the thread. You could have made your point and fecked off.
I wish MN had a block button for posters like you.

Unless the job is using the single sex exemption, then sex doesn’t matter. From an equality point of view.

The argument gets tricky when using the single sex exemption and then men apply using an updated birth certificate. For that reason, I disagree with changing birth certificates. But it’s nothing to do with a DBS check.

And presumably your original (ACTUAL) sex is also conveniently "left off" the certificate?

THAT'S definitely a "Trans issue" and absolutely a safeguarding problem and not ok.

Your theoretical ' "ordinary "cis" ' criminal can't do that, can he?

And presumably your original (ACTUAL) sex is also conveniently "left off" the certificate?

THAT'S definitely a "Trans issue" and absolutely a safeguarding problem and not ok.

Your theoretical ' "ordinary "cis" ' criminal can't do that, can he?

I think the OP even said that because the helpline is not mandatory, that means they can legally leave their name off.

The helpline are the people who do the hiding. You call them and they will hide your old name. If you don’t call them, then your old name will be shown. So the OP clearly doesn’t even know what the helpline is for if she is demanding it be mandatory. If it’s mandatory, then every trans person would have their old name hidden even if they didn’t actually ask for it.

In any case, it has nothing to do with the application. They all have to fill out the same application with all their previous names. All names are checked, no matter what.
If you leave out your name, you’re committing fraud, trans or not. It is not legally allowed.

Why? Because policy has for some time considered sex to be a private matter. Even before the Goodwin case based on privacy, these ‘sensitive’ routes existed.

Analysing that from a feminist perspective (misogyny, homophobia) is perfectly reasonable but there’s not really a big mystery about it.

Until the Equality Act and after as well, there’s no doubt that plenty of trans people got sacked or attacked or isolated or missed out on opportunities because they are presenting as the opposite sex. The drive for privacy is part of that kind of discrimination.

No, other posted different points which made sense. OP seemed to latch onto those and almost made sense… then went right back to saying “trans people are legally allowed to leave their old name off the form and hide their criminal record.”

They can’t. And mumsnet really shouldn’t allow those posts to stand.

Can they remove details of gender specific crimes? I know Unlock were trying to do a legal challenge to that because they can’t. DBS can’t alter the information about a crime as the data isn’t theirs, they get it from the police national database. When the police were asked to alter the crimes, they refused as they said their records are a matter of historical accuracy. I thought there was a legal challenge coming up around that, to alter gender specific crimes but as far as I know, they can’t at the moment. They can only redact their old name.

As I have said before, and no doubt will say again, the UK should use an individual identifier like the PPSN in Ireland, that is used for all interactions with the state and that is not changed if a person changes their registered gender.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_Public_Service_Number

The fact that it doesn't, and any complications that causes, is a fault in the planning of public service provision and record keeping.

Public service provision and planning for same are important. The record keeping associated with it should make it possible to protect eg women's sex-based rights, including rights to sex-appropriate health care. It cannot do that if the category 'women' in the records that are collected includes men. That is a primary way that genderism damages all women and all men.

And the OP has explained countless times what she meant by that and others have posted that they understood what she meant yet here you are fucking up a thread with other contributions because you cannot move on from tbe fact that the OP is not going to conceed to you.

Yes misinformation needs to be challenged and you have done that countless times. The OP is not going to agree either you so for the love of God move on.

I have made no claims about whether or not transexuals might fraudulently apply for a DBS certificate so your questions are misguided. However upthread you twisted my words into lies. I corrected you but for some reason you won't acknowledge that you posted lies. Here is your opportunity.

I can’t find it online now and can barely remember the details, but wasn’t there a woman who changed her name when she fled domestic abuse and she used the sensitive application team to have her old name left off her DBS?

I cannot remember if she was successful or if it was a legal challenge or just someone talking about whether it was possible. But I’d be interested to know if the sensitive applications can be used by someone for reasons other than trans.

Leaving aside the apparently endless determination to disagree with something the OP said, I've noted the fact that the DBS has a parallel 'sensitive application' route for transgender applicants; this illustrates my point about the disproportionate influence that such a tiny percentage of the population exerts on society.

Why does a small social have such power that they can be treated differently from the 'common or garden' applicant for a DBS cert, have a dedicated route through the process, and be given 'the choice not to have any gender or name information disclosed on their DBS certificate, that could reveal their previous gender identity.'?

'Why?' is one of the most basic challenges to pretty much any of the TRAs demands:
you must use my chosen pronouns - why?
I should be allowed used the women's facilities even though I'm a biological male - why?
Trans people are vulnerable - why?
Lesbians are transphobic if they won't have sex with trans-identifying males - why?
Biological males should be allowed take part in women's sports - why?

and so on... not an aggressive 'why', just a reasonable request for a reasonable answer which doesn't rely on 'just be kind' or 'because we say so' .

And at that point I will post that @TruthOrAlethiometer is right (obviously) and the OP is wrong about this. I also think it’s important that misunderstandings and/or plain lies aren’t left unchallenged.

No, other people posted actual issues which were driven by the OP, but not actually do with with what OP claimed.
Especially around them being given a new birth certificate. I fully agree with all of that. Those are real issues. But that’s not what I was arguing about.

I’m not saying trans identify change isn’t a problem. Lots of people posted a lot of stuff showing different things… there’s even issues with them getting new credit ratings which hasn’t been mentioned yet. There are a lot of issues.

Not one person has agreed with OP that trans people have a legal right to leave their old names off… because they don’t.

I’ve explained the the OP over and over what the guidance means and what the hotline is for (it is optional and nothing to do with the actual form or the criminal record check; it’s literally just the name shown on the certificate at the end). But she keeps doubling down on her misunderstanding.

I’d have stopped posting if she understood.

The whole point of the DBS sensitivity helpline is to help trans people remove details of their true sex, regardlessof GRC status. They can remove details of gender specific crimes, and use new name on past conviction.

This obviously is dangerous if the person passes, but equally, even in the person doesn't, it gives the imppression that they have transitioned longer than they have. Which might influence how people treat them.

It seems only you disagrees with the OP others have posted their support of the OP.

As I said you have made your stance very clear multiple times and it seems that you cannot brow beat the OP in to changing what she said so move on.

What does that mean? Please can we clarify

When male transexuals apply for a DBS certificate how many will have changed their name from their old male name to a more fluffy feminine name? In my experience it's 100% but as that is just anecdotal perhaps you can provide a more accurate figure.

Except that most married women have nothing to hide. Any trans woman with something to hide has a solution provided by the state - a brand new identity with no connection to the old one.

This IS significantly different from everyone else. All these other fraudsters you mention are having to diy a new ID. They could easily make a mistake.

I have adopted daughters. You would not believe how suddenly the DWP for example drops their old birth name in. Utterly inexplicable. Shouldn't happen etc. But it does because the old and new names are connected.

Only trans people can get the entirely new ID legally with no chance of a cock up by a gov dep.

Do you think that trans people have been told they can legally leave their old name off a DBS application and therefore hide a criminal past? Legally hide it form being checked?

Exactly! If my TW friend and I both had to show our BC for some reason, 'hers' would show that her name is Sarah Smith and always has been and that "she's" female.

Mine would show that my name is Karen Jones, which won't be the name on any of my other paperwork as I changed it by deed poll to Karen Carpenter. I'd also have to show my deed poll.

So if this were for the purposes of a DBS I couldn't pretend that I'd never changed my name. But Sarah could.

Not real names obv.