How does it even affect you? Just be kind.

It’s such a silly, vapid, thought terminating cliche and I instantly know that I’m either talking to someone very sexist or who hasn’t given the matter a great deal of thought.

AFAIK an individual cannot apply for an Enhanced DBS certificate. It has to be applied for by the organisation that the individual is going to work/volunteer for. So the individual must give all their previous names to the sponsoring organisation that they would like work/volunteer for. Perhaps I missed something?

I wonder what would happen if a trans identifying man* applied for a DBS stating they were female and the person filling in the form didn't believe them and asked for all other names?
On a personal level, it's pretty hard to say to Debbie in front of you "that's not your real name", though a medic friend did tell me about some elderly patients who kept asking a nurse "why did your parents call you Mary? That's a funny name for a bloke. What were they thinking?".
But at an organisational level, even if the applicant revealed to the volunteer doing the DBS that they had a GRC, if they said "and it's a criminal offence to tell anyone about it" to the volunteer, the volunteer wouldn't know that they were allowed to pass on the fact that this person identifies as trans and has more than one name - they are unlikely to be that clued up on it.
Plus, of course, if the applicant was large and male and the volunteer small and female they may find the applicant intimidating.

I applied for a DBS using Ms (I don't use Dr socially) and was told I had to confirm I had no previous names, because I hadn't ticked the paper box saying "here are my previous names". But that was when it was on paper.
The youth leader processing it was a bit confused about this and I think if I'd put "Mrs" they would have worked out I needed to include previous names and it wouldn't have been sent back.

*I hope I'm allowed to use this now - I'm aware that not all trans identifying men identify as women, though for UK official documents it has to be one or the other.

Why do I care? Because I find lying abhorrent, and the whole concept of 'trans' is built on lies and deceit. I don't have any issue with people presenting themselves in the way that they want and living their lives, but I do object when I'm forced to pretend that a man is actually a woman, when I know that they are not.

I don't want to lie. I don't want my kids to be told that they've got to lie too, just to be kind.

It's not possible for non-transexuals to obtain a new "unique" GMC even if they change their name. Your GMC number is yours for life unless you are one of the sacred caste.

So any criminal can get around it and apply for a DBS without revealing a birth name.

Again, this is not a trans issue. It is a DBS shitty system issue.

Trans people fill out the same form as everyone else and the form guidance is clear; they must include all their names. The transgender sensitivity phone line just allows them to call up and ensure their name isn’t given to their employer. It doesn’t give them special rights to avoid the criminal record check.

The issue is that it is possible to cheat the checks with a name change… for anyone, trans or not. Literally every person in this country has the same option of changing their name and trying to cheat on the form. And DBS probably wouldn’t notice. But it is illegal, and it’s illegal for trans people just like everyone else. OP is claiming that trans people have a legal right to leave their old names off. They don’t.

I know that - the KPSS document suggests that this should always be necessary, even if it's an adjunct document (like mine would be as it wasn't issued within a short enough time after birth).

It's not true, that anyone can 'have' a sex other than their sex at birth (unless they have a very rare DSD requiring medical treatment and/or correction of their birth registration).

Less than 20% of British people believe that it is true.

(I'm basing this on the social attitudes survey response to questions about transwomen using women-only spaces, and the issuance of birth certificates with an altered sex marker.)

Despite this, it is taught, and enforced, as a true fact, which is wrong, and would still be wrong, in a secular society, even if far more people believed it.

The bad consequences fall mostly on women and children, because they are more physically and socially vulnerable than men.

Apart from data integrity, safeguarding, freedom of speech, and sex-based rights, everyone should surely be worried about children being given irreversible unapproved medical treatments.

You don’t need to provide a birth certificate for a DBS check at all. If you have a passport, driving license and marriages certified showing your name then you don’t need the birth certificate.

They are the only group allowed to change their birth certificates.

Adopted people have a new short form birth certificate (states name and date of birth but not parentage) but they do not change it themselves and it's always changed while they are under 18.

Everyone else has to produce an original birth certificate (or adoption certificate) which is bound to have their original name on it. The document by KPSS linked to reminds you of the fact that sex offenders can change their name and aren't likely to notify authorities, but their birth certificate will still be in their original name - so this will link up offences with the person.
But a person with a GRC won't have their original name (or gender) on their new BC.

I (or probably my mum, thanks mum) lost my birth certificate so mine isn't issued within however may months of birth. So I have to produce something else when applying for a DBS. We can't get round people losing their BCs or indeed adopted people's BCs being issued later in childhood.
But we CAN get round people getting a whole new BC with a new name in adulthood.

The problem is there shouldn't be a "confidential checking service for transgender applicants in accordance with the Gender Recognition Act 2004" via the DBS.

If you want to work with children then there should be no exceptions. Knowing someone's sex is important in schools. All adults may suddenly be in a position where going onto toilets, supervising groups changing is required. An adult who's deliberately concealed their birth sex from a school or organisation working with children may (not always) be compromising the privacy, dignity or safety of children.

This all happened because of the stranglehold that the trans lobby groups have on all our institutions. The fact that, despite repeated challenge about this loophole, the DBS has failed to resolve it speaks to the power of the trans lobby to undermine even measures to ensure safeguarding children.

All the DBS had to do was tweak their guidance to ensure that this exceptional "sensitive" route still means that trans applicants are legally required (they MUST) disclose all their previous identities. No exceptions. No forgetting.

The fact they've failed to do this small thing just highlights how powerful the trans lobby is in the civil service. It's not safeguarding children that's the priority, it's pandering to the demands of the trans lobby that their demands are more important.

Oh, absolutely. I’m not on the trans side of the debate if there has to be sides. I’m very much on the “protect women’s spaces and rights” side.

But it’s very important to me that my “side” doesn’t spread misinformation.

Plenty of posters have highlighted actual real problems with the system of allowing a change of sex, especially on birth certificates. There are hundreds of real problems.

My actual issue is that the OP has claimed that trans people are the only group who are legally entitled to leave their old names off their DBS application. This is 100% false. She is spreading misinformation.

There are plenty of issues with DBS and what is disclosed, there are plenty of issues with concealing someone’s real sex. But OP isn’t talking about those. She has made something up.

Any person (and any criminal) can change their name and try to get around DBS. Trans people do not have a legal right to do it, so declaring yourself trans does not give criminals a legal loophole. It would be fraud for anyone to leave a bake off the form.

To answer @Shedmistress ‘s original question: like many women, I have been sexually assaulted more than once and have also survived other male violence, not unscathed.

Men violating the few spaces that are meant to be for women only are very unlikely to do so for harmless reasons.

I am especially cautious of a man standing between me and the exit, or trying to manoeuvre me into a confined space.

Being hypervigilant is tiring and distressing. I object to male thrill-seekers forcing it on me.

Yes, exactly. It is a huge issue. In the DBS system.

But a criminal called John Smith and change his name to Jack Smythe and fill in the DBS as Jack Smythe, with no mention of John Smith and possibly get away with it. It’s not a special thing for trans people only. Anyone can, and criminals have been doing this for a long long time.

It’s DBS issue. Not a trans issue.

There isn’t… for anyone. At all.

Anyone who has changed their name has the same option to commit this fraud. And a hell of a lot more “cis” people (I do not agree with that word) have changed their names that trans people have.

Anyone at all can change their name and attempt to cheat on a DBS. Anyone. Nothing to do with just trans people getting special treatment. That is what the OP is claiming.

@TruthOrAlethiometer trans people would be the only people whose employer cannot know their sex (theoretically).

That has safeguarding implications. In a situation where same sex care was needed, an employer would not be able to enforce that if a DBS and a new birth certificate had been issued. That’s a massive invasion of the privacy and dignity of all those receiving care, and a safeguarding risk.

Literally all the guidance on how to fill in the form. I’ve done loads of them. It’s quite clear. You must give all your names.

The transgender sensitivity simple means that they won’t tell your employer your old name when they issue the certificate, but crimes will still show up.

Trans people have no more rights than anyone else when filling out a DBS check. If they miss a name off then it is fraud.

Anyone who changes their name can commit that fraud, if they choose to. Trans people can commit that fraud, I’m sure some do. Just like people who are not trans also commit that fraud.

Not a trans issue. It’s a shitty DBS system issue.

tell you what: you show us where there is an official mechanism to ensure that all previous names have been entered on the application. That might be quicker.

Not DBS but the SPS are a bit shite at tracking convicted criminals who've changed their name/gender -

https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/politics/new-snp-shame-trans-killer-35401766

A trans id’d doctor’s disciplinary record does not get attached to their new name, should they change it. I don’t know if that applies only to trans people, or whether anyone else is allowed to change their name and erase their disciplinary history if they want to.

Omg. You don’t understand what that is!
The transgender application route is just so they know that their old male and gender won’t be given to their employer. And yes, anyone could ask for that. So?

It has no affect on the application. All that happens is their old name is not revealed to their employer. So what? Should I go tell my employer my maiden name from years ago? They don’t need it.

You’ve completely misunderstood what the transgender application means. They do not have permission to leave their old names off. If they do, then it is fraud like anyone else who does that. All that happens is that their old name is not given to their employer. That’s it. That’s the difference. Who give a shit?

Point me to exactly where it says that trans people have the legal right to leave their old names off their DBS application, while everyone else who has changed their name is legally required to include theirs?

This isn’t about whether or not it is possible. We all know it is, and has been for a long time. But it doesn’t require a change in gender. Criminals have changed their names (whilst remaining the same gender) and cheated on their DBS forms. It happens. It’s not allowed, but they do it.
It’s also not allowed for trans people, they may do it but it’s not allowed.

My point is - the OP claims that trans people are the only group of people who are actually legally allowed to fill out a DBS check and not include their old names, so they can do this and it wouldn’t be fraud. That is not true. They are not allowed to. It isn’t a legal right they have.