Do people actually believe that trans people have a legal right to only DBS check their new identity?

I don't think some posters appreciate the amount of background checking that happens when employing someone to work with vulnerable children. DBS is part of it but there's a huge amount more to it.

Because these arseholes can and will use every trick in the book.

DBS getting in the way of these very important checks by withholding a person's name is frankly outrageous.

I'm afraid I am not going to be taking the word of someone who has openly lied on another thread and been caught out. Anyone can claim to be anything here. I for example run the Supreme Court on Tuesdays, and on Thursdays I dust the Tower of London ravens, hence the user name.

OP you would do better to thoroughly check your facts on a range of reputable sources, and be aware that activist ones may contain significantly distorted views and beliefs as well as intentional misleading towards political ends. I believe this loophole has been discussed at high level.

I had practice on the other thread 🤣.

I like your example.

Of course not. Apparently Ian Huntley went by several names and that's how he evaded police checks which enabled him to work in a school. Very dangerous.

Cross posted with this, yes thats exactly the sort of thing I meant, summarised way briefer

Just a minute - as I understand it, leaving off the old name on the final certificate is a pretty significant difference, if that only an option for trans people.

Take teaching for example. When you hire a teacher, you do a DBS check but you also do a general vetting check of that person's online presence. For example you might choose not to hire someone as a teacher if they had a public sexual-themed tiktok channel or very extreme political YouTube channel etc etc. When you get the DBS certificate, if it says previous names, you can check all that too.

As per the other thread, DBS not sharing previous name prevents an employer doing their own checks. Checks required by Ofsted, for example.

This is the problem. It's not just about convictions.

This is another thread title which make some kind of controversial statement and in this case it's a topic that has been covered at length in another thread.

There's a 'marking their territory' vibe about a lot of these threads.

Also a man who likes to intimidate actual lesbians at Pride in an attempt to make them include males as sexual partners.

In a thread about safeguarding, the red flags are strong for this one.

And 'sponsored by mumsnet' - just laughable. The very idea that women are allowed to talk, right?!

You are responding to a man who teaches his kids about kink and bondage so I'd take what he says with a lorryload of salt.

It’s pretty obvious when a bloke in a dress is in a women’s space he doesn’t belong. Pretty obvious when Lia Thomas is taking medals scholarships and opportunities away from young women, as well as inhabiting the space they need to wrangle their way into extremely awkward competition swimwear.

It was also disgustingly obvious when a trans identifying man in my city took to trying on women’s wear inappropriate clothing department stores, photographing his boner as he went.

Sometimes there’s little need for subtlety.

You are welcome.

And as a bit of a sneak peak, pretty much every other "trans fear" is based on similar level of complete nonsense, sponsored by mumsnet et al, just most of those are not as obvious.

I've done dbs and security vetting going quite deep that rabbit hole, and... No, that's not how any of this works. That's why all the checks have route where you can handle disclosures privately and safely.

And without going into details, just withholding your past name, assuming you legally changed it and not just for casual day-to-day acronym, is not going to sever the link.

It's just tons of people who do not know what they are talking about claiming to be experts so it supports their "trans people are doing it to hide crimes" latest made up hate-trigger.

What’s important to me is that someone’s biological sex is shown on all official documentation, this should not allowed to be changed. I think the GRC allowing this should be reversed. In the event that someone is now ‘Bev’ when they were ‘Brian’ then this should prompt a name change note too.