Did you do 'checks' on a new boyfriend? (Eg disclosure schemes)

[GreyCarpet]

I didn't.

I've had cause to check someone before (not someone I was dating) and work in a safeguarding role so I'm not oblivious but I'd known him for several years as a friend and wouldn't have dated him if I'd felt the need to check.

He asked me outright a couple of weeks ago if I had (we were discussing the case which brought about Claire's Law). I was a bit surprised by the question, tbh.

And he seemed quite surprised that I hadn't but accepted that I wouldn't have dated him if I'd thought I had any reason specifically to do so. He'd assumed I just would have done given the level of violence against women and children.

I just wondered if it was something many women did really.

No one, literally no one is “riled” at the existence of Clare’s law. Quite the opposite.

We are talking about the process

And I didn’t say the existence of Claire’s law.

I said at people, as in this thread, engaging in the process Claire’s law has created.

We are so fortunate that we’re able to take these steps. And I for one, will always be grateful for the chance to be able to do it.

But I had no concerns about my partner.

Anyone else asking who has no concerns about their partner is asking because they feel they need the security of a check - regardless of whether or not they are a rape victim.

Yes but you are the victim of a rape
and had a liaison officer
and the submission wasn’t made by you, it was made by your liaison officer

you clearly were very vulnerable and they agencies were concerned about you

Why and in what way am I very vulnerable?

You had very recently been the victim of a rape (the police and liaison officer were at your house presumably taking your statement, it was that recent) you were embarking on a new relationship

come on @Taztoy , you were vulnerable

No they were not there taking my statement.

I challenge the vulnerable every time by the way, it’s not just aimed at you. That is placing a label on me that I do not accept.

I was the victim of a crime. That doesn’t make me vulnerable per se.

I was vulnerable to a repeat when he was bailed, for example. But I was no longer vulnerable to that once he broke his bail conditions and came to my home and tried to do it again.

I am not saying you were vulnerable per se

I am saying that in the immediate aftermath of a rape, you were vulnerable

And again. I am telling you I don’t consent to you placing that label on me. And I’m surprised you keep pushing.

Heavens

I am not talking about vulnerable in the sense of the rapist attacking you again.

I am talking emotionally vulnerable.

Having a history of rape or domestic violence would be ‘just cause’ in this context.

And I am telling you I don’t consent to you putting that label on me. Please stop.

For both Sarah's Law and Claire's Law 'just wanting to know' is a valid reason for asking. That's the point.

If you have children and a new boyfriend, that is reason enough to make a request under Sarah's Law.

Equally, with Claire's Law, having started a relationship with someone but wanting to know before you invite them into your home to spend time alone with them would be reason to ask.

You can't just make requests about someone out of curiosity - eg a neighbour or a man in the pub or a random first date. You need to be in a position to safeguard someone else or protect yourself.

Realiatically, if you have a tangible reason to be concerned (eg something has been said or done) neither Law should be necessary because you would ordinarily use your own judgement to decide whether a person is safe or not. The schemes are not really there to validate your existing concerns.

If you make a request, a disclosure won't necessarily be made. If you make one on behalf of someone else then the disclosure will be made to them and not you as the person who made the request.

No one has suggested that every random first date be checked and you would be unlikely to have the information needed to make a request.

I really just wondered if some people do check. Thanks to those who've actually answered the question!

People have actually suggested that this is used as part of the dating screening process, yes. This is misinformation.

Exactly

It’s just cause.

it doesn’t mean I’m vulnerable.

There’s a difference.

Did you see the stats re how many do not meet the criteria for any response?

over half

In the year ending March 2020, 8,591 ‘right to know’ applications were applied for in England and Wales. 4479 (52%) applications resulted in disclosure.
In the year ending March 2020, 11,556 ‘right to ask’ applications were applied for in England and Wales. 4,236 (37%) applications resulted in disclosure.

Well I wouldn't just sit back and accept having a black mark against my name permanently when I'm totally innocent. Why haven't you contacted the police force involved in charging her, to tell them they've made a mistake and it's coming up as you as the perp?

It's not really relevant to the question I asked originally, though.

I only wondered how many women put in requests. Not how many disclosures were made.

I'm not even suggesting women should ask. I just wondered if it was something many women did. That's all.

The stats don't say why disclosures weren't made either.

Were the non disclosures because there was nothing to disclose or because the requests didn't meet the criteria for disclosure? Eg there was no lawful reason for that person to receive a disclosure.

Yes but as you can see, the thread evolved.

Of course any one can submit what ever they like any time to anything.

However as the stats show… whether or not you even get a response is another matter entirely (and by no response I don’t mean confirmation that nothing on record)

so they idea you can ask and receive information regarding a partner because you’re curious… is untrue

Have you ever discussed with a single family or friend whether or not they have done this OP?

There is a lot of confusion on here regarding the Clare's Law/DVDS scheme.

No red flags need to have occurred - you can still make the application whilst being treated like a queen. You need to either be in, or have been in an intimate relationship with the person.

This is the statutory guidance used by police forces throughout the UK. Take guidance from this rather than the information on this thread.

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6489ab97103ca6000c039ea0/Domestic_Violence_Disclosure_Scheme.pdf

You can ask for one all you like, the very guidance you have attached states you don’t automatically get one

following the initial checks conducted under step 1, the police decide that the disclosure application should continue, the person who made the application (either A or C) must, where possible, be seen either in person or using technology that enables a face-to-face meeting to take place at a time that is safe for them to do so. This is to ensure that the request is:

1. genuine and not malicious;
2. to establish further details about the application in order to further assess risk and to inform a decision around disclosure;

Decision on whether to progress Disclosure Application

1. The information gathered via the initial contact and intelligence checks (either face-to-face or via the online portal) inform both the initial assessment of risk and basis for safety planning for A and the basis of a decision on whether to progress the disclosure application. A form is at Annex D to assist this decision-making process.
2. In accordance with local police procedures, it will be for the police member of staff to:
3. make the decision on whether or not to progress the disclosure application following assessment of risk; and
4. determine how A or C will be contacted to progress the disclosure application, consistent with the preferred method agreed at the initial contact.

And having applied and got one I am pretty sure I know what I’m talking about