Doing checks too early is putting me off

[keyser]

So, I have started dating this lovely woman, 2 dates within 1 month and she has request personal information etc to do Clare's law(she asked for personal information, address history), sexual test(share results etc)

I do like her obviously, we talk daily, but I do not feel comfortable to do all these things just after 1 month, I am not even sure yet if we are an item yet, if we will be sexually compatible etc. She has never been abused or anything so no trauma that I would assume is triggering her.

I get it is for security but am I silly for feeling this way? She has a kid but i have not even suggested to meet the child or go to her house etc.

For context, I am in the military, I have a clean record, never been arrested or stopped for a single things in my 40 years on earth. I am not hiding anything, I just feel like she is jumping too ahead and it is putting me off sending someone my address history etc. I do not even know her child's name as she has only told me his nickname and I do not wish to ask until she feels like she can tell me

Claire's Law isn't just a criminal record check - the police can tell you if someone has merely had certain allegations made about them, even if they were never charged or convicted of anything, or if they've had concerns raised about them through other agencies. You couldn't get that from Googling them, or even from a copy of their criminal record. So it wouldn't really serve the same purpose.

I completely agree that Claire's Law shouldn't be used in the way the OP's date wants to use it, though!

This is absolutely something i recommend, google someone first , she actually did, as i have a limited company and she can see my full name and year of birth. Obviously it means nothing much to what she wants to find out but it is enough for me after 4 weeks of talking to a random person off the internet.

"men like OP would have no reason to be nervous "

1. Why assume it is just men who have checks done on them?
2. Where did you get the hint that I am nervous? Nervous to hand over my personal history to a person i just met off the internet?

General Data Protection Regulation is unequivocally important in the world of scammers / fraud / honey traps etc. watch a documentary or two, you will understand why not exposing yourself to random people you meet off the streets or online is important.

It’s difficult because I get where she’s coming from. But I would also be reluctant to provide loads of personal info and address history to someone I’d only met twice.

The sexual health test - fine. It can take a little while to get an appointment, then to get the results. You don’t want to wait to bring it up at the point you’re about to have sex. But again, I think if someone asked me for that after date 2, I’d maybe think they were a bit presumptuous

I didn't think the police had to comply with every Clare's Law request, and they don't:

Police can refuse a Clare's Law request because they must satisfy several tests before disclosing information, including ensuring the request is not malicious, there is a pressing need for the disclosure, and it's necessary to protect a person from being a victim of crime. Police must also balance the need for disclosure against the subject's rights, and any decision to disclose is made on a case-by-case basis.

In fact, there is concern that they're refusing too many requests. This is obviously bad. Bad but understandable, if loads of women are submitting requests with no current cause for concern!

At some point, you have to bite the bullet and use your own judgement. (Even if that means checking out of dating altogether, as many women are.)

Agreed. I'd be cautious about handing over my previous addresses (with dates, presumably) because that information yields a lot more, including credit scoring and similar.

It should be said, though, that fairly comprehensive background checks are investigative agencies' bread and butter. I don't know how much they charge these days, but I'm guessing it's not much more than a dinner for two somewhere nice or a decent coat.

Wow, people thinking that's not too much are seriously weird. Dating someone will always involve some risk and if she's being so heavy handed by now, I'd be wondering if she can deal with the normal uncertainties of life. She sounds very anxious.
(And by "risks" I mean the normal ones: being disappointed, having a broken heart, etc. We avoid risks by moving slowly, and it looks like she doesn't know that)

This is incorrect.

You do not need to have a suspicion that the person may be a domestic abuse perpetrator to apply.

You will need to meet the criteria of the Clare's Law (DVDS) scheme, but there does not have to be a suspicion of any type of violence/domestic abuse.

In this case the OPs date is clearly jumping the gun, however just because there are no red flags present doesn't mean that someone cannot apply.

I wouldn't pursue this OP. The talk of Clare's Law and STD checks after 2 cups of coffee would be a red flag for me.

I can understand why she would want to know.
She is probably aware that violance against women has never been so high, so she is going to want to know who she is emotionally investing in.

I can understand why you think this is premature.
For a guy it probably feels intrusive. Even if you have the cleanest of all records. Its intrusive. If you have nothing to hide, then Claire's law check is there for a reason. Not your fault obviously, but if you had a daughter, or a sister, would you say to her no wait a few months till you are so emotionally invested that whatever the records say, they risk staying in an abusive situation?

But I understand you as well. It feels intrusive and premature, but for women, its vital information to keep themselves safe, and their DC.

They aren’t even close to having sec yet and don’t you think there is a chance someone wanting your personal info including previous addresses at this early stage might be actually fraudster?

I work in an industry where financial crime is rife and see ever increasingly sophisticated scammers. Anyone who thinks it’s normal or acceptable to gd giving this level of detail to a virtual stranger honestly needs their head testing - there is ZERO need to ever give your previous addresses or work details to someone you’re dating briefly. You might as well just hand over your passport and debit card while you’re there.

That law is for people who have legitimate concerns, it's NOT a dating filter.

If people with your level of thinking keep abusing the system with inappropriate requests, the system will be removed.

I think I'd find it refreshing that she's up front from the off. But if that's not how you feel then it's not how you feel.

Again, my issue isn't about people knowing for the sake of not wasting /wasting time! It's about how soon, you cannot just meet people off the internet and in a month you get comfortable to hand over your personal history and information(WOULD YOU?) . I barely know enough about her to not know if she is a scammer(i doubt she is but you cannot read people just like that).

"It feels intrusive and premature, but for women, its vital information to keep themselves safe, and their DC"
Not sure if you are suggesting that it is vital only because she is a woman and has a DC. Men do have the same right to disclosure of such nature and do face abuse too(not equally or even near of course) but in this context it is important to note. I was abused (physically, verbally, financially years ago by my DC's mother) but her record is clean so she will never be regarded as one if someone was to do checks on her; some if not most, have a clean record. I do have a DC myself also who i protect but I am not thinking of getting personal details off each woman i meet online and not even getting into a relationship with after 3/4 weeks.

Fuck that. Throw her back in the sea and keep looking.

I think it's way way too early to demand a Clare's law check. If she really liked you and she wanted to get "serious" I understand but after two dates wtf! Unless you're sending out red flags nonstop but in that case why even bother after two dates?

Exactly this.

Let’s just reverse this for a moment:
“I (23 F 😉) started talking to a guy on the internet a month ago. We’ve been on two dates that have been nice. Well, last night he asked me for my full address and address history to run a background check on me, which I was a bit uncomfortable with. I should also mention that I have a DC who lives with me at my address part time, so it’s not just my home that I’d be giving out the details for.
He then asked me to have a full STI screening and that I share the results with him, which although is sensible before a new sexual partner I thought was too soon as I have literally seen the guy twice and only in public date spots. Sex isn’t even on the table yet and I’m not sure if/when it even would be.
AIBU to refuse this man’s request to divulge my address history where I live with my child and consent to these medical tests?”

If that’s how she dates and operates, good for her. But it’s clearly not how you do (and I don’t blame you…) so you aren’t compatible. Cut your losses now and throw her back. You’ll both meet someone more your tempo eventually, but it’s not worth forcing something that already doesn’t feel right.

This:

“Crunchymum · Today 15:01

As far as I am aware you cannot request a Clare's Law disclosure "just" to check out a new partner? I thought there had to be some grounds?
And I am also pretty sure you aren't allowed to tell the person you are asking for a disclosure under Clare's Law about them?”

I really don’t think Clare’s Law is intended for checking all new men. I also think it’s really unwise to disclose that you’re doing a check as that could make a dangerous man more dangerous.

@keyser - I wouldn’t like this either.

As to STI checks, that is fair enough as and when condom-free sex is on the cards. That said, i came of age in the mid-80s when HIV infection was a death sentence. All sensible people used condoms in new relationships. It wasn’t up for discussion.

I understand a STD test if you’re planning on sleeping together, but not Claire’s law, it’s there to confirm any suspicions and red flag behaviour, if you’re already in a relationship not a dating filter. Perhaps if she continues be lovely and you end up in a relationship, however it sounds like she’s got some deeper issues going on, I’d walk away.

Agree, she’s gone in way too heavy way too soon. I wouldn’t be handing over my details to be thoroughly investigated by someone I wasn’t even sure about myself yet.

Exactly.This random woman is wanting his name address and date of birth.

Hell no. I wouldn't hand those personal details out to a stranger after two dates

I think an STI check is sensible. I can understand why some women may wish to carry out a Claire's Law check when starting a relationship, and in some cases doing so is a brilliant idea. However, I would be cautious about sharing personal information with someone you don't really know.

Is this really a thing? Why not just use condoms? I have never supplied an STD test to anyone. The Clare’s Law thing is too intrusive so I wouldn’t entertain it, if I were you.

What next? Women bringing a chaperone to a date? Feels like we’re going backwards, frankly.

How long before we get the dating equivalent of a pre sale housing survey?

I think an equivalent would be a man asking to perform a credit check on you and then making enquiries with social services to see if you’d ever been investigated re: the care of your children. It makes sense potentially to someone you’re considering as a partner and most of us wouldn’t have any issues pop up but it still feels very intrusive and a bit insulting.