New report from KPSS on DBS checks where name & ‘gender’ are changed & the safeguarding loopholes that creates.

[GrumpyMenopausalWombWielder]

Link To Twitter Thread

Link To Report on KPSS Website

"Our new report, DBS Checks & Identity Verification: Safeguarding Loopholes Created by Changes of Identity is now on our website"

"We found that when individuals who have applied to work in roles where safeguarding applies submit identity documents for DBS checks that display a new identity, safeguarding loopholes are created because the applicant can sever the link with any existing records of offending. 2/"

"The result is that identity verification is compromised & there is no guarantee that the information returned during a DBS check & displayed on the certificate will be accurate or complete. 3/"

"The most wide-reaching loopholes are created where individuals change both their name and gender. This is because of the exceptional enhanced privacy rights the DBS grants to those who change gender.
4/"

"Any individual can easily, and for any reason, change their name and gender on documents commonly used to establish identity via a process of self-declaration. These documents, including passport & driving licence, can be presented for the purposes of a DBS check. 5/"

"Exceptional privacy rights allow an applicant who changed gender to withhold all their previous names from their DBS certificate. Disclosing previous identities is a key component of safeguarding and DBS certificates for other individuals display all other names used. 6/"

"Applicants who change their gender can also conceal their sex & the DBS certificate issued will display their acquired gender instead. The importance of sex to safeguarding means that for all other applicants, sex is always displayed. 7/"

"The current operation of the DBS regime means that organisations requesting DBS checks cannot have confidence in the information disclosed. We propose:

• Mandatory use of NI numbers for DBS checks & identity changes
• DBS certificates display sex registered at birth 8/"

"* DBS certificates display other names used for all applicants, including those who have changed gender as part of changing identity 9/"

"The rules of safeguarding must apply equally to everyone. Whenever the members of one group are excused from the normal requirements of safeguarding, a loophole is created that is ripe for exploitation. 10/"

"KPSS is the only organisation prepared to expose this. To date, the government is unwilling to acknowledge or address this. We will be pushing this at Tory Conference. Constituency contacts: we will be asking for your help. 11/11"

This is a really important report & a subject well worth discussion.

If you create a system where dbs checks don't apply to people in red t-shirts people with something to hide will put on a red t-shirt.

If you create a system where safeguarding rules don't apply to people in red t-shirts and predators can get easier access to their preferred victims by putting on a red t-shirt predators will put on a red t-shirt.

If you create a system where people in red t-shirts cannot be held accountable for voyeurism, voyeurs will put on red shirts.

If anyone interprets the any of the above as me hating red t-shirts it seems to me that they are being deliberately obtuse (or as they say so open minded your brain has fallen out).

This.

Bloody hell, I despair, did no-one honestly think of this :-(

Feminists have been raising this for years, but were fobbed off.

Under various usernames I've been banging on about this forever.
And so have many others. And every single time, transphobia came the answer.
Even if we said it's nothing to do with trans. The next answer was you are trans if you say you are so there.

Even some of us put it on the main boards instead of hidden away on fwr, the answers were the same. Its transphobic to gatekeep. Apparently.

I don't think this is new news. It's been a known issue for quite some time.

I think this is the first time that it's actually been confirmed so to speak. A number of women have attempted to get clarification about this with government officials twisting and turning, trying to avoid admitting that they watered down safeguarding measures in response to demands from the sacred caste.
Now it's evidenced and out in the open.
I hope that it's picked up by the msm and I hope (probably in vain) that the officials who oversaw this will be held to account for such an appalling breach of safeguarding that yet again, allows predators to access children in plain sight. they won't be held to account - nobody ever is it seems.

So as things currently stand, a trans person working in a school will quite likely not have been subject to the same criminal records checks as other staff, is this correct?

And @WarriorN did you mean that a criminal record from abroad doesn't appear on a UK dbs check, or a criminal record acquired as a minor?

Yes it is quite possible that rigorous checks have not been done for certain people.
We have pointed this out for years here, as others have said. No one should be able to have a new birth certificate and then cover up their actual sex. However name changes can be used if someone is at risk due to being a witness, for example.

Thanks everyone!
We read through the previous MN threads on this - these were really helpful.

To clarify:

The DBS Sensitive Applications Route is available to ANYONE who changes gender - no GRC required. If an individual does through the SAR, the DBS will collude in hiding previously used names by not disclosing these on the DBS certificate issued. All other individuals MUST have their previously used names displayed on the certificate. DBS will also agree to hide your sex, by displaying your acquired gender instead. For all other applicants, sex is displayed.

Organisations applying for DBS checks are not entitled to know whether an individual has used the SAR.

The safeguarding loopholes operate in exactly the same way for self ID as they do for GRC.

At this stage in the game, there is little that comes as a real shock any more. But this did. It's like nothing has been learned from Soham.

No one is willing to touch this. One of our team who worked on this report tried for a entire year to get safeguarding organisations and the parliamentarians who had taken up safeguarding to look at this. None of them would. So we did.

Thank you very much KeepPrisonsSingleSex.
I presume politicians and government officials are aware that even in the days where prioritising the demands of one protected characteristic over others is considered normal, removing safeguarding requirements from one group of adults to allow them access to children without the checks that the rest of us must have is a step too far in terms of defending it?

I wasn't aware you could self ID with passports and driving licence in order to change name and gender. This is shocking, I'm in disbelief. Please tell me it isn't true:
"Any individual can easily, and for any reason, change their name and gender on documents commonly used to establish identity via a process of self-declaration. These documents, including passport & driving licence, can be presented for the purposes of a DBS check."

Exactly.

Safeguarding applies to everyone.

Yes it's true. I can't remember if it was one of the Man Friday women who changed their driving license on a Tuesday, and then changed it back the following week.

@KeepPrisonsSingleSex are you looking into the processes of Disclosure Scotland too? They only ask about gender identity on the form, not sex or gender, so the answer to it is totally useless. Red flag to me that they are not doing the right thing either.

No one is willing to touch this. One of our team who worked on this report tried for a entire year to get safeguarding organisations and the parliamentarians who had taken up safeguarding to look at this. None of them would. So we did.

This is damning.

That's for doing the work KPSS. And thanks to all the people who contributed. One in particular I'm a huge admirer of. She knows who she is 😉

@KeepPrisonsSingleSex thank you.

Yes it's true. I can't remember if it was one of the Man Friday women who changed their driving license on a Tuesday, and then changed it back the following week.

Yes it was:

https://manfridayuk.org/2018/04/20/self-id-and-driving-licences/

I’m still a little shocked at how easy it was. DVLA could have rejected my application on several points by saying it was a sex or even a legal gender category, but they didn’t. No questions asked, no querying of my female title, no paperwork required, no proof of transition, no doctor’s letter. Nothing.

It’s official, the male/female category on your driving licence does not reflect your biological sex, but your gender identity. I hope you have one.

For fucks sake, we were pointing this out here years ago.

Will the bloody civil service please join bloody MN since apparently they could really bloody do with the help in basic common sense.

@KeepPrisonsSingleSex thank you for all your work on this.

we are also big fans of She Knows Who She is!!!

The DBS system is flawed in any case and there is currently a review on going not linked with transgender matters.

The use of NI is key and this is asked for in any case on applications.

Potentially there is going to be ID verification digitally so need to produce certain documents for majority of applications. If you have a UK driving licence or passport and use Government Gateway it's all linked to NI anyway.

There is too much emphasis on rights of individuals and not enough on rights of the vulnerable that the process is there to protect.

Digital identities are a big concern for us. In our view they both perpetuate the existing safeguarding loopholes and create their own risks:

Digital identities simply replicate the existing problems by transferring them to the digital realm. So if you have already changed your passport on basis of self ID, you can create a digital identity from that document which will also hide your sex. The digital attributes have to come from somewhere, and they come from existing documentation - we know that is already compromised.

The policy docs on digital identity state that the existing privacy rights given to those who change gender will extend to digital identities - so they are all set to simply continue with the (shoddy) status quo.

Lastly, digital identities crate their own risk by creating distance between the individual and the organisation that needs to verify your identity. Enhancing 'the customer experience' in a key theme with digital identities. So make the process 'easier' you can share your digital identity remotely and this is then verified through a third party.

So for a DBS check, you be sat in your house, submit your digital identity from your mobile phone, it will go off to a third party who will then communicate the verification decision to the organisation that has requested the DBS check.

In person identity verification acts as its own safeguard: having the individual present their physical documents in person provides those with responsibility for safeguarding with the opportunity to ask questions of and about that individual. But by creating distance between the individual and the organisation with professional responsibility for safeguarding, this is removed.

I cannot stress enough how concerned we are.

(There's a whole section in the report with full references.)

we are also big fans of She Knows Who She is!!!

It sounds like everyone should be hope she is reading!

Yes, one or more of the man Friday crew did it. Far as I know she/they/he could still be male on her driving licence.

And man Friday was eons ago.

NI number is under utilised in DBS checks and there is no requirement to submit it for a DBS check. NI number is only checked if police records bring up a name that is a very close, but not exact, match for the individual and they need to confirm or rule out.

We tested all this by getting an enhanced with children's list check done for one of us - screenshots are in the report.