Does theDBS Sensitve Application Route for trans applicants undermines the value of a DBS check and pose a safeguarding issue

[IwantToRetire]

From a recent NHS job advert:

The Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) offers a confidential checking service for transgender applicants in accordance with the Gender Recognition Act 2004. This is known as the sensitive applications route, and is available for all levels of DBS check - basic, standard and enhanced.

The sensitive applications route gives transgender applicants the choice not to have any gender or name information disclosed on their DBS certificate that could reveal their previous identity. To contact the sensitive applications team, please telephone

https://www.nhsjobs.com/job/UK/North_Yorkshire/Scarborough/York_Scarborough_Teaching_Hospitals_NHS_Foundation_Trust/Physiotherapist/Physiotherapist-v6767892

Government Guidance
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/transgender-applications

KPSS wrote about this being a safeguarding issue 2 years ago
https://kpssinfo.org/dbs-checks-and-identity-verification-pdf/

Yes it's arrant bollocks and an enormous safeguarding risk.

So you mean, if I see something advertised as saying staff DBS checked, I shouldn't regard this as any guarantee of safety for me as a female thinking of using the service advertised?

Yes

Yes.

Though DBS only ever picked up those who had already been caught.

It's an appalling loophole and the refusal of the DBS to address this shows that yet another institution has been captured by the trans lobby at the expense of safeguarding children and the vulnerable.

It's completely indefensible.

Hang on, I’m pretty GC but can’t see the risk here. Isn’t this just saying the trans person will have to declare their previous name etc for the DBS check so they can perform a full check but the info on name won’t be given to the employer.

That doesn’t validate the check surely?

I'm with @Questionforthedons on this one. But a DBS is only ever good for picking up what is known about. Some offenders have spent years perfecting their 'craft' and only get caught when they get complacent.

DBS checks can disclose intelligence and not only convictions. It depends. But the loophole we are talking about here exists. You're relying on someone to be truthful. If everyone was always truthful, there'd be no need for a DBS system in the first place.

Surely anything that requires notification on a DBS check would have to be noted? It would only be a previous name/gender that would be withheld. Have I got that all wrong?

https://kpssinfo.org/dbs-checks-and-identity-verification-pdf/

Keep Prisons Single Sex wrote a 48 page report on this if anyone's interested.

And a summary here https://kpssinfo.org/dbs-checks-identity-verification/

Yes, convicted sex offenders just need to declare their previous name so their previous convictions can be found. Or they could just decide not to tell and then their employer won’t know about their paedophilic crimes and record of trying to gain employment which gives them access to children…

And @IwantToRetire raised an interesting point on the thread this came up on, which I'm not 100% sure of the answer to. Privacy is paramount in the "sensitive" process (which only applies to trans people, and does not require a GRC). Some crimes would identify a person as male, or strongly suggest it. Would they be disclosed, when the sex of the person was not?

DBS checks can disclose intelligence and not only convictions. It depends.

Yes that's also why "no crime hate incidents" aren't good because they are the type of info that can be disclosed.

It's the same check everybody gets. They just won't say they're trans.

This. Being trans is not after all a crime, and therefore not something which would be disclosed under a DBS check. Actual crimes would be.

Of course people can lie but anyone can lie, this is not some trans-specific loophole.

Yes

It seems this is more of a name change loophole. The form asks an applicant to declare all names. But if Mr James Nicely doesn't declare that he was previously convicted as Mr John Nasty, does the current system have any way to pick that up? Or are all name changes a potential opportunity to get a new clean DBS?

Shouldn't there be a database linking name changes. That way there would be no way of hiding past crimes from DBS checks.

How does John get a birth certificate naming him as James?

I think it can be assumed that you can't just change your name and hide previous convictions. That would be as ridiculously obvious as Kier Starmer's number 10 log in password being "Kierstarmer69!".

You don't have to give a birth certificate as one of your pieces of ID. Perfectly possible to only provide ID in current name. I do DBS checks for Girlguiding and most people don't use birth certificate IME

I think it can be assumed that you can't just change your name and hide previous convictions.

As said up thread, if the intent of the "sensitive route" is not to out someone with a GRC (or new identity based on a driving licence name) it would be in some instances, say where a prison sentence was served, or a type of crime, would be an identifier of born sex.

It would be great to hear from someone who had actually had to do a DBS check under the conditions of the "sensitve route". It maybe that in terms of what the employer is told, nothing of relevance would be ommitted and the outcome no different.

It isn't for me about someone trying to conceal they are trans, for employers and service users that a whole other issue which many have not worked out how to deal with.

For me it is an issue of fairness, does the very kind, considerate, "sensitve route" mean that people who are trans are treated / judged differently at the expense of the DBS being as truthful and accurate as one where this option is not used.

Yes it's a risk

Schools now must do wider checks of social media and news reports. An individual may not have broken the law but they may be highly inappropriate for a job working with children or vulnerable people.

There was also a case whereby a young woman had murdered a child in Spain. She was herself late teens so didn't serve very long. She moved to the U.K. and started working in a nursery. U.K. DBS was clear. Name came up in searches online - Spanish news reports.

I've often wondered why DBS and criminal records can't use something like your national insurance number to link name changes, rather than rekying on honesty