How does it even affect you? Just be kind.

[Shedmistress]

We all get this endlessly from every angle. Why do you care?
Why can't you just let this vulnerable group quietly get on with their lives?
It's just a tiny minority so go do something better with your day...

So I thought it would be a good idea to have a thread of 'ways it affects other people' and the effects of losing all logic, reason, sense of reality, and how health, safety and welfare are thrown out of the window the moment the word 'trans' is mentioned.

Please feel free to add your own with a link to what you are talking about. Especially documents relating to policy and processes that are wide open to abuse.

I have cross posted I see!

The more the merrier though.

Yes, I know the guidance well. That’s not what it says. Not at all. You are quite literally making it up.

Trans people are not allowed to leave their names off. No where does it say that. They are not allowed.

There are plenty of other issues around identify changes and altering birth certificates which are hugely problematic. Talk about those. But this? You’re making this up. Trans people have not been given permission to leave their old names off their DBS application.

I think what you’ve misunderstood is that their old names are left off the disclosure certificate. That means when their employer is shown the certificate, it will not list their old names. They must still put their old names on the application (and can speak to the sensitive team for help around this like anyone can) but their old names will not be told to their employer.

Again... very slowly... read the link the OP posted....

Sorry, no you do not HAVE to give your former names.

The guidance says you 'should'. There is no check to previous names and it is well known that the police have lost track of people who have changed their names and who have been previously been convicted of crimes that they should [that should word again] have been tracking. It is absolute chaos. See pic attached.

If you are asked to complete a DBS check and have a previous identity that you do not wish to be disclosed to your employer and/or on your DBS certificate, you should call or email the dedicated sensitive applications team before submitting your application. The team is experienced in dealing with sensitive cases and will advise you of the process and what you need to do.

There is NOTHING stopping a convicted paedophile from changing their name, under the guise of 'trans' as there is no definition of 'trans' and just putting their shiny new name on the application. The checking is done against that name and not any other name.

That’s not what the OP is saying. And she has actually posted again, still arguing that she is correct in what she thinks.

She thinks they are allowed to fill in the DBS check form without including their past names. They are not.

Anything that affects women as a class affects me.

But that’s not a trans issue. They don’t have to change their name from a male name to a female name. They can just change it to a different male name and carry on being a man.

The issue with DBS checks being badly designed applies to anyone who has changed their name at all, and decided not to give their past names. It has nothing at all to do with trans people.

Trans people are not allowed to do it, which you said they are.
Trans people could, if they want to commit fraud, just the same as any person who has changed their name and chooses not to include their past names.

This is a DBS issue, not a trans issue. And it has been an issue for a long time with criminals changing their name… no need for a change of gender.

OP i said "Should" and if you read my post you will also see that i wrote that there is no mechanism to force anyone to do so

@TruthOrAlethiometer this is a conversation. Several people posted the same information at the same time pointing out that there is no way to force people to actually comply with the requirement to give their former names. Additionally if you have changed your birth certificate (afaik only people with a GRA - ie trans - can do that)

So accept (for the love of bod) that the issue has now been clarified, and indeed trans people cannot actually be forced to disclose anything and that there is no compulsion to comply, and that nobody at all has the power to force anyone to do so. "anyone" would include those with a trans identity who have an extra layer of obfuscation if they have a GRA.

ETA: and let's not forget that it is easy as pie to get a GRA now (or have i missed something there)

Because I use WOMEN'S lavatories, WOMEN'S changing rooms and occasionally am in a WOMEN'S ward in hospital. I don't want some bloke in these spaces, just because he's wearing frock and lipstick. He can use the men's facilities.

Superb. Says it all, clearly and reasonably. There’s no excuse for any sane adult pretending not to understand.

It does appear to be a trans issue, according to the title of the guidance.

The Transgender Applications Route is available to anyone, because there is no definition of Trans, that's the point.

Opening up a loophole for special people that ANYONE can exploit is the problem.

Point me to exactly where it says that trans people have the legal right to leave their old names off their DBS application, while everyone else who has changed their name is legally required to include theirs?

This isn’t about whether or not it is possible. We all know it is, and has been for a long time. But it doesn’t require a change in gender. Criminals have changed their names (whilst remaining the same gender) and cheated on their DBS forms. It happens. It’s not allowed, but they do it.
It’s also not allowed for trans people, they may do it but it’s not allowed.

My point is - the OP claims that trans people are the only group of people who are actually legally allowed to fill out a DBS check and not include their old names, so they can do this and it wouldn’t be fraud. That is not true. They are not allowed to. It isn’t a legal right they have.

Point me to anything in the guidance that confirms that all people filling a DBS form in will do so and HAVE to declare all their previous names and addresses.

Omg. You don’t understand what that is!
The transgender application route is just so they know that their old male and gender won’t be given to their employer. And yes, anyone could ask for that. So?

It has no affect on the application. All that happens is their old name is not revealed to their employer. So what? Should I go tell my employer my maiden name from years ago? They don’t need it.

You’ve completely misunderstood what the transgender application means. They do not have permission to leave their old names off. If they do, then it is fraud like anyone else who does that. All that happens is that their old name is not given to their employer. That’s it. That’s the difference. Who give a shit?

A trans id’d doctor’s disciplinary record does not get attached to their new name, should they change it. I don’t know if that applies only to trans people, or whether anyone else is allowed to change their name and erase their disciplinary history if they want to.

Not DBS but the SPS are a bit shite at tracking convicted criminals who've changed their name/gender -

https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/politics/new-snp-shame-trans-killer-35401766

tell you what: you show us where there is an official mechanism to ensure that all previous names have been entered on the application. That might be quicker.

Literally all the guidance on how to fill in the form. I’ve done loads of them. It’s quite clear. You must give all your names.

The transgender sensitivity simple means that they won’t tell your employer your old name when they issue the certificate, but crimes will still show up.

Trans people have no more rights than anyone else when filling out a DBS check. If they miss a name off then it is fraud.

Anyone who changes their name can commit that fraud, if they choose to. Trans people can commit that fraud, I’m sure some do. Just like people who are not trans also commit that fraud.

Not a trans issue. It’s a shitty DBS system issue.

Yeah, ex criminals are really concerned about not committing fraud.

@TruthOrAlethiometer trans people would be the only people whose employer cannot know their sex (theoretically).

That has safeguarding implications. In a situation where same sex care was needed, an employer would not be able to enforce that if a DBS and a new birth certificate had been issued. That’s a massive invasion of the privacy and dignity of all those receiving care, and a safeguarding risk.

There isn’t… for anyone. At all.

Anyone who has changed their name has the same option to commit this fraud. And a hell of a lot more “cis” people (I do not agree with that word) have changed their names that trans people have.

Anyone at all can change their name and attempt to cheat on a DBS. Anyone. Nothing to do with just trans people getting special treatment. That is what the OP is claiming.

Yes, exactly. It is a huge issue. In the DBS system.

But a criminal called John Smith and change his name to Jack Smythe and fill in the DBS as Jack Smythe, with no mention of John Smith and possibly get away with it. It’s not a special thing for trans people only. Anyone can, and criminals have been doing this for a long long time.

It’s DBS issue. Not a trans issue.

To answer @Shedmistress ‘s original question: like many women, I have been sexually assaulted more than once and have also survived other male violence, not unscathed.

Men violating the few spaces that are meant to be for women only are very unlikely to do so for harmless reasons.

I am especially cautious of a man standing between me and the exit, or trying to manoeuvre me into a confined space.

Being hypervigilant is tiring and distressing. I object to male thrill-seekers forcing it on me.

Oh, absolutely. I’m not on the trans side of the debate if there has to be sides. I’m very much on the “protect women’s spaces and rights” side.

But it’s very important to me that my “side” doesn’t spread misinformation.

Plenty of posters have highlighted actual real problems with the system of allowing a change of sex, especially on birth certificates. There are hundreds of real problems.

My actual issue is that the OP has claimed that trans people are the only group who are legally entitled to leave their old names off their DBS application. This is 100% false. She is spreading misinformation.

There are plenty of issues with DBS and what is disclosed, there are plenty of issues with concealing someone’s real sex. But OP isn’t talking about those. She has made something up.

Any person (and any criminal) can change their name and try to get around DBS. Trans people do not have a legal right to do it, so declaring yourself trans does not give criminals a legal loophole. It would be fraud for anyone to leave a bake off the form.

The problem is there shouldn't be a "confidential checking service for transgender applicants in accordance with the Gender Recognition Act 2004" via the DBS.

If you want to work with children then there should be no exceptions. Knowing someone's sex is important in schools. All adults may suddenly be in a position where going onto toilets, supervising groups changing is required. An adult who's deliberately concealed their birth sex from a school or organisation working with children may (not always) be compromising the privacy, dignity or safety of children.

This all happened because of the stranglehold that the trans lobby groups have on all our institutions. The fact that, despite repeated challenge about this loophole, the DBS has failed to resolve it speaks to the power of the trans lobby to undermine even measures to ensure safeguarding children.

All the DBS had to do was tweak their guidance to ensure that this exceptional "sensitive" route still means that trans applicants are legally required (they MUST) disclose all their previous identities. No exceptions. No forgetting.

The fact they've failed to do this small thing just highlights how powerful the trans lobby is in the civil service. It's not safeguarding children that's the priority, it's pandering to the demands of the trans lobby that their demands are more important.