Law passed in UK to allow women to do background checks on partners
- Thread starter woofercooker
- Start date
Means nothing as human error is always a factor! Also tefal has a good point..
That would be... too logical.
So this law is protecting your right to be illogical?
Men can check on their female partners too.
No, in simple terms if someone needs to ask the question, the answer doesn't actually matter because the relationship is already ****ed.
But what it does do is allow anyone to instigate a police trawl of their 'friend' or 'neighbour' behind the back of the said person. It's then left to a so called specialist department who then decide whether to interfere in a private relationship. Why not just take a few years and risk access every UK citizen and publish the results? Madness.
what do you think the xbox one always on kineckt is for
Thanks for that
interestingly though the way its set up your neighbor can contact them and inquire if there's anything but they decide the nighbour doesn't need to know but they may then contact your partner and tell her directly or her family.
which i imagine is going to be even worse for your new relationship, imagine getting a random call from the police/other services saying your partner may be a threat to you.
have you not seen Teresa Mays track record?
A lot of misinformation in this thread.
If you want to see how it works, google Clares Law and Leaflet, it should throw up quite a few pages where you can download a PDF.
When you read through the leaflet, you will realise that checks are carried out not only on the individual who may be in danger and the person who may endanger them, but also the individual who is making the requests for information. They are invited in to speak face to face and have to provide ID documents. This is to ensure a check is made to prevent people trawling for information.
Secondly it doesn't follow that the individual who makes the request will be the person to whom the information is disclosed. At the initial contact, they'll simply be told "thanks for the info, we might be in touch". A decision is made as to who is in the best place to protect the person who may be harmed.
Lastly don't forget that the information passed is from a Computer Database.
Section 55 of the Data Protection Act 1998 states
1) A person must not knowingly or recklessly, without the consent of the data controller —
(a) obtain or disclose personal data or the information contained in personal data, or
(b) procure the disclosure to another person of the information contained in personal data.
As the legislation and procedure is so new and people quite rightly will be worried about the disclosure etc., you can bet your bottom dollar that anyone caught breaching this will be prosecuted and more than likely very publically.
If you want to see how it works, google Clares Law and Leaflet, it should throw up quite a few pages where you can download a PDF.
When you read through the leaflet, you will realise that checks are carried out not only on the individual who may be in danger and the person who may endanger them, but also the individual who is making the requests for information. They are invited in to speak face to face and have to provide ID documents. This is to ensure a check is made to prevent people trawling for information.
Secondly it doesn't follow that the individual who makes the request will be the person to whom the information is disclosed. At the initial contact, they'll simply be told "thanks for the info, we might be in touch". A decision is made as to who is in the best place to protect the person who may be harmed.
Lastly don't forget that the information passed is from a Computer Database.
Section 55 of the Data Protection Act 1998 states
1) A person must not knowingly or recklessly, without the consent of the data controller —
(a) obtain or disclose personal data or the information contained in personal data, or
(b) procure the disclosure to another person of the information contained in personal data.
As the legislation and procedure is so new and people quite rightly will be worried about the disclosure etc., you can bet your bottom dollar that anyone caught breaching this will be prosecuted and more than likely very publically.
Last edited:
In theory, maybe, but no rational person would think that it would be treated in the same way. Look how it's being reported. Also, look at how domestic violence is treated in general. There is absolutely no possibility of sexual equality because the driving force behind the politics is extremely opposed to sexual equality.
I knew a man who was hospitalised with broken bones 3 times by his girlfriend and injured in less serious ways many more times. She was expressing her intention to kill him the last time, according to witnesses who heard her. He was arrested because he forced his way past her to escape through the doorway she was blocking and he was assumed to be the abuser because he's male (despite his injuries, witnesses, etc). So anyone who did a check on him under this law would find him listed as a domestic violence abuser and a threat to women.
There is such extreme sexism on this issue that there aren't even any reliable numbers on victims. Who knows how many male victims are listed as abusers?
Last edited:
Which is why it only makes sense in the context of it being a more routine check, something women are able to do and encouraged to do before any relationship with any man. That's not how it's being framed now, but it certainly wouldn't be the first law to be put in place for one thing and then function creeped into something else.
Has it been effective though? Has domestic violence lessened because of laws like this?
What does the evidence say about the effectiveness of the law compared to the additional intrusions into privacy it represents?
I have no idea. But it's great if you're going to move to a place and want to know what the people are like or if your going to employ someone.
As for "domestic violence" no one knows when or if it's going to happen but it's better knowing the odds.