theForum is run by the charity Unlock. We do not actively moderate, monitor or edit contributions but we may intervene and take any action as we think necessary. Further details can be found in our terms of use. If you have any concerns over the contents on our site, please either register those concerns using the report-a-post button or email us at forum@unlock.org.uk.


Claires Law - The Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme


Claires Law - The Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme

Author
Message
Simmo
Simmo
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 18, Visits: 85
'Claires Law' or the Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme as its officially known has been in operation for some time now. It gives partners or their family or professionals working with them ect to submit a request to the police to see if the persons partner has any convictions relating to domestic violence. Whats your thoughts on this? Is it fair? Especially if you have moved on from something in the past and are trying to improve your life?

Was
Was
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (3.3K reputation)Supreme Being (3.3K reputation)Supreme Being (3.3K reputation)Supreme Being (3.3K reputation)Supreme Being (3.3K reputation)Supreme Being (3.3K reputation)Supreme Being (3.3K reputation)Supreme Being (3.3K reputation)Supreme Being (3.3K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 169, Visits: 2K
It's a tricky one as this site is for law-abiding people with convictions where moving on is definitely part of ethos and I fully support that... but

My sister was violently attacked with attempted strangulation by her partner. It was so loud that it was the neighbours who called the police, which is no mean feat when she lived in a detached house. The police were originally going to do sweet FA as a "six of one half a dozen of the other" until my niece revealed that she had videoed it, which is why he had also tried to attack her smashing down her bedrooom door that she had locked herself in and destroying her phone. Thank goodness for uploading to the cloud. Only then did they even start investigating and forward charges to the CPS.

So I'm conflicted. Yes, people who have got professional help for their psychotic episodes should be able to move on, but I'd hate to think he could just keep doing this to future partners.
punter99
punter99
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (7.2K reputation)Supreme Being (7.2K reputation)Supreme Being (7.2K reputation)Supreme Being (7.2K reputation)Supreme Being (7.2K reputation)Supreme Being (7.2K reputation)Supreme Being (7.2K reputation)Supreme Being (7.2K reputation)Supreme Being (7.2K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 265, Visits: 1.5K
Depends if it is a unrestricted right to know, or if there are safeguards to prevent people going on fishing expeditions. Provided somebody, usually the police, act as gatekeepers, to decide if a request for disclosure ought to be granted or not, then you have protection. Otherwise, it will be a free for all, with peoples convictions being spread all over social media.That would be a problem.

Simmo
Simmo
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 18, Visits: 85
Was - 23 Jul 20 8:20 AM
It's a tricky one as this site is for law-abiding people with convictions where moving on is definitely part of ethos and I fully support that... but

My sister was violently attacked with attempted strangulation by her partner. It was so loud that it was the neighbours who called the police, which is no mean feat when she lived in a detached house. The police were originally going to do sweet FA as a "six of one half a dozen of the other" until my niece revealed that she had videoed it, which is why he had also tried to attack her smashing down her bedrooom door that she had locked herself in and destroying her phone. Thank goodness for uploading to the cloud. Only then did they even start investigating and forward charges to the CPS.

So I'm conflicted. Yes, people who have got professional help for their psychotic episodes should be able to move on, but I'd hate to think he could just keep doing this to future partners.

I see your conflict. I am very much the same. People have the right to be considered rehabilitated and move on, yet at the same time if someone is a known and proven risk, then maybe their partner should know about their past so they can make informed decisions about the relationship.
Simmo
Simmo
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)Supreme Being (405 reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 18, Visits: 85
punter99 - 23 Jul 20 11:16 AM
Depends if it is a unrestricted right to know, or if there are safeguards to prevent people going on fishing expeditions. Provided somebody, usually the police, act as gatekeepers, to decide if a request for disclosure ought to be granted or not, then you have protection. Otherwise, it will be a free for all, with peoples convictions being spread all over social media.That would be a problem.

This is a very good point and was subject to alot of parliamentary debate when this legislation was drafted. Anyone (friend, neighbour, family member ect) can apply for disclosure on someone's behalf under the DVDS or the person themselves can apply, known as 'the right to know'. Although just because someone applies on someone elses behalf doesnt mean that they are given any of the information disclosed if there is any. The disclosure is usually done directly to the person concerned, is always done in person, and they are never given any documents. They are warned about the confidentiality of any information they are given and told they must not disclose it to anyone. It is designed for the person concerned to be given the information about any history their partner has to enable them to make informed choices about their partner/relationship, so if it is not necessary to disclose it to a third party they they must not do so. Of course this does not mean they wont. Any disclosure must also be made inline with the ROA act and any convictions considered spent (or previous incidents/arrests that resulted in NFA or no conviction that are from some time ago) are normally not disclosed. Also, any convictions that are not relevant, for example possession of drugs are never disclosed. 
GO


Similar Topics


As a small but national charity, we rely on charitable grants and individual donations to continue running theForum. We do not deliver government services. By being independent, we are able to respond to the needs of the people with convictions. Help us keep theForum going.

Donate Online

Login
Existing Account
Email Address:


Password:


Select a Forum....
























































































































































































theForum


Search