Transsexual police officers are unfairly discriminated against because they are asked to reveal their sex change history, a new campaign group for cross-dressing PCs claimed.
The National Trans Police Association wants embarrassing vetting procedures which reveal a transsexual’s gender history to be ditched.
The organisation claims people who are transgender or undergoing a sex change operation are deterred from joining the police because they face scrutiny of the past gender and former names.
Det Con Al Smith, secretary of the association, also wants a discreet system for serving police officers to update their gender status and name change.
These changes would encourage more transvestites and cross-dressers to join the police and help the force become an ”employer of choice for trans people”.
The National Trans Police Association represents around 50 people in the service who are transgender, androgyne, intersex or cross-dressers,
DC Smith, and an intelligence officer at West Midlands Police, said: ”Although there is a process whereby people can complete Criminal Records Bureau checks sensitively, there is not yet the equivalent for vetting checks for people already employed by the police if people want to move roles.
”I think with the Equality Act 2010 coming through and a lot of generic gender equality issues being reviewed this year, there is an opportunity to get trans issues on the table that have not necessarily had the same attention in the
past.
”In a perfect world, we will identify and overcome all the barriers and issues for people who are trans, and ideally the police service will become an employer of choice for trans people.”
All new police officers or staff currently must reveal any previous names they have used.
People who have had a sex change or gender realignment procedure will change their name to suit their new gender.
Trans officers might also have their details disclosed when they have DNA samples taken, such as when they join up, and then undergo gender realignment, DC Smith added.
The organisation also plans to re-examine court appearances for trans officers, to enable them to make discreet disclosures to the Crown Prosecution Service rather than having to reveal previous names in court.
The NTPA was launched in March at Bramshill Police College, in Hampshire, and has 50 members.
It is eligible to receive taxpayer funding while campaigning for recruitment and retention of Trans Police Officers, Police Staff and Special Constables within the UK Police Service.
Campaign groups have criticised the group for wasting taxpayers’ money on politically correct initiatives when stretched resources should be spent fighting crime.
John Midgeley, spokesman for Campaign Against Political Correctness, said: ”In these economically difficult times the last thing the public wants is money spent on politically correct initiatives.
”These type of things are politically correct window dressing initiatives and we must remember the public want the police to fight crime rather than naval gaze amongst themselves.”
A spokesman for the Taxpayers’ Alliance said: ”Taxpayers’ money should not be spent on subsidising any particular interest group within the police.
”All members of the police force should be subject to the same vetting
procedures, to ensure everyone is treated the same.
”These checks aren’t there to be unduly nosey or hurtful, they are crucial to checking applicants don’t have criminal records.
”It is worrying that any group defining itself separately by religion, race or gender, is running lobbying campaigns within the police.
”People want police officers to be united in the fight against crime,
regardless of differences in their personal lives.”
