Sex Offenders Should Be Banned From Changing Their Names, Says Victim

A woman from Warwickshire is calling for sex offenders to be stripped of their right to change their names after discovering the man she was in a relationship with had a hidden past as a convicted sex offender.

Julie Purvin had no idea about her partner’s history because he had simply changed his name, making it impossible for her to find out the truth through basic checks. Now she wants the law changed to close what she describes as a dangerous loophole that puts unsuspecting people at serious risk.

The case highlights a growing concern across England that the sex offenders register, while an important tool for police, has significant gaps that leave ordinary people vulnerable. Changing a name by deed poll is a straightforward and largely unregulated process in England, meaning someone on the register can adopt a completely new identity with relatively little effort.

For Julie, the discovery was devastating. She had been in what she believed was a normal relationship, with no reason to suspect anything was wrong. It was only later that the truth about her partner’s past came to light. The experience left her shaken and determined to make sure other people do not find themselves in the same situation.

“He just changed his name and that was it,” she said. “Nobody could find out who he really was. There was nothing to warn me. I think that is completely wrong and it needs to change.”

Julie is now pushing for legislation that would prevent anyone on the sex offenders register from legally changing their name. Under her proposal, any name change attempted by a registered sex offender would either be blocked outright or automatically flagged to police, keeping the register accurate and up to date.

At the moment, sex offenders in England are technically required to notify police if they change their name, as part of their registration conditions. But campaigners argue this system relies too heavily on offenders following the rules, and that the consequences for failing to notify are not strong enough to act as a real deterrent. Someone determined to hide their identity can simply change their name and hope the update slips through the cracks.

Child protection charities and victim support groups have backed calls for tighter controls, arguing that the current system is not fit for purpose. They point out that while police do have access to records linking old and new names, the general public does not, and most people have no realistic way of checking whether someone they have met has a criminal history involving sexual offences.

England does have a scheme known informally as Sarah’s Law, which allows people to formally ask police whether someone who has contact with a child has a record of sexual offending. But this only applies in specific circumstances and requires someone to already have suspicions. It does not help people like Julie, who had no reason to be suspicious in the first place.

The broader debate around name changes and the sex offenders register has been simmering for years, but cases like Julie’s bring it back into sharp focus. Critics of the current rules say it is simply too easy for offenders to reinvent themselves and move to a new area where nobody knows their history.

Supporters of reform argue that restricting name changes for sex offenders is not about punishment but about public safety. They say it is a reasonable and proportionate measure to ensure that people who pose a potential risk cannot simply erase their identity and start fresh without any oversight.

There are also questions about how well the register itself is managed and whether all offenders are complying with their notification requirements. Estimates suggest a significant number of registered sex offenders may not be fully compliant with the conditions placed on them, raising concerns about how effective the system really is.

Julie says she hopes her story will push politicians to take the issue seriously and introduce new rules before more people are put in danger. She believes a simple legislative change could make a real difference and that there is no good reason to allow sex offenders to hide behind a new name.

For now, the campaign continues, and Julie is determined to keep speaking out until something changes.