🔗 Share this article

The Queensland government released private details about the parent of a transgender teenager – data she claims potentially “outed” her teen – to a unknown individual.

Accusations of “Intimidation” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The revelation came as the government was charged of “coercion” and “an invasion of privacy” after demanding confidential medical information from parents of transgender children who are considering a additional legal challenge to its disputed prohibition on puberty blockers.

Latest Official Directive on Hormone Treatments

Last month, the state health official, Tim Nicholls, issued a new order prohibiting the use of puberty blockers for trans individuals, just hours after the high court determined the government’s first attempt was illegal.

Media has spoken to several parents who have contacted Nicholls for a official paper called a statement of reasons – a formal explanation of why the government made a decision to ban puberty blockers in the region. Legally, the paper must be provided under the state’s Judicial Review Act.

Requested Medical Details

All four were required by the health authorities for particulars of their teen’s health background, including the minor’s identity, their birthdate and any other evidence which confirms your teen having a clinical diagnosis of gender dysphoria”.

The details were requested before the statement of reasons would be released.

The email, which has been seen by the media, also instructed them to “please also confirm if your teen is a patient of the Queensland Children’s Gender Clinic so that we can verify the information submitted with Children’s Health Queensland,” reads the email, which was sent recently.

Mothers Describe Request as Invasion of Privacy

All four mothers described the demand as an violation of confidentiality.

A mother said she was reluctant to divulge the information because the state government had mistakenly sent her data to a different parent.

“It feels like having to reveal your teen to actually get a reply; like, it’s frightening,” she said.

Case of the Mother

The parent, who cannot be legally identified because it would also identify or expose her child, was among those who asked for a statement of reasons both times.

In May, the department sent a reply meant for her to another parent, disclosing her name and location – and the fact that she had a transgender child – to a stranger. She said a department official later said sorry over the phone; the Guardian has obtained an email from the agency confirming the error.

She said she felt “sick and unsafe” as a result of the error.

“My daughter is very reserved. She is deeply afraid of being exposed in any social setting. She dislikes people to be aware that she’s transgender,” the mother said.

“I honor that to my core as much as humanly possible. The only time I ever share is out of need for obtaining entry to services and only to individuals I consider incredibly safe and I know well.”

Louise was especially worried about the implication it would be “verified” by the medical facility.

She said the request was “intimidating” and “feels threatening”.

Other Parent Expresses Concerns

Another mother said she was not comfortable disclosing the medical history of her seven-year-old non-binary child.

“It’s not my data, it’s a child’s information,” she said.

“To imagine that that data could accidentally be disclosed someday, in any way, you know, although that was unintentional, could be deeply, deeply distressing to them.”

She responded saying the agency had requested an “excessive level of detail”.

“I wouldn’t provide that data to another entity that asked for it, especially in the context of the present environment,” she said.

“It’s such highly confidential information. You wouldn’t disclose, for example, your medical condition to the minister’s office, you know. You’d be hesitant and careful to provide any of that information to a bunch of bureaucrats, basically.”

Legal Service Weighing Further Action

The LGBTI Legal Service, which represented the mother in her case, was considering a new legal action, it said recently.

Its president, Ren Shike, said the decision had affected about hundreds of minors and their relatives and it was “important to promptly enable the supply of reasons so that children and their parents can understand the reasoning behind this ruling, which has had such a severe effect on their medical care”.

Authorities Stance on Ban

The authorities has consistently said the prohibition would remain in place until a review into trans healthcare had been finished.