🔗 Share this article

The Queensland government released confidential details about the parent of a transgender teenager – data she claims potentially “outed” her child – to a stranger.

Accusations of “Bullying” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The disclosure came as the government was charged of “coercion” and “a breach of confidentiality” after demanding private medical information from guardians of trans youth who are considering a additional legal challenge to its disputed prohibition on puberty blockers.

Recent Government Directive on Hormone Treatments

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

Media has interviewed four mothers who have approached Nicholls for a official paper called a explanation of decision – a formal explanation of why the authorities made a decision to prohibit hormone treatments in the state. By law, the document must be supplied under the state’s Judicial Review Act.

Demanded Health Information

All four were required by the Queensland health department for particulars of their teen’s health background, including “your child’s name, their date of birth and any supporting documents which supports your teen having a clinical diagnosis of gender dysphoria”.

The details were requested before the explanation would be provided.

The message, which has been reviewed by the media, also asked them to verify if your child is a patient of the youth gender service so that we can confirm the information provided with Children’s Health Queensland,” reads the communication, which was dispatched last Friday.

Parents Describe Demand as Invasion of Privacy

All four mothers characterized the demand as an invasion of privacy.

A mother said she was hesitant to share the information because the state government had accidentally forwarded her data to a another individual.

“It seems like having to ‘out’ your teen to actually get a reply; like, it’s terrifying,” she said.

Situation of the Mother

Louise*, who must remain anonymous because it would also identify or “out” her child, was one of several who asked for a statement of reasons both times.

In May, the agency sent a reply intended for her to someone else, disclosing her identity and location – and the detail that she had a transgender child – to a third party. She said a department official later apologised over the phone; the Guardian has obtained an email from the department confirming the error.

She said she felt “ill and vulnerable” as a result of the blunder.

“My child is incredibly private. She is immensely fearful of being outed in any social setting. She doesn’t like people to be aware that she’s trans,” Louise said.

“I honor that to my core as much as humanly possible. The only time I ever disclose is out of necessity for gaining access to supports and exclusively to individuals I consider trustworthy and I know well.”

Louise was particularly concerned about the suggestion it would be “confirmed” by the medical facility.

She said the demand was “intimidating” and “seems coercive”.

Other Parent Voices Worries

Sally* said she was not comfortable revealing the health background of her young gender-diverse child.

“It’s not my information, it’s a seven-year-old’s information,” she said.

“To think that that data could accidentally be leaked one day, in any manner, you know, although that was unintentional, could be extremely upsetting to them.”

She wrote back saying the agency had asked for an “excessive level of detail”.

“I would not share that information to another entity that asked for it, especially in the context of the present environment,” she said.

“It’s such highly confidential stuff. You wouldn’t disclose, for instance, your medical condition to the government office, you know. You’d be very reluctant and careful to provide any of that information to a group of officials, essentially.”

Legal Service Weighing Second Lawsuit

The advocacy organization, which represented the parent in her case, was considering a new legal action, it said last week.

The head, Ren Shike, said the decision had impacted about hundreds of minors and their families and it was “important to efficiently facilitate the provision of explanations so that children and their parents can comprehend the logic behind this ruling, which has had such a devastating impact on their medical care”.

Government Stance on Prohibition

The authorities has consistently said the prohibition would stay enforced until a review into trans healthcare had been finished.