🔗 Share this article

The Queensland government disclosed confidential information about the mother of a trans teenager – information she says potentially “outed” her teen – to a unknown individual.

Allegations of “Bullying” and “Privacy Violation”

The revelation came as the government was charged of “intimidation” and “a breach of confidentiality” after requesting confidential medical information from guardians of transgender children who are considering a further legal challenge to its controversial ban on hormone blockers.

Latest Government Directive on Hormone Treatments

Recently, the state health official, Tim Nicholls, enacted a fresh directive prohibiting the prescription of puberty blockers for transgender patients, just hours after the state’s supreme court ruled the initial ban was illegal.

Media has spoken to several parents who have contacted Nicholls for a official paper called a explanation of decision – a formal explanation of why the government decided to prohibit hormone treatments in the state. Legally, the paper must be provided under the legal statute.

Demanded Health Information

All four were required by the health authorities for particulars of their teen’s health background, including “your child’s name, their birthdate and any supporting documents which supports your teen having a medical confirmation of gender dysphoria”.

The details were requested before the explanation would be released.

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

Parents Describe Demand as Breach of Confidentiality

Each parent characterized the demand as an invasion of privacy.

A mother said she was hesitant to share the details because the state government had mistakenly sent her data to a different parent.

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

Situation of Louise*

Louise*, who cannot be legally identified because it would also identify or expose her teen, was one of several who requested a explanation on multiple occasions.

In May, the department emailed a reply meant for her to another parent, revealing her identity and address – and the fact that she had a transgender child – to a stranger. She said a department official later said sorry by telephone; the Guardian has seen an message from the department admitting the mistake.

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

“My daughter is very reserved. She is deeply afraid of being exposed in any public space. She dislikes people to know that she’s trans,” the mother said.

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

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

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

Other Mother Voices Concerns

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

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

“To imagine that that information could accidentally be disclosed one day, in any way, you know, even if that was accidental, could be extremely upsetting to him.”

She wrote back saying the agency had requested an “extraordinary amount of information”.

“I wouldn’t provide that data to any other organisation that requested it, especially in the context of the current political climate,” she said.

“It’s such intensely private information. You wouldn’t disclose, for example, your medical condition to the minister’s office, you know. You’d be very reluctant and very cautious to provide any of that information to a group of officials, essentially.”

Advocacy Group Considering Second Lawsuit

The LGBTI Legal Service, which represented the parent in her challenge, was considering a second lawsuit, it said last week.

The head, Ren Shike, said the decision had impacted about 500 Queensland children and their families and it was crucial to efficiently facilitate the supply of reasons so that children and their guardians can understand the reasoning behind this ruling, which has had such a devastating impact on their medical care”.

Authorities Position on Prohibition

The authorities has consistently said the ban would stay enforced until a examination into gender-affirming care had been finished.