🔗 Share this article

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

Allegations of “Intimidation” and “Privacy Violation”

The disclosure emerged as the government was charged of “intimidation” and “an invasion of privacy” after demanding private medical information from parents of transgender children who are considering a further court case to its disputed prohibition on hormone blockers.

Latest Government Directive on Puberty Blockers

Recently, the state health official, Tim Nicholls, issued a new order prohibiting the prescription of puberty blockers for trans individuals, shortly after the state’s supreme court determined the government’s first attempt was unlawful.

Guardian Australia has interviewed several parents who have contacted Nicholls for a legal document called a explanation of decision – a formal explanation of why the government made a decision to prohibit puberty blockers in the region. By law, the paper must be supplied under the legal statute.

Requested Health Information

All four were asked by the Queensland health department for details of their teen’s health background, including the minor’s identity, their birthdate and any other evidence which supports your teen having a medical confirmation of gender identity disorder”.

The information were requested before the explanation would be provided.

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

Parents Label Request as Invasion of Privacy

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

A mother said she was reluctant to share the details because the state government had accidentally forwarded her data to a different parent.

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

Case of Louise*

The parent, who must remain anonymous because it would also reveal or “out” her child, was one of several who asked for a explanation on multiple occasions.

In May, the agency emailed a response meant for her to someone else, disclosing her name and location – and the fact that she had a transgender child – to a third party. She said a department official later said sorry over the phone; the Guardian has seen an email from the agency admitting the mistake.

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

“My child is very reserved. She is deeply afraid of being exposed in any social setting. She dislikes people to know that she’s trans,” Louise said.

“I honor that to my core as much as humanly possible. The only time I ever, ever share is out of need for obtaining entry to supports and exclusively to people I deem incredibly safe and I trust completely.”

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

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

Additional Mother Voices Worries

Sally* said she was unwilling disclosing the health background of her seven-year-old non-binary child.

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

“To think that that data could accidentally be disclosed one day, in any way, you know, although that was accidental, could be deeply, deeply distressing to them.”

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

“I wouldn’t provide that information to any other organisation that asked for it, particularly in the climate of the current political climate,” she said.

“It’s such highly confidential stuff. You would not reveal, for instance, 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 bunch of bureaucrats, basically.”

Legal Service Considering Further Action

The advocacy organization, which represented the mother in her challenge, was evaluating a second lawsuit, it said recently.

Its president, Ren Shike, said the ruling had impacted about 500 Queensland children and their relatives and it was “important to efficiently facilitate the provision of explanations so that minors and their parents can comprehend the logic behind this decision, which has had such a devastating impact on their access to healthcare”.

Authorities Position on Ban

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