🔗 Share this article

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

Allegations of “Bullying” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The disclosure emerged as the state government was accused of “intimidation” and “an invasion of privacy” after requesting confidential medical information from parents of trans youth who are contemplating a additional court case to its controversial prohibition on hormone blockers.

Recent Official Directive on Puberty Blockers

Recently, the Queensland health official, Tim Nicholls, enacted a fresh directive banning the use of puberty blockers for trans individuals, shortly after the state’s supreme court determined the initial ban was unlawful.

Media has interviewed four mothers who have approached Nicholls for a legal document called a explanation of decision – a formal explanation of why the government decided to prohibit hormone treatments in the state. By law, the paper must be supplied under the legal statute.

Requested 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 birthdate and any other evidence which supports your teen having a medical confirmation of gender dysphoria”.

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

The email, which has been seen by the Guardian, also asked them to verify if your child is a client of the Queensland Children’s Gender Clinic so that we can verify the data submitted with Children’s Health Queensland,” reads the email, which was dispatched last Friday.

Mothers Describe Request as Invasion of Privacy

Each parent described the request as an invasion of privacy.

One parent said she was reluctant to share the details because the state government had mistakenly sent her data to a another individual.

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

Case of the Mother

The parent, who cannot be legally identified because it would also identify or “out” her child, was among those who asked for a statement of reasons on multiple occasions.

Earlier, the department emailed a reply intended for her to another parent, disclosing her identity and location – and the fact that she had a transgender child – to a third party. She said a department official later apologised over the phone; the Guardian has seen an message from the department admitting the error.

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

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

“I respect that to my core as much as possible. The sole occasion I ever, ever disclose is out of need for gaining access to supports and only to people I deem trustworthy and I know well.”

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

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

Additional Mother Expresses Concerns

Sally* said she was unwilling revealing the medical history of her young non-binary child.

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

“To imagine that that information could inadvertently be leaked someday, in any way, you know, even if that was accidental, could be deeply, deeply distressing to them.”

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

“I would not share that data 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 HIV status to the government office, you know. You’d be hesitant and careful to submit such details to a bunch of bureaucrats, basically.”

Advocacy Group Weighing Second Lawsuit

The advocacy organization, which assisted the parent 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 families and it was “important to promptly enable the provision of reasons so that minors and their parents can comprehend the reasoning behind this ruling, which has had such a devastating impact on their medical care”.

Government Position on Ban

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