🔗 Share this article

The state government disclosed confidential information about the parent of a transgender teenager – information she claims potentially exposed her teen – to a unknown individual.

Accusations of “Intimidation” and “Privacy Violation”

The disclosure came as the state government was charged of “intimidation” and “a breach of confidentiality” after requesting private health records from guardians of transgender children who are considering a further legal challenge to its controversial prohibition on puberty blockers.

Latest Government Order on Hormone Treatments

Recently, the Queensland health official, Tim Nicholls, issued a new order prohibiting the prescription of puberty blockers for trans individuals, just hours after the high court ruled the government’s first attempt was illegal.

Media has interviewed four mothers who have contacted Nicholls for a legal document called a explanation of decision – a formal explanation of why the government made a decision to ban puberty blockers in the state. Legally, the document must be provided under the state’s Judicial Review Act.

Requested Health Information

Each were required by the Queensland health department for particulars of their teen’s health background, including the minor’s identity, their date of birth and any other evidence which confirms your teen having a clinical diagnosis of gender dysphoria”.

The details were sought before the statement of reasons would be provided.

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

Mothers Describe Demand as Invasion of Privacy

Each parent described the demand as an invasion of privacy.

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

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

Situation of Louise*

Louise*, who cannot be legally identified because it would also reveal or expose her teen, was one of several who requested a explanation both times.

Earlier, the agency sent a reply intended for her to someone else, revealing her name and address – and the detail that she had a trans teen – to a third party. She said a government employee later said sorry over the phone; the media has obtained an email from the department confirming the mistake.

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

“My daughter is very reserved. She is immensely fearful of being outed in any social setting. She doesn’t like anyone to know that she’s trans,” the mother said.

“I respect that to my very being as much as humanly possible. The sole occasion I ever, ever share is out of need for gaining access to supports and exclusively to individuals I deem trustworthy and I trust completely.”

Louise was especially worried about the implication it would be “confirmed” by the hospital.

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

Additional Parent Voices Worries

Another mother said she was not comfortable revealing the medical history of her young gender-diverse child.

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

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

She wrote back saying the department had asked for an “extraordinary amount of information”.

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

“It’s such intensely private stuff. You would not reveal, for instance, your HIV status to the minister’s office, you know. You’d be very reluctant and careful to provide such details to a bunch of bureaucrats, essentially.”

Legal Service Considering Second Lawsuit

The advocacy organization, which assisted the parent in her case, was considering a second lawsuit, it said last week.

The head, Ren Shike, said the ruling had affected about 500 Queensland children and their relatives and it was “important to promptly enable the supply of reasons so that children and their parents can understand the logic behind this ruling, which has had such a severe effect on their medical care”.

Government Position on Prohibition

The government has consistently said the ban would remain in place until a review into gender-affirming care had been finished.