🔗 Share this article

The Queensland government released confidential details about the mother of a trans teenager – data she claims potentially “outed” her teen – to a unknown individual.

Accusations of “Intimidation” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The disclosure came as the state government was charged of “intimidation” and “an invasion of privacy” after demanding confidential medical information from guardians of transgender children who are contemplating a further legal challenge to its disputed ban on puberty blockers.

Latest Official Directive on Hormone Treatments

Last month, the Queensland health official, Tim Nicholls, issued a fresh directive banning the use of hormone blockers for trans individuals, shortly after the state’s supreme court determined the initial ban was illegal.

Media has spoken to several parents who have contacted Nicholls for a official paper called a statement of reasons – a detailed account 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 Medical Details

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 clinical diagnosis of gender dysphoria”.

The information were requested before the explanation would be provided.

The email, which has been reviewed by the media, also instructed 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 the health service,” reads the communication, which was sent recently.

Mothers Describe Demand as Invasion of Privacy

Each parent characterized the demand as an violation of confidentiality.

A mother said she was hesitant to divulge the information because the state government had mistakenly sent her data to a another individual.

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

Situation of the Mother

Louise*, who cannot be legally identified because it would also reveal or expose her child, was among those who asked for a explanation on multiple occasions.

In May, the department sent a reply intended for her to another parent, revealing her name and location – and the detail that she had a trans teen – to a stranger. She said a government employee later apologised by telephone; the media has seen an message from the agency admitting the error.

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

“My child is very reserved. She is deeply afraid of being exposed in any public space. She doesn’t like anyone to know that she’s trans,” Louise said.

“I respect that to my very being as much as humanly possible. The sole occasion I ever, ever disclose is out of need for obtaining entry to services and exclusively to people I consider trustworthy and I trust completely.”

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

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

Other Parent Voices Concerns

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 details,” she said.

“To imagine that that data could inadvertently be leaked one day, in any manner, you know, even if that was unintentional, could be extremely upsetting to them.”

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

“I would not share that data to another entity that requested it, particularly in the climate of the current political climate,” she said.

“It’s such intensely private stuff. You wouldn’t disclose, for example, your HIV status to the government office, you know. You’d be very reluctant and very cautious to submit such details to a bunch of bureaucrats, essentially.”

Legal Service Weighing Second Lawsuit

The LGBTI Legal Service, which assisted the parent in her case, was considering a new legal action, it said last week.

The head, Ren Shike, said the ruling had affected about hundreds of minors and their relatives and it was “important to promptly enable the supply of explanations so that children and their guardians can understand the reasoning behind this decision, which has had such a severe effect on their access to healthcare”.

Government Stance on Prohibition

The authorities has repeatedly said the prohibition would remain in place until a examination into trans healthcare had been completed.