🔗 Share this article

The state government released private details about the parent of a trans teenager – information she says potentially exposed her child – to a stranger.

Allegations of “Bullying” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The revelation came as the state government was charged of “coercion” and “a breach of confidentiality” after requesting private medical information from parents of trans youth who are contemplating a further legal challenge to its disputed prohibition on puberty blockers.

Latest Government Order on Puberty Blockers

Recently, the Queensland health minister, Tim Nicholls, issued a new order banning the use of hormone blockers for transgender patients, just hours after the high court determined the government’s first attempt was illegal.

Guardian Australia has spoken to several parents who have approached Nicholls for a legal document called a statement of reasons – a detailed account of why the authorities made a decision to prohibit puberty blockers in the state. By law, the paper must be provided under the state’s Judicial Review Act.

Demanded Medical Details

Each were asked 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 confirms your teen having a clinical diagnosis of gender identity disorder”.

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

The message, which has been reviewed by the media, also instructed them to verify if your child is a client of the Queensland Children’s Gender Clinic so that we can verify the data provided with Children’s Health Queensland,” states the communication, which was sent recently.

Parents Describe Demand as Invasion of Privacy

All four mothers described the demand as an violation of confidentiality.

A mother said she was hesitant to divulge the information because the authorities had accidentally sent her information to a another individual.

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

Case of the Mother

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

In May, the department emailed a reply meant for her to someone else, disclosing her identity and location – and the detail that she had a transgender child – to a third party. She said a government employee later apologised over the phone; the Guardian has obtained an email from the department admitting the error.

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

“My daughter is very reserved. She is deeply afraid of being outed in any public space. She doesn’t like people to know that she’s trans,” the mother said.

“I respect that to my very being as much as humanly possible. The only time I ever, ever disclose is out of necessity for gaining access to supports and exclusively to people I consider trustworthy and I know well.”

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

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

Additional Parent Expresses Concerns

Sally* said she was unwilling revealing the health background of her seven-year-old gender-diverse child.

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

“To think that that data could inadvertently be leaked someday, in any way, you know, although that was unintentional, could be extremely upsetting to him.”

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

“I would not share that data to another entity that requested it, especially in the climate of the present environment,” she said.

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

Advocacy Group Weighing Second Lawsuit

The LGBTI Legal Service, which represented the parent in her challenge, was evaluating 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 “important to promptly enable the supply of reasons so that children and their guardians can comprehend the logic behind this decision, which has had such a severe effect on their medical care”.

Authorities Stance on Ban

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