🔗 Share this article

The state government disclosed confidential details about the mother of a trans teenager – data she claims potentially “outed” her teen – to a stranger.

Accusations of “Intimidation” and “Privacy Violation”

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

Recent Official Order on Puberty Blockers

Last month, the Queensland health official, Tim Nicholls, issued a fresh directive banning the prescription of hormone blockers for trans individuals, just hours after the state’s supreme court determined the government’s first attempt was illegal.

Guardian Australia has interviewed several parents who have contacted Nicholls for a legal document called a explanation of decision – a detailed account of why the government decided to ban hormone treatments in the region. Legally, the paper must be provided under the state’s Judicial Review Act.

Requested Medical Details

All four were asked by the Queensland health department for details of their child’s medical history, including the minor’s identity, their birthdate and any supporting documents which supports your teen having a clinical diagnosis of gender identity disorder”.

The details were sought before the explanation would be provided.

The message, which has been reviewed by the Guardian, also asked them to verify if your teen is a patient of the youth gender service so that we can verify the data provided with the health service,” states the email, which was sent last Friday.

Parents Describe Demand as Invasion of Privacy

Each parent described the request as an violation of confidentiality.

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

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

Situation of Louise*

The parent, who cannot be legally identified because it would also reveal or expose 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 name and address – and the fact that she had a trans teen – to a third party. She said a government employee later said sorry by telephone; the media has obtained an message from the department admitting the error.

She said she felt “sick and unsafe” as a result of the blunder.

“My child is incredibly private. She is deeply afraid of being exposed in any social setting. She dislikes people to know that she’s trans,” the mother said.

“I respect that to my very being as much as possible. The only time I ever, ever share is out of need for obtaining entry to supports and exclusively to people I consider trustworthy and I trust completely.”

The parent was particularly concerned about the suggestion it would be “confirmed” by the hospital.

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

Other Mother Voices Worries

Sally* said she was not comfortable disclosing the medical history of her seven-year-old gender-diverse child.

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

“To think that that information could accidentally be disclosed someday, in any manner, you know, although that was accidental, could be deeply, deeply distressing to them.”

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

“I wouldn’t provide that data to another entity that asked for it, particularly in the context of the present environment,” she said.

“It’s such highly confidential information. You would not reveal, for instance, your medical condition to the minister’s office, you know. You’d be hesitant and careful to submit any of that information to a bunch of bureaucrats, essentially.”

Advocacy Group Considering Second Lawsuit

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

The head, Ren Shike, said the decision had affected about 500 Queensland children and their relatives and it was “important to efficiently facilitate the provision of explanations so that minors and their guardians can comprehend the reasoning behind this decision, which has had such a devastating impact on their medical care”.

Authorities Stance on Prohibition

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