🔗 Share this article

The state government released confidential information about the mother of a transgender teenager – information she says potentially exposed her child – to a unknown individual.

Accusations of “Bullying” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The revelation came as the state government was charged of “coercion” and “an invasion of privacy” after requesting private health records from guardians of transgender children who are contemplating a additional legal challenge to its disputed prohibition on puberty blockers.

Recent Official Order on Puberty Blockers

Last month, the state health minister, Tim Nicholls, enacted a new order prohibiting the prescription of puberty blockers for trans individuals, shortly after the high court determined the initial ban was unlawful.

Media has spoken to four mothers who have contacted Nicholls for a official paper called a explanation of decision – a detailed account of why the government decided to prohibit hormone treatments in the state. Legally, the paper must be supplied under the state’s Judicial Review Act.

Demanded Health Information

Each were asked by the Queensland health department for details of their teen’s health background, including “your child’s name, their birthdate and any other evidence which confirms your teen having a medical confirmation of gender dysphoria”.

The information were requested before the explanation would be provided.

The message, which has been seen by the media, also asked them to verify if your child is a patient of the Queensland Children’s Gender Clinic so that we can verify the data provided with the health service,” states the email, which was sent recently.

Parents Describe Request as Breach of Confidentiality

Each parent described the request as an invasion of privacy.

A mother said she was hesitant to divulge the details because the authorities had accidentally forwarded her data to a another individual.

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

Situation of Louise*

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

Earlier, the agency sent a response meant for her to someone else, revealing her identity and address – and the fact that she had a transgender child – to a third party. She said a government employee later apologised over the phone; the media has obtained an message from the department confirming the error.

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

“My child is incredibly private. She is deeply afraid of being exposed 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 only time I ever disclose is out of necessity for obtaining entry to services and exclusively to people I consider trustworthy and I trust completely.”

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

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

Additional Mother Voices Worries

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

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

“To imagine that that information could accidentally be leaked one day, in any manner, you know, although that was accidental, could be extremely upsetting to them.”

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

“I wouldn’t provide that information to another entity that requested it, especially in the context of the current political climate,” she said.

“It’s such highly confidential stuff. You wouldn’t disclose, for instance, your HIV status to the government office, you know. You’d be very reluctant and careful to provide any of that information to a bunch of bureaucrats, essentially.”

Advocacy Group Weighing Further Action

The LGBTI Legal Service, which assisted the parent in her case, was considering a second lawsuit, it said recently.

Its president, Ren Shike, said the ruling had impacted about hundreds of minors and their families and it was “important to promptly enable the supply of explanations so that children and their guardians can comprehend the reasoning behind this decision, which has had such a severe effect on their medical care”.

Authorities Stance on Ban

The government has repeatedly said the prohibition would remain in place until a examination into gender-affirming care had been completed.