🔗 Share this article

The state government released private details about the parent of a transgender teenager – data she says potentially exposed her child – to a unknown individual.

Accusations of “Intimidation” and “Privacy Violation”

The revelation came as the government was charged of “coercion” and “a breach of confidentiality” after demanding confidential medical information from parents of transgender children who are contemplating a additional court case to its controversial ban on hormone blockers.

Recent Government Directive on Puberty Blockers

Recently, the state health official, Tim Nicholls, issued a fresh directive prohibiting the use of puberty blockers for trans individuals, just hours after the high court determined the government’s first attempt was unlawful.

Guardian Australia has interviewed four mothers who have approached Nicholls for a legal document called a statement of reasons – a detailed account of why the government decided to prohibit hormone treatments in the region. Legally, the document must be supplied under the legal statute.

Requested Health Information

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

The information were sought before the statement of reasons would be released.

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

Mothers Label Demand as Breach of Confidentiality

Each parent characterized the demand as an invasion of privacy.

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

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

Case of Louise*

The parent, who cannot be legally identified because it would also identify or expose her teen, was one of several who asked for a statement of reasons both times.

In May, the department sent a response intended for her to someone else, disclosing her identity 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 seen an email from the department confirming the mistake.

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

“My daughter is incredibly private. She is immensely fearful of being outed in any social setting. She doesn’t like anyone to know that she’s transgender,” Louise said.

“I respect that to my core as much as humanly possible. The sole occasion I ever, ever share is out of need for gaining access to services and exclusively to individuals I consider incredibly safe and I trust completely.”

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

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

Additional Mother Voices Concerns

Another mother said she was unwilling disclosing the health background of her seven-year-old non-binary child.

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

“To think that that information could accidentally be disclosed someday, in any manner, you know, even if 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 any other organisation 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 government office, you know. You’d be hesitant and very cautious to provide any of that information to a bunch of bureaucrats, basically.”

Legal Service Weighing Second Lawsuit

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

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 explanations so that minors and their parents can comprehend the logic behind this decision, which has had such a severe effect on their access to healthcare”.

Government Position on Ban

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