🔗 Share this article

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

Accusations of “Intimidation” and “Privacy Violation”

The revelation came as the government was accused of “coercion” and “an invasion of privacy” after requesting private medical information from parents of transgender children who are considering a additional legal challenge to its controversial prohibition on hormone blockers.

Latest Official Directive on Puberty Blockers

Recently, the Queensland health minister, Tim Nicholls, enacted a new order prohibiting the use of hormone blockers for trans individuals, just hours after the high court ruled the government’s first attempt was unlawful.

Media has interviewed four mothers who have contacted Nicholls for a legal document called a explanation of decision – a detailed account of why the authorities decided to prohibit puberty blockers in the state. By law, the paper must be supplied under the legal statute.

Demanded 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 confirms your child having a medical confirmation of gender identity disorder”.

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

The message, which has been reviewed by the Guardian, also instructed them to “please also confirm if your teen is a client of the youth gender service so that we can confirm the information submitted with the health service,” reads the email, which was dispatched last Friday.

Parents Label Request as Invasion of Privacy

All four mothers characterized the request as an invasion of privacy.

One parent said she was hesitant to share the details because the state government had accidentally sent her data to a different parent.

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

Case of Louise*

The parent, who must remain anonymous because it would also identify or “out” her child, was among those who asked for a statement of reasons both times.

Earlier, the agency emailed a reply intended for her to someone else, revealing her name and address – and the fact that she had a transgender child – to a third party. She said a department official later apologised over the phone; the Guardian has obtained an message from the agency confirming the error.

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

“My child is incredibly private. She is immensely fearful of being exposed in any social setting. She doesn’t like people to be aware that she’s trans,” the mother said.

“I respect that to my very being as much as possible. The sole occasion I ever share is out of need for gaining access to supports and only to people I deem incredibly safe and I know well.”

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

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

Other Parent Expresses Concerns

Another mother said she was not comfortable revealing the medical history of her young non-binary child.

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

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

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

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

“It’s such highly confidential information. You would not reveal, for example, your HIV status to the government office, you know. You’d be hesitant and careful to provide such details to a bunch of bureaucrats, essentially.”

Legal Service Considering Further Action

The advocacy organization, which assisted the mother in her case, was considering a second lawsuit, it said recently.

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

Authorities Stance on Ban

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