🔗 Share this article

The Queensland government released private information about the parent of a trans teenager – data she claims potentially “outed” her child – to a stranger.

Allegations of “Bullying” and “Privacy Violation”

The revelation emerged as the government was charged of “intimidation” and “a breach of confidentiality” after requesting confidential health records from parents of trans youth who are contemplating a additional legal challenge to its controversial ban on hormone blockers.

Recent Official Directive on Hormone Treatments

Last month, the Queensland health minister, Tim Nicholls, issued a new order prohibiting the prescription of puberty blockers for transgender patients, just hours after the high court determined the initial ban was unlawful.

Media has interviewed several parents who have approached Nicholls for a legal document called a explanation of decision – a formal explanation of why the authorities made a decision to ban puberty blockers in the state. By law, the document must be provided under the legal statute.

Demanded Medical Details

All four were asked by the health authorities for particulars of their child’s medical history, including the minor’s identity, their date of birth and any other evidence which confirms your child having a clinical diagnosis of gender dysphoria”.

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

The email, which has been seen by the Guardian, also instructed them to “please also confirm if your child is a client of the Queensland Children’s Gender Clinic so that we can confirm the data submitted with Children’s Health Queensland,” reads the email, which was dispatched last Friday.

Mothers Describe Demand as Invasion of Privacy

Each parent described the request as an invasion of privacy.

One parent said she was reluctant to share the information because the authorities had accidentally forwarded her information to a different parent.

“It feels like having to reveal your child to obtain a reply; like, it’s terrifying,” she said.

Case of the Mother

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

Earlier, the agency sent a response intended for her to another parent, disclosing her identity and address – and the fact that she had a trans teen – to a third party. She said a department official later said sorry by telephone; the media has obtained an message from the department admitting 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 exposed in any public space. She dislikes anyone to be aware that she’s transgender,” the mother said.

“I honor that to my very being as much as possible. The sole occasion I ever disclose is out of need for gaining access to services and exclusively to people I deem incredibly safe and I know well.”

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

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

Other Mother Voices Concerns

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

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

“To think that that data could accidentally be leaked one day, in any way, you know, although that was unintentional, could be deeply, deeply distressing to him.”

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

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

“It’s such intensely private information. You would not reveal, for instance, your medical condition to the government office, you know. You’d be very reluctant and careful to submit such details to a bunch of bureaucrats, basically.”

Advocacy Group Weighing Further Action

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

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

Government Stance on Ban

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