🔗 Share this article

The Queensland government released confidential information about the parent of a trans teenager – data she says potentially “outed” her teen – to a unknown individual.

Accusations of “Intimidation” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The disclosure came as the government was charged of “intimidation” and “a breach of confidentiality” after requesting private medical information from parents of transgender children who are contemplating a additional court case to its disputed ban on puberty blockers.

Latest Official Directive on Hormone Treatments

Recently, the state health minister, Tim Nicholls, issued a fresh directive prohibiting the prescription of puberty blockers for transgender patients, shortly after the high court ruled the initial ban was illegal.

Guardian Australia has spoken to several parents who have approached Nicholls for a official paper called a statement of reasons – a formal explanation of why the government decided to ban puberty blockers in the region. By law, the paper must be supplied under the legal statute.

Requested Medical Details

Each were required 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 confirms your teen having a medical confirmation of gender identity disorder”.

The details were sought before the explanation would be provided.

The email, which has been seen by the media, also asked them to “please also confirm if your teen is a patient of the youth gender service so that we can verify the data submitted with Children’s Health Queensland,” states the email, which was dispatched last Friday.

Parents Label Request as Breach of Confidentiality

Each parent characterized the demand as an invasion of privacy.

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

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

Situation of Louise*

The parent, who cannot be legally identified because it would also reveal or “out” her teen, was among those who requested a explanation both times.

In May, the agency sent a reply intended for her to another parent, revealing her name and location – and the fact that she had a transgender child – to a third party. She said a department official later apologised by telephone; the Guardian has obtained an email from the department confirming the mistake.

She said she felt “ill and vulnerable” as a result of the blunder.

“My daughter is incredibly private. She is deeply afraid of being exposed in any social setting. She doesn’t like people to know that she’s trans,” Louise 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 only to individuals I deem trustworthy and I trust completely.”

Louise was especially worried about the implication it would be “confirmed” by the hospital.

She said the request was “intimidating” and “seems coercive”.

Additional Mother Expresses Worries

Sally* said she was unwilling revealing the health background of her young non-binary child.

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

“To imagine that that information could inadvertently be disclosed someday, in any way, you know, even if that was accidental, could be extremely upsetting to him.”

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

“I would not share that data to another entity that requested it, particularly in the climate of the current political climate,” she said.

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

Legal Service Weighing Second Lawsuit

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

The head, Ren Shike, said the decision had impacted about hundreds of minors and their families and it was “important to promptly enable the supply of reasons so that minors and their parents can understand the logic behind this ruling, which has had such a devastating impact on their access to healthcare”.

Government Position on Prohibition

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