🔗 Share this article

The state government disclosed private details about the parent of a trans teenager – data she claims potentially exposed her teen – to a unknown individual.

Allegations of “Bullying” and “Privacy Violation”

The disclosure emerged as the government was charged of “intimidation” and “an invasion of privacy” after requesting private medical information from guardians of transgender children who are considering a additional court case to its disputed prohibition on hormone blockers.

Recent Official Directive on Puberty Blockers

Recently, the state health official, Tim Nicholls, enacted a new order prohibiting the prescription of puberty blockers for trans individuals, just hours after the state’s supreme court ruled the government’s first attempt was unlawful.

Guardian Australia has interviewed four mothers who have contacted Nicholls for a official paper called a statement of reasons – a formal explanation of why the government made a decision to prohibit puberty blockers in the region. By law, the document must be provided under the legal statute.

Demanded Health Information

Each were asked by the Queensland health department for particulars of their teen’s health background, including “your child’s name, their date of birth and any other evidence which confirms your teen having a clinical diagnosis of gender dysphoria”.

The information were requested before the explanation would be released.

The message, which has been reviewed by the Guardian, also instructed them to verify if your teen is a patient of the Queensland Children’s Gender Clinic so that we can confirm the information provided with Children’s Health Queensland,” states the communication, which was sent last Friday.

Mothers Describe Demand as Breach of Confidentiality

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

A mother said she was hesitant to share the information because the authorities had mistakenly forwarded her information to a another individual.

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

Case of Louise*

The parent, who cannot be legally identified because it would also reveal or “out” her child, was one of several who requested a explanation on multiple occasions.

In May, the agency sent a reply intended for her to another parent, revealing her identity and location – and the detail that she had a transgender child – to a third party. She said a government employee later said sorry over the phone; the media has seen an email from the agency confirming the error.

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

“My daughter is very reserved. She is deeply afraid of being exposed in any social setting. She dislikes people to be aware that she’s transgender,” the mother said.

“I honor that to my very being as much as humanly possible. The only time I ever, ever disclose is out of need for gaining access to supports and exclusively to individuals I deem incredibly safe and I trust completely.”

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

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

Additional Parent Voices Concerns

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

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

“To think that that information could accidentally be leaked someday, in any way, you know, although that was unintentional, could be extremely upsetting to them.”

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

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

“It’s such intensely private information. You would not reveal, for instance, your HIV status to the government office, you know. You’d be hesitant and careful to submit any of that information to a group of officials, basically.”

Advocacy Group Considering Further Action

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 decision had affected about 500 Queensland children and their relatives and it was crucial to promptly enable the provision of reasons so that minors and their guardians can understand the logic behind this ruling, which has had such a severe effect on their access to healthcare”.

Authorities Position on Ban

The authorities has consistently said the ban would stay enforced until a review into gender-affirming care had been finished.