🔗 Share this article

The Queensland government disclosed confidential information about the mother of a trans teenager – data she says potentially exposed her teen – to a unknown individual.

Allegations of “Intimidation” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The disclosure emerged as the state government was charged of “intimidation” and “a breach of confidentiality” after requesting confidential health records from parents of transgender children who are considering a further court case to its controversial ban on puberty blockers.

Recent Official Order on Hormone Treatments

Recently, the Queensland health official, Tim Nicholls, enacted a fresh directive prohibiting the prescription of hormone blockers for transgender patients, shortly after the high court determined the initial ban was unlawful.

Media has interviewed four mothers who have approached Nicholls for a official paper called a statement of reasons – a formal explanation of why the government decided to prohibit hormone treatments in the region. Legally, the document must be supplied under the legal statute.

Demanded Health Information

Each were asked by the health authorities for particulars of their teen’s health background, including “your child’s name, their birthdate and any supporting documents which supports your child having a clinical diagnosis of gender dysphoria”.

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

The email, which has been reviewed by the Guardian, also instructed them to “please also confirm if your child is a patient of the youth gender service so that we can verify the data provided with Children’s Health Queensland,” states the communication, which was sent last Friday.

Parents Describe Demand as Invasion of Privacy

All four mothers characterized the request as an violation of confidentiality.

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

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

Case of the Mother

Louise*, who cannot be legally identified because it would also identify or expose her child, was one of several who asked for a explanation on multiple occasions.

In May, the agency emailed a response meant for her to another parent, revealing her name and address – and the detail that she had a transgender child – to a stranger. She said a department official later said sorry by telephone; the Guardian has obtained an message from the agency confirming the mistake.

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

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

“I honor that to my core as much as possible. The only time I ever disclose is out of necessity for obtaining entry to services and only to individuals I consider trustworthy and I know well.”

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

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

Other Mother Expresses Concerns

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

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

“To think that that information could inadvertently be disclosed one day, in any manner, you know, although that was accidental, could be extremely upsetting to him.”

She responded saying the agency had asked for an “extraordinary amount of information”.

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

“It’s such highly confidential stuff. You wouldn’t disclose, for example, your medical condition to the government office, you know. You’d be very reluctant and careful to submit any of that information to a group of officials, basically.”

Advocacy Group Weighing Further Action

The advocacy organization, which represented the mother in her challenge, was evaluating a second lawsuit, it said last week.

Its president, Ren Shike, said the decision had affected about 500 Queensland children and their families and it was “important to promptly enable the provision of reasons so that children and their parents can understand the logic behind this ruling, which has had such a severe effect on their medical care”.

Authorities Stance on Prohibition

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