🔗 Share this article

The Queensland government disclosed private details about the parent of a transgender teenager – data she claims potentially “outed” her child – to a stranger.

Accusations of “Bullying” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The disclosure emerged as the state government was charged of “coercion” and “an invasion of privacy” after demanding private medical information from parents of trans youth who are considering a further court case to its controversial prohibition on hormone blockers.

Latest Official Order on Hormone Treatments

Recently, the state health minister, Tim Nicholls, issued a fresh directive prohibiting the prescription of hormone blockers for trans individuals, just hours after the state’s supreme court determined the government’s first attempt was illegal.

Guardian Australia has spoken to several parents who have approached Nicholls for a official paper called a explanation of decision – a formal explanation of why the authorities made a decision to prohibit puberty blockers in the state. By law, the document must be supplied under the legal statute.

Demanded Medical Details

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

The details were requested before the explanation would be released.

The email, which has been seen by the Guardian, also asked them to verify if your child is a client of the Queensland Children’s Gender Clinic so that we can verify the information submitted with Children’s Health Queensland,” reads the communication, which was dispatched recently.

Mothers Describe Demand as Breach of Confidentiality

Each parent characterized the demand as an invasion of privacy.

A mother 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 teen to obtain a response; like, it’s frightening,” she said.

Case of Louise*

Louise*, who cannot be legally identified because it would also reveal or expose her teen, was one of several who asked for a explanation both times.

Earlier, the department emailed a response meant for her to someone else, revealing her name and address – and the fact that she had a transgender child – to a stranger. 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 “sick and unsafe” as a consequence of the blunder.

“My child is very reserved. She is immensely fearful of being exposed in any social setting. She dislikes anyone to know that she’s transgender,” Louise said.

“I honor that to my core as much as possible. The sole occasion I ever, ever share is out of necessity for gaining access to supports and exclusively to individuals I consider trustworthy and I trust completely.”

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

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

Additional Parent Voices Worries

Sally* said she was unwilling disclosing the medical history of her seven-year-old gender-diverse child.

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

“To think that that information could inadvertently be disclosed someday, in any way, you know, although that was unintentional, could be deeply, deeply distressing to them.”

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

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

“It’s such highly confidential information. You would not reveal, for instance, your HIV status to the minister’s office, you know. You’d be hesitant and careful to submit such details to a group of officials, basically.”

Advocacy Group Considering Further Action

The advocacy organization, which assisted the mother in her challenge, was evaluating a new legal action, it said last week.

Its president, Ren Shike, said the ruling had impacted about 500 Queensland children and their families and it was “important to efficiently facilitate the provision of explanations so that children and their parents can comprehend the reasoning behind this decision, which has had such a devastating impact on their medical care”.

Government Stance on Prohibition

The government has consistently said the ban would remain in place until a review into gender-affirming care had been completed.