🔗 Share this article

The Queensland government released confidential details about the mother of a transgender teenager – information she claims potentially “outed” her child – to a stranger.

Allegations of “Bullying” and “Privacy Violation”

The disclosure emerged as the government was charged of “coercion” and “an invasion of privacy” after requesting confidential medical information from parents of transgender children who are considering a additional legal challenge to its disputed ban on hormone blockers.

Latest Government Order on Puberty Blockers

Recently, the state health official, Tim Nicholls, enacted a new order prohibiting the prescription of puberty blockers for transgender patients, just hours after the high court determined the government’s first attempt was unlawful.

Guardian Australia has spoken to four mothers who have approached Nicholls for a legal document called a statement of reasons – a formal explanation of why the authorities decided to prohibit puberty blockers in the state. By law, the paper must be supplied under the state’s Judicial Review Act.

Demanded Medical Details

All four were asked by the health authorities for particulars of their child’s medical history, 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 details were requested before the statement of reasons would be released.

The email, which has been seen by the Guardian, also asked them to “please also confirm if your teen is a patient of the Queensland Children’s Gender Clinic so that we can confirm the data provided with Children’s Health Queensland,” states the communication, which was sent recently.

Parents Describe Demand as Invasion of Privacy

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

A mother said she was reluctant to share the details because the state government had accidentally sent her data to a another individual.

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

Case of Louise*

Louise*, who must remain anonymous because it would also identify or “out” her child, was one of several who asked for a explanation on multiple occasions.

In May, the agency sent a response intended for her to someone else, disclosing her name 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 obtained an email from the department confirming the error.

She said she felt “sick and unsafe” as a consequence of the blunder.

“My daughter is very reserved. She is immensely fearful of being outed in any public space. She dislikes people to be aware that she’s trans,” the mother said.

“I honor that to my core as much as possible. The sole occasion I ever, ever disclose is out of need for obtaining entry to services and exclusively to individuals I consider incredibly safe and I know well.”

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

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

Other Parent Expresses Worries

Another mother said she was not comfortable revealing the health background of her young gender-diverse child.

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

“To imagine that that data could accidentally be disclosed one day, in any way, you know, although that was accidental, 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 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 HIV status to the minister’s office, you know. You’d be hesitant and careful to provide any of that information to a group of officials, basically.”

Legal Service Considering Further Action

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

Its president, Ren Shike, said the ruling had affected about 500 Queensland children and their families and it was “important to promptly enable the provision of reasons so that minors and their parents can understand the reasoning behind this decision, which has had such a devastating impact on their access to healthcare”.

Government Stance on Prohibition

The authorities has repeatedly said the prohibition would remain in place until a examination into gender-affirming care had been completed.