🔗 Share this article

The state government released private information about the parent of a trans teenager – data she claims potentially “outed” her teen – to a stranger.

Accusations of “Intimidation” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The disclosure came as the government was accused of “intimidation” and “an invasion of privacy” after demanding confidential medical information from guardians of transgender children who are contemplating a further legal challenge to its disputed ban on hormone blockers.

Recent Government Directive on Hormone Treatments

Last month, the Queensland health official, Tim Nicholls, issued a new order prohibiting the prescription of hormone blockers for trans individuals, shortly after the state’s supreme court determined the government’s first attempt was illegal.

Media has spoken to several parents who have contacted Nicholls for a official paper called a explanation of decision – a detailed account of why the authorities decided to prohibit hormone treatments in the region. Legally, the paper must be supplied under the legal statute.

Requested Medical Details

All four were asked by the Queensland health department for details of their child’s medical history, including the minor’s identity, their date of birth and any supporting documents which confirms your child having a clinical diagnosis of gender dysphoria”.

The details were sought before the explanation would be provided.

The message, which has been reviewed by the Guardian, also instructed them to “please also confirm if your child is a client of the Queensland Children’s Gender Clinic so that we can confirm the information provided with the health service,” reads the communication, which was sent recently.

Mothers Label Request as Invasion of Privacy

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

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

“It seems like having to reveal your teen 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 teen, was one of several who requested a explanation on multiple occasions.

In May, the agency emailed a reply intended for her to another parent, revealing her identity and address – and the fact that she had a transgender child – to a stranger. She said a government employee later apologised over the phone; the media has seen an email from the agency admitting the error.

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

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

“I respect that to my very being as much as humanly possible. The sole occasion I ever disclose is out of necessity for obtaining entry to supports and exclusively to people I consider trustworthy and I know well.”

The parent was particularly concerned about the suggestion it would be “confirmed” by the hospital.

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

Additional Mother Voices Worries

Another mother said she was unwilling disclosing the medical history of her seven-year-old non-binary child.

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

“To think that that information could accidentally be leaked one day, in any way, you know, although that was accidental, could be deeply, deeply distressing to him.”

She wrote back saying the agency had asked for an “excessive level of detail”.

“I wouldn’t provide that information to another entity that asked for it, particularly in the climate of the present environment,” she said.

“It’s such intensely private information. You would not reveal, for example, your medical condition to the government office, you know. You’d be hesitant and very cautious to provide such details to a group of officials, essentially.”

Advocacy Group Weighing Second Lawsuit

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

The head, Ren Shike, said the ruling had impacted about hundreds of minors and their relatives and it was “important to efficiently facilitate the provision of explanations so that minors and their guardians can understand the reasoning behind this ruling, which has had such a severe effect on their access to healthcare”.

Government Stance on Ban

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