🔗 Share this article

The Queensland government released private details about the mother of a trans teenager – data she claims potentially “outed” her teen – 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 trans youth who are considering a further legal challenge to its disputed prohibition on puberty blockers.

Recent Official Directive on Hormone Treatments

Recently, the state health official, Tim Nicholls, enacted a new order banning the use of puberty blockers for trans individuals, shortly after the state’s supreme court determined the government’s first attempt was unlawful.

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

Demanded Medical Details

Each were required by the health authorities for particulars of their child’s medical history, including the minor’s identity, their birthdate and any other evidence which supports your teen having a medical confirmation of gender identity disorder”.

The details were sought before the explanation would be released.

The email, which has been reviewed by the Guardian, also instructed them to verify if your teen is a client of the youth gender service so that we can confirm the information provided with Children’s Health Queensland,” states the email, which was dispatched last Friday.

Parents Label Request as Breach of Confidentiality

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

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

“It feels like having to ‘out’ your teen to obtain 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 among those who requested a statement of reasons on multiple occasions.

Earlier, the department emailed a response meant for her to someone else, revealing her identity and location – and the fact that she had a trans teen – to a third party. She said a department official later said sorry by telephone; the media has seen an email from the department admitting the error.

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

“My child is very reserved. She is deeply afraid of being exposed in any social setting. She doesn’t like anyone to know that she’s trans,” Louise said.

“I respect that to my core as much as humanly possible. The sole occasion I ever disclose is out of need for obtaining entry to services and only to individuals I consider incredibly safe and I trust completely.”

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

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

Other Mother Voices Worries

Another mother said she was unwilling revealing the health background of her young gender-diverse child.

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

“To think that that data could inadvertently be disclosed someday, in any manner, you know, although that was accidental, could be deeply, deeply distressing to him.”

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

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

“It’s such highly confidential stuff. You wouldn’t disclose, for instance, your HIV status to the government office, you know. You’d be very reluctant and careful to submit such details to a bunch of bureaucrats, basically.”

Legal Service Weighing Second Lawsuit

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

The head, Ren Shike, said the decision had affected about hundreds of minors and their relatives and it was “important to promptly enable the provision of explanations so that minors and their guardians can comprehend the reasoning behind this decision, which has had such a severe effect on their medical care”.

Government Position on Prohibition

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