🔗 Share this article

The Queensland government disclosed confidential information about the parent of a trans teenager – data she claims potentially “outed” her teen – to a unknown individual.

Allegations of “Bullying” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The revelation came as the state government was charged of “coercion” and “an invasion of privacy” after demanding confidential medical information from parents of transgender children who are considering a additional court case to its controversial ban on puberty blockers.

Recent Official Directive on Puberty Blockers

Recently, the Queensland health official, Tim Nicholls, enacted a new order banning the use of puberty blockers for trans individuals, just hours after the high court ruled the government’s first attempt was illegal.

Media has spoken to four mothers who have contacted Nicholls for a official paper called a statement of reasons – a formal explanation of why the government made a decision to ban hormone treatments in the state. By law, the document must be provided under the state’s Judicial Review Act.

Requested Health Information

All four were required by the Queensland health department for details of their teen’s health background, including the minor’s identity, their birthdate and any supporting documents which confirms your teen having a medical confirmation of gender identity disorder”.

The information were sought before the explanation would be provided.

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

Parents Label Demand as Breach of Confidentiality

All four mothers described the demand as an violation of confidentiality.

A mother said she was reluctant to share the details because the state government had mistakenly sent her data to a different parent.

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

Situation of Louise*

The parent, who cannot be legally identified because it would also identify or expose her child, was one of several who asked for a statement of reasons on multiple occasions.

In May, the agency sent a response meant for her to another parent, disclosing her name and address – and the detail that she had a trans teen – to a third party. She said a department official later said sorry over the phone; the media has seen an message from the agency confirming the error.

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

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

“I honor that to my very being as much as possible. The sole occasion I ever share is out of need for obtaining entry to supports and exclusively to individuals I consider trustworthy and I trust completely.”

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

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

Other Mother Expresses Concerns

Another mother said she was not comfortable disclosing the health background 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 data could accidentally be leaked someday, in any way, you know, even if that was accidental, could be deeply, deeply distressing to them.”

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

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

“It’s such highly confidential information. You would not reveal, for example, your HIV status to the government office, you know. You’d be very reluctant and very cautious to submit such details to a bunch of bureaucrats, basically.”

Legal Service Considering Further Action

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

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

Authorities Position on Ban

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