🔗 Share this article

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

Accusations of “Bullying” and “Privacy Violation”

The revelation emerged as the government was accused of “coercion” and “an invasion of privacy” after requesting confidential health records from parents of transgender children who are considering a additional court case to its controversial ban on puberty blockers.

Recent Official Directive on Hormone Treatments

Last month, the state health official, Tim Nicholls, issued a new order banning the prescription of puberty blockers for trans individuals, just hours after the high court determined the initial ban was illegal.

Guardian Australia has interviewed several parents who have contacted Nicholls for a official paper called a explanation of decision – a formal explanation of why the government made a decision to ban puberty blockers in the region. By law, the paper must be provided under the state’s Judicial Review Act.

Demanded Medical Details

All four were required by the Queensland health department for details of their child’s medical history, including “your child’s name, their date of birth and any other evidence which supports your child having a clinical diagnosis of gender identity disorder”.

The information were sought before the explanation would be released.

The email, which has been seen by the media, also asked them to “please also confirm if your child is a client of the youth gender service so that we can confirm the data provided with Children’s Health Queensland,” reads the communication, which was sent recently.

Parents Label Demand as Invasion of Privacy

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

One parent said she was reluctant to divulge 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 reply; like, it’s terrifying,” she said.

Situation of Louise*

Louise*, who must remain anonymous because it would also identify or expose her teen, was one of several who requested a statement of reasons both times.

Earlier, the agency 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 government employee later apologised by telephone; the Guardian has obtained an email from the agency 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 doesn’t like anyone to be aware that she’s transgender,” Louise said.

“I honor that to my core as much as possible. The only time I ever, ever share is out of need for gaining access to supports and only to individuals I consider incredibly safe and I trust completely.”

Louise was especially worried about the suggestion it would be “confirmed” by the medical facility.

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

Additional Mother Voices Worries

Sally* said she was not comfortable disclosing the health background of her seven-year-old non-binary child.

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

“To think that that data could accidentally be disclosed someday, in any manner, you know, although that was unintentional, could be deeply, deeply distressing to them.”

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

“I wouldn’t provide that information to any other organisation that asked for it, particularly in the context of the current political climate,” she said.

“It’s such highly confidential stuff. You wouldn’t disclose, for instance, your medical condition to the minister’s office, you know. You’d be hesitant and very cautious to provide any of that information to a bunch of bureaucrats, essentially.”

Advocacy Group Considering Second Lawsuit

The LGBTI Legal Service, which represented the parent in her case, was considering 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 promptly enable the supply of reasons so that children and their parents can understand the reasoning behind this ruling, which has had such a severe effect on their access to healthcare”.

Authorities Position on Prohibition

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