🔗 Share this article

The state government released confidential details about the parent of a transgender teenager – information she claims potentially exposed her child – to a unknown individual.

Allegations of “Bullying” and “Privacy Violation”

The disclosure came as the government was charged of “intimidation” and “a breach of confidentiality” after demanding confidential health records from guardians of transgender children who are contemplating a additional legal challenge to its controversial prohibition on hormone blockers.

Latest Government Directive on Hormone Treatments

Recently, the state health minister, Tim Nicholls, enacted a new order banning the use of hormone blockers for transgender patients, shortly after the high court ruled the initial ban was illegal.

Media 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 state. Legally, the document must be provided under the legal statute.

Demanded Medical Details

Each were required by the Queensland health department for details of their teen’s health background, including the minor’s identity, their date of birth and any supporting documents which supports your child having a medical confirmation of gender identity disorder”.

The information were requested before the statement of reasons would be released.

The message, which has been reviewed by the Guardian, also asked them to “please also confirm if your teen is a client of the Queensland Children’s Gender Clinic so that we can verify the data provided with Children’s Health Queensland,” reads the email, which was sent last Friday.

Parents Label Demand as Invasion of Privacy

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

One parent said she was hesitant to share the information because the authorities had mistakenly forwarded her information to a different parent.

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

Situation of Louise*

The parent, who must remain anonymous because it would also reveal or “out” her teen, was one of several who requested a explanation both times.

Earlier, the agency emailed a reply meant for her to another parent, revealing her name and address – and the fact that she had a transgender child – to a third party. She said a department official later said sorry over the phone; the Guardian has obtained an message from the agency admitting the error.

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

“My daughter is incredibly private. She is immensely fearful of being outed in any social setting. She doesn’t like 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, ever disclose is out of need for obtaining entry to services and exclusively to people I deem incredibly safe and I know well.”

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

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

Other Parent Voices Worries

Another mother said she was not comfortable disclosing the medical history of her seven-year-old gender-diverse child.

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

“To think that that information could accidentally be disclosed someday, in any way, you know, although that was accidental, could be extremely upsetting to him.”

She wrote back saying the department had requested an “extraordinary amount of information”.

“I would not share that data to any other organisation that asked for it, particularly in the context of the current political climate,” she said.

“It’s such intensely private information. You wouldn’t disclose, for instance, your HIV status to the government office, you know. You’d be very reluctant and very cautious to provide such details to a bunch of bureaucrats, basically.”

Legal Service Considering Second Lawsuit

The advocacy organization, which represented the mother in her challenge, was evaluating a new legal action, it said last week.

The head, Ren Shike, said the ruling had affected about hundreds of minors and their relatives and it was “important to promptly enable the supply of reasons so that minors and their parents can understand the logic 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 ban would remain in place until a examination into gender-affirming care had been completed.