🔗 Share this article

The state government released private details about the mother of a transgender teenager – information she claims potentially exposed her teen – to a stranger.

Accusations of “Bullying” and “Privacy Violation”

The disclosure came as the government was charged of “intimidation” and “an invasion of privacy” after requesting private medical information from guardians of trans youth who are considering a further court case to its controversial prohibition on puberty blockers.

Latest Government Directive on Puberty Blockers

Recently, the Queensland health official, Tim Nicholls, enacted 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 unlawful.

Guardian Australia has interviewed four mothers who have approached Nicholls for a legal document called a statement of reasons – a detailed account of why the authorities made a decision to ban puberty blockers in the region. Legally, the paper must be supplied under the legal statute.

Requested Medical Details

All four were required by the health authorities for details of their child’s medical history, including “your child’s name, their date of birth and any supporting documents which confirms your child having a medical confirmation of gender dysphoria”.

The details were requested before the statement of reasons would be provided.

The email, which has been seen by the media, also asked them to verify if your teen is a patient of the youth gender service so that we can confirm the data submitted with the health service,” states the communication, which was dispatched last Friday.

Mothers Label Request as Breach of Confidentiality

Each parent characterized the demand as an violation of confidentiality.

A mother said she was hesitant to divulge the information because the state government had mistakenly forwarded her information to a another individual.

“It seems like having to ‘out’ your teen to actually get a response; like, it’s terrifying,” she said.

Situation of Louise*

Louise*, who must remain anonymous because it would also identify or “out” her child, was among those who requested a explanation on multiple occasions.

Earlier, the agency emailed a response meant for her to someone else, disclosing her name and address – and the fact that she had a trans teen – to a third party. She said a department official later said sorry over the phone; the media has obtained an message from the department confirming the mistake.

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

“My daughter is incredibly private. She is deeply afraid of being exposed in any social setting. She dislikes anyone to know that she’s trans,” Louise said.

“I respect that to my very being as much as possible. The sole occasion I ever, ever disclose is out of need for gaining access to supports and exclusively to people I deem trustworthy and I know well.”

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

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

Other Parent Expresses Concerns

Sally* 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 information,” she said.

“To imagine that that information could inadvertently be disclosed one day, in any manner, you know, although that was accidental, could be deeply, deeply distressing 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, especially in the context of the current political climate,” she said.

“It’s such intensely private information. You wouldn’t disclose, for instance, your medical condition to the minister’s office, you know. You’d be hesitant and careful to submit such details to a bunch of bureaucrats, basically.”

Advocacy Group Considering Further Action

The advocacy organization, which assisted the parent in her case, was evaluating a new legal action, it said last week.

The head, Ren Shike, said the ruling had affected about 500 Queensland children and their families and it was crucial to efficiently facilitate the supply of explanations so that minors and their parents can understand the logic behind this decision, which has had such a devastating impact on their medical care”.

Government Position on Prohibition

The authorities has consistently said the prohibition would remain in place until a examination into gender-affirming care had been completed.