🔗 Share this article

The state government released confidential details about the mother of a transgender teenager – data she claims potentially “outed” her teen – to a stranger.

Allegations of “Intimidation” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The revelation emerged as the state government was charged of “intimidation” and “an invasion of privacy” after requesting confidential health records from guardians of transgender children who are contemplating a further legal challenge to its disputed ban on puberty blockers.

Recent Official Directive on Puberty Blockers

Recently, the Queensland health minister, Tim Nicholls, enacted a new order banning the prescription of hormone blockers for transgender patients, shortly after the state’s supreme court determined the government’s first attempt was illegal.

Media has interviewed several parents who have contacted Nicholls for a official paper called a statement of reasons – a detailed account of why the government decided to prohibit hormone treatments in the region. By law, the document must be supplied under the state’s Judicial Review Act.

Demanded Medical Details

Each were asked by the Queensland health department for details of their teen’s health background, including the minor’s identity, their birthdate and any other evidence which confirms your teen having a medical confirmation of gender dysphoria”.

The details were requested before the explanation would be provided.

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

Parents Describe Demand as Invasion of Privacy

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

A mother said she was reluctant to divulge the details because the authorities had mistakenly sent her information to a another individual.

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

Case of the Mother

Louise*, who must remain anonymous because it would also identify or “out” her child, was among those who asked for a statement of reasons on multiple occasions.

Earlier, the agency emailed a response meant for her to another parent, disclosing her identity and location – and the detail that she had a transgender child – to a third party. She said a government employee later apologised over the phone; 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 incredibly private. She is immensely fearful of being outed in any public space. She doesn’t like people to be aware that she’s transgender,” the mother said.

“I respect that to my core as much as humanly possible. The sole occasion I ever disclose is out of need for gaining access to services and only to people I deem incredibly safe and I know well.”

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

She said the request was “intimidating” and “seems coercive”.

Additional Parent Voices Concerns

Another mother said she was unwilling revealing the medical history of her young non-binary child.

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

“To think that that information could inadvertently be disclosed one day, in any manner, you know, even if that was unintentional, could be extremely upsetting to him.”

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

“I would not share that information to another entity that requested it, especially in the climate of the present environment,” she said.

“It’s such intensely private 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 any of that information to a group of officials, essentially.”

Advocacy Group Weighing Second Lawsuit

The LGBTI Legal Service, which assisted the mother in her case, was considering a new legal action, it said recently.

The head, Ren Shike, said the decision had impacted about hundreds of minors and their families and it was crucial to efficiently facilitate the provision of explanations so that children and their parents can understand the logic behind this ruling, 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.