🔗 Share this article

The Queensland government released private details about the parent of a trans teenager – data she says potentially exposed her child – to a unknown individual.

Allegations of “Intimidation” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The revelation emerged as the state government was charged of “coercion” and “a breach of confidentiality” after demanding private health records from guardians of transgender children who are contemplating a further legal challenge to its controversial ban on puberty blockers.

Latest Official Directive on Puberty Blockers

Last month, the Queensland health minister, Tim Nicholls, issued a new order banning the prescription of puberty blockers for trans individuals, shortly after the state’s supreme court ruled the government’s first attempt was unlawful.

Guardian Australia has spoken to four mothers who have contacted Nicholls for a official paper called a statement of reasons – a detailed account of why the authorities decided to ban puberty blockers in the region. Legally, the paper must be provided under the state’s Judicial Review Act.

Requested Health Information

Each were required by the Queensland health department for particulars of their teen’s health background, including the minor’s identity, their birthdate and any supporting documents which supports your child having a clinical diagnosis of gender dysphoria”.

The information were sought before the explanation would be released.

The email, which has been reviewed by the Guardian, also instructed them to verify if your child is a client of the youth gender service so that we can verify the data provided with the health service,” states the email, which was dispatched last Friday.

Mothers Label Request as Breach of Confidentiality

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

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

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

Case of the Mother

Louise*, who must remain anonymous because it would also reveal or expose her teen, was among those who requested a explanation on multiple occasions.

Earlier, the department emailed a response intended for her to someone else, revealing her identity and location – and the detail that she had a transgender child – to a third party. She said a government employee later apologised by telephone; the media has seen an message from the department admitting the mistake.

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

“My daughter is very reserved. She is deeply afraid 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 very being as much as humanly possible. The sole occasion I ever, ever disclose is out of necessity for gaining access to supports and exclusively to people I deem incredibly safe and I trust completely.”

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

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

Other Parent Expresses Concerns

Another mother said she was unwilling revealing the health background of her seven-year-old non-binary child.

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

“To imagine that that information could inadvertently be disclosed someday, in any way, you know, even if that was unintentional, could be extremely upsetting to them.”

She wrote back saying the agency 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 present environment,” she said.

“It’s such intensely private stuff. You would not reveal, for example, your HIV status to the minister’s office, you know. You’d be hesitant and very cautious to provide such details to a bunch of bureaucrats, essentially.”

Advocacy Group Considering Further Action

The LGBTI Legal Service, which represented the mother in her case, was evaluating a new legal action, it said last week.

Its president, Ren Shike, said the ruling had affected about hundreds of minors and their relatives and it was “important to efficiently facilitate the supply of reasons so that minors and their parents can comprehend the logic behind this decision, which has had such a severe effect on their access to healthcare”.

Authorities Position on Prohibition

The government has consistently said the ban would remain in place until a examination into gender-affirming care had been finished.