🔗 Share this article

The Queensland government released private details about the parent of a trans teenager – data she claims potentially “outed” her teen – to a unknown individual.

Allegations of “Intimidation” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The disclosure emerged as the government was charged of “intimidation” and “an invasion of privacy” after demanding confidential medical information from guardians of transgender children who are considering a further legal challenge to its disputed ban on puberty blockers.

Latest Government Order on Puberty Blockers

Recently, the Queensland health minister, Tim Nicholls, enacted a fresh directive banning the use of puberty blockers for trans individuals, just hours after the high court ruled the initial ban was illegal.

Media has spoken to four mothers who have approached Nicholls for a official paper called a statement of reasons – a detailed account of why the government made a decision to ban puberty blockers in the state. Legally, the paper must be supplied under the legal statute.

Demanded Health Information

All four were asked by the health authorities for details of their child’s medical history, including “your child’s name, their date of birth and any other evidence which confirms your teen having a medical confirmation of gender identity disorder”.

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

The email, which has been seen by the media, also instructed them to “please also confirm if your child is a patient of the Queensland Children’s Gender Clinic so that we can verify the data provided with the health service,” reads the communication, which was dispatched recently.

Parents Describe Request as Invasion of Privacy

Each parent described the request as an violation of confidentiality.

One parent said she was reluctant to divulge the details because the state government had accidentally forwarded her information to a another individual.

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

Case of the Mother

The parent, who must remain anonymous because it would also reveal or “out” her child, was among those who requested a statement of reasons both times.

In May, the agency emailed a reply intended for her to another parent, revealing her identity and address – and the detail that she had a trans teen – to a stranger. She said a department official later apologised over the phone; the media has obtained an message from the agency admitting the mistake.

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

“My daughter is incredibly private. She is deeply afraid of being outed in any public space. She dislikes anyone to be aware that she’s transgender,” the mother said.

“I respect that to my core as much as possible. The sole occasion I ever share is out of need for gaining access to supports and exclusively to people I consider trustworthy and I know well.”

The parent was especially worried about the implication it would be “confirmed” by the hospital.

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

Other Mother Expresses Worries

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

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

“To imagine that that data could inadvertently be disclosed someday, in any way, you know, although that was unintentional, could be extremely upsetting to him.”

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

“I wouldn’t provide that data to another entity that asked for it, particularly in the climate of the current political climate,” she said.

“It’s such highly confidential stuff. You would not reveal, for example, your medical condition to the government office, you know. You’d be hesitant and careful to provide any of that information to a group of officials, basically.”

Legal Service Considering Further Action

The advocacy organization, which represented the mother in her challenge, was considering a second lawsuit, it said recently.

The head, Ren Shike, said the ruling had impacted about hundreds of minors and their families and it was “important to promptly enable the provision 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”.

Authorities Stance on Prohibition

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