🔗 Share this article

The Queensland government disclosed confidential information about the mother of a trans teenager – information she claims potentially “outed” her teen – to a stranger.

Accusations of “Intimidation” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The revelation emerged as the government was charged of “coercion” and “a breach of confidentiality” after requesting private medical information from parents of transgender children who are contemplating a additional legal challenge to its disputed prohibition on hormone blockers.

Latest Official Directive on Hormone Treatments

Recently, the state health minister, Tim Nicholls, issued a fresh directive prohibiting the prescription of hormone blockers for trans individuals, just hours after the state’s supreme court determined the government’s first attempt was illegal.

Guardian Australia has interviewed four mothers who have contacted Nicholls for a official paper called a explanation of decision – a detailed account of why the government decided to ban hormone treatments in the region. Legally, the paper must be provided under the state’s Judicial Review Act.

Demanded Medical Details

Each were asked by the Queensland health department for details of their child’s medical history, including “your child’s name, their date of birth and any supporting documents which confirms your teen having a medical confirmation of gender identity disorder”.

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

The message, which has been reviewed by the media, also asked them to “please also confirm if your child is a client of the youth gender service so that we can verify the data submitted with the health service,” states the email, which was dispatched recently.

Parents Label Demand as Breach of Confidentiality

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

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

“It seems like having to reveal your child to obtain a response; like, it’s frightening,” she said.

Case of the Mother

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

Earlier, the department sent a response meant for her to another parent, disclosing her identity and address – and the fact that she had a transgender child – to a third party. She said a government employee later said sorry over the phone; the Guardian has seen an email from the agency confirming the error.

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

“My daughter is incredibly private. She is immensely fearful of being outed in any social setting. She dislikes people to be aware that she’s trans,” the mother said.

“I honor that to my very being as much as possible. The sole occasion I ever share is out of necessity for gaining access to services and only to individuals I deem trustworthy and I know well.”

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

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

Other Parent Expresses Concerns

Sally* said she was unwilling revealing 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 think that that information could inadvertently be leaked one day, in any way, you know, although that was unintentional, could be extremely upsetting to them.”

She wrote back saying the department had requested an “excessive level of detail”.

“I would not share that data to another entity that requested it, particularly in the climate of the present environment,” 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 very reluctant and careful to submit any of that information to a group of officials, essentially.”

Legal Service Weighing Further Action

The advocacy organization, which assisted the parent in her challenge, was considering a new legal action, it said recently.

Its president, Ren Shike, said the decision had impacted about 500 Queensland children and their relatives and it was crucial to efficiently facilitate the provision of reasons so that children and their parents can understand the logic behind this decision, which has had such a severe effect on their medical care”.

Authorities Position on Prohibition

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