🔗 Share this article

The Queensland government disclosed private details about the parent of a transgender teenager – information she claims potentially exposed her child – to a unknown individual.

Accusations of “Intimidation” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The revelation came as the state government was accused of “coercion” and “a breach of confidentiality” after requesting private health records from parents of transgender children who are contemplating a additional legal challenge to its disputed prohibition on puberty blockers.

Recent Official Order on Puberty Blockers

Last month, the state health minister, Tim Nicholls, enacted a fresh directive prohibiting the prescription of puberty blockers for trans individuals, just hours after the high court ruled the initial ban was illegal.

Guardian Australia has spoken to several parents who have contacted Nicholls for a official paper called a statement of reasons – a formal explanation of why the authorities decided to prohibit puberty blockers in the region. By law, the paper must be supplied under the state’s Judicial Review Act.

Demanded Medical Details

All four 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 other evidence which confirms your child having a clinical diagnosis of gender identity disorder”.

The details were sought before the explanation would be released.

The message, which has been seen by the Guardian, also instructed them to verify if your teen is a client of the youth gender service so that we can confirm the data provided with the health service,” states the email, which was sent recently.

Parents Describe Demand as Invasion of Privacy

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

A mother said she was reluctant to divulge the details because the state government had mistakenly forwarded her data to a another individual.

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

Case of the Mother

Louise*, who cannot be legally identified because it would also identify or “out” her child, was one of several who asked for a statement of reasons both times.

In May, the agency emailed a response intended for her to someone else, disclosing her name and address – and the detail that she had a transgender child – to a stranger. She said a department official later said sorry over the phone; the Guardian has obtained an email from the department admitting the error.

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

“My daughter is very reserved. She is deeply afraid of being exposed in any social setting. She doesn’t like anyone to be aware that she’s trans,” Louise said.

“I honor that to my very being as much as humanly possible. The only time I ever share is out of need for obtaining entry to services and only to individuals I deem incredibly safe and I trust completely.”

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

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

Other Parent Voices Concerns

Another mother said she was not comfortable 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 data could accidentally be leaked someday, in any manner, you know, although that was unintentional, could be deeply, deeply distressing to him.”

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

“I would not share that data to another entity that asked for it, especially in the context of the current political climate,” she said.

“It’s such highly confidential information. You wouldn’t disclose, for instance, your medical condition to the minister’s office, you know. You’d be very reluctant and very cautious to provide any of that information to a bunch of bureaucrats, essentially.”

Advocacy Group Considering Second Lawsuit

The advocacy organization, which assisted the parent in her challenge, was evaluating a second lawsuit, it said recently.

The head, Ren Shike, said the decision had impacted about 500 Queensland children and their relatives and it was “important to efficiently facilitate the provision of explanations so that minors and their guardians can understand the logic behind this decision, which has had such a devastating impact on their medical care”.

Authorities Stance on Ban

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