🔗 Share this article

The Queensland government disclosed private details about the parent of a trans teenager – data she says potentially “outed” her teen – to a stranger.

Allegations of “Bullying” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The disclosure emerged as the government was accused of “coercion” and “an invasion of privacy” after requesting private medical information from parents of transgender children who are contemplating a additional legal challenge to its controversial prohibition on hormone blockers.

Recent Government Directive on Puberty Blockers

Recently, the Queensland health official, Tim Nicholls, issued a new order prohibiting the use of puberty blockers for trans individuals, just hours after the high court determined the initial ban was unlawful.

Media has interviewed four mothers who have contacted Nicholls for a legal document called a statement of reasons – a detailed account of why the authorities made a decision to ban hormone treatments in the state. Legally, the document must be provided under the legal statute.

Demanded Health Information

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 other evidence which confirms your teen having a medical confirmation of gender identity disorder”.

The information were requested before the explanation would be released.

The message, which has been seen by the Guardian, also asked them to verify if your child is a patient of the Queensland Children’s Gender Clinic so that we can verify the data provided with Children’s Health Queensland,” states the communication, which was dispatched recently.

Parents Label Demand as Invasion of Privacy

Each parent characterized the request as an invasion of privacy.

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

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

Case of the Mother

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

In May, the agency emailed a response intended for her to someone else, disclosing her name and location – and the fact that she had a transgender child – to a third party. She said a department official later apologised by telephone; the media has obtained an email from the agency admitting the error.

She said she felt “sick and unsafe” as a result of the blunder.

“My daughter is very reserved. She is immensely fearful of being exposed in any social setting. She dislikes people to know that she’s trans,” Louise said.

“I honor that to my core as much as possible. The sole occasion I ever, ever disclose is out of necessity for obtaining entry to services and only to people I consider incredibly safe and I know well.”

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

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

Other Mother Expresses Worries

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

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

“To think that that data could inadvertently be disclosed someday, in any manner, you know, although that was accidental, could be extremely upsetting to them.”

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

“I wouldn’t provide that data to another entity that requested it, particularly 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 minister’s office, you know. You’d be hesitant and very cautious to submit any of that information to a group of officials, essentially.”

Advocacy Group Weighing Further Action

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

The head, Ren Shike, said the ruling had affected about hundreds of minors and their families and it was “important to efficiently facilitate the provision of explanations so that minors and their parents can understand the logic behind this decision, which has had such a severe effect on their medical care”.

Government Position on Prohibition

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