🔗 Share this article

The state government released confidential information about the mother of a transgender teenager – information she claims potentially exposed her teen – to a stranger.

Accusations of “Bullying” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The disclosure emerged as the government was accused of “intimidation” and “a breach of confidentiality” after requesting private medical information from guardians of transgender children who are contemplating a further legal challenge to its disputed prohibition on hormone blockers.

Latest Official Order on Puberty Blockers

Recently, the Queensland health minister, Tim Nicholls, enacted a new order prohibiting the prescription of hormone blockers for transgender patients, just hours after the high court ruled the government’s first attempt was unlawful.

Media has spoken to four mothers who have contacted Nicholls for a legal document called a explanation of decision – a formal explanation of why the government decided to ban puberty blockers in the region. By law, the paper must be supplied under the state’s Judicial Review Act.

Requested Medical Details

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

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

The message, which has been reviewed by the media, also instructed them to verify if your child is a patient of the youth gender service so that we can verify the information provided with the health service,” states the email, which was sent recently.

Mothers Label Request as Invasion of Privacy

All four mothers characterized the demand as an violation of confidentiality.

One parent said she was hesitant to divulge the information because the state government had mistakenly forwarded her data to a another individual.

“It feels like having to reveal your teen to obtain a response; like, it’s terrifying,” she said.

Situation of Louise*

Louise*, who must remain anonymous because it would also reveal or “out” her teen, was among those who requested a explanation both times.

Earlier, the department emailed a reply meant for her to someone else, disclosing her name and address – and the detail that she had a transgender child – to a third party. She said a department official later said sorry by telephone; the Guardian has seen an email from the department confirming the error.

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

“My daughter is incredibly private. She is deeply afraid of being exposed in any public space. She doesn’t like anyone to know that she’s transgender,” Louise said.

“I honor that to my core as much as possible. The sole occasion I ever, ever share is out of necessity for gaining access to supports and only to individuals I consider trustworthy and I trust completely.”

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

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

Additional Mother Voices Worries

Sally* said she was not comfortable disclosing the medical history of her young non-binary child.

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

“To imagine that that data could accidentally be leaked one day, in any way, you know, although that was accidental, could be deeply, deeply distressing to them.”

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

“I would not share that information to another entity that requested it, especially in the climate of the present environment,” she said.

“It’s such intensely private stuff. You would not reveal, for instance, your HIV status to the minister’s office, you know. You’d be very reluctant and careful to submit such details to a bunch of bureaucrats, basically.”

Advocacy Group Considering Second Lawsuit

The advocacy organization, which assisted the mother in her case, was evaluating a new legal action, it said last week.

Its president, Ren Shike, said the ruling had impacted about 500 Queensland children and their relatives and it was crucial to efficiently facilitate the provision of explanations so that children and their parents can understand the logic behind this decision, which has had such a devastating impact on their access to healthcare”.

Government Stance on Ban

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