🔗 Share this article

The state government disclosed confidential information about the mother of a transgender teenager – information she claims potentially exposed her child – to a unknown individual.

Accusations of “Bullying” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The revelation emerged as the state government was charged of “intimidation” and “an invasion of privacy” after requesting confidential health records from guardians of transgender children who are considering a additional court case to its disputed ban on puberty blockers.

Recent Official Directive on Puberty Blockers

Last month, the Queensland health minister, Tim Nicholls, issued a fresh directive banning the use of puberty blockers for trans individuals, just hours after the state’s supreme court determined the government’s first attempt was illegal.

Media has spoken to several parents who have approached Nicholls for a legal document called a statement of reasons – a formal explanation of why the government made a decision to ban hormone treatments in the state. Legally, the paper must be supplied under the legal statute.

Requested Health Information

Each were required by the health authorities for particulars of their child’s medical history, including the minor’s identity, their birthdate and any other evidence which supports your child having a medical confirmation of gender identity disorder”.

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

The message, which has been seen by the Guardian, also instructed them to verify if your teen is a patient of the Queensland Children’s Gender Clinic so that we can verify the data provided with the health service,” states the communication, which was dispatched last Friday.

Mothers Label Demand as Breach of Confidentiality

Each parent characterized the demand as an invasion of privacy.

A mother said she was reluctant to share the details because the state government had accidentally forwarded her data to a different parent.

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

Situation of the Mother

The parent, who cannot be legally identified because it would also reveal or expose her teen, was among those who requested a statement of reasons on multiple occasions.

Earlier, the agency sent a reply intended for her to someone else, disclosing her name and location – and the detail that she had a trans teen – to a stranger. She said a department official later said sorry by telephone; the Guardian has seen an email from the department admitting the mistake.

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

“My child is very reserved. She is deeply afraid of being exposed in any social setting. She dislikes anyone to be aware that she’s trans,” Louise said.

“I honor that to my very being as much as humanly possible. The sole occasion I ever disclose is out of need for gaining access to services and only to people I consider trustworthy and I trust completely.”

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

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

Other Parent Voices Concerns

Another mother said she was unwilling disclosing the medical history of her young non-binary child.

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

“To think that that data could accidentally be leaked someday, in any way, you know, even if that was accidental, could be deeply, deeply distressing to him.”

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

“I would not share that information to any other organisation 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 careful to submit any of that information to a bunch of bureaucrats, basically.”

Legal Service Weighing Second Lawsuit

The LGBTI Legal Service, which assisted the mother in her challenge, was considering a second lawsuit, it said recently.

Its president, Ren Shike, said the decision had affected about hundreds of minors and their families and it was crucial to efficiently facilitate the supply of explanations so that minors and their parents can understand the reasoning behind this ruling, which has had such a severe effect on their medical care”.

Authorities Stance on Prohibition

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