🔗 Share this article

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

Allegations of “Intimidation” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The disclosure came as the government was charged of “coercion” and “a breach of confidentiality” after requesting confidential medical information from parents of transgender children who are contemplating a additional court case to its disputed ban on puberty blockers.

Recent Official Order on Hormone Treatments

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

Media has spoken to four mothers who have contacted Nicholls for a official paper called a explanation of decision – a detailed account of why the authorities made a decision to ban hormone treatments in the state. Legally, the paper must be supplied under the state’s Judicial Review Act.

Demanded Medical Details

Each were asked by the health authorities for particulars of their child’s medical history, including “your child’s name, their date of birth and any supporting documents which supports your teen having a clinical diagnosis of gender dysphoria”.

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

The email, which has been reviewed by the media, also asked them to “please also confirm if your child is a patient of the Queensland Children’s Gender Clinic so that we can verify the data submitted with the health service,” reads the communication, which was sent recently.

Parents Label Demand as Breach of Confidentiality

Each parent characterized the request as an violation of confidentiality.

One parent said she was reluctant to divulge the details because the state government had mistakenly sent her data to a another individual.

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

Situation 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 explanation both times.

Earlier, the department emailed a response intended for her to another parent, revealing her name and location – and the detail that she had a transgender child – to a third party. She said a government employee later apologised over the phone; the media has obtained an message from the department confirming the error.

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

“My daughter is very reserved. She is deeply afraid of being outed in any public space. She dislikes people to know that she’s trans,” the mother said.

“I honor that to my very being as much as humanly possible. The sole occasion I ever disclose is out of necessity for gaining access to services and exclusively to individuals I consider incredibly safe and I know well.”

Louise was particularly concerned about the implication it would be “verified” by the medical facility.

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

Other Mother Voices Worries

Another mother said she was not comfortable revealing the medical history of her seven-year-old gender-diverse child.

“It’s not my information, it’s a seven-year-old’s details,” she said.

“To imagine that that information could accidentally be disclosed one day, in any manner, you know, although that was unintentional, could be deeply, deeply distressing to him.”

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

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

“It’s such highly confidential stuff. You wouldn’t disclose, 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 group of officials, essentially.”

Advocacy Group Weighing Further Action

The advocacy organization, which represented the parent in her case, was considering a second lawsuit, it said last week.

Its president, Ren Shike, said the decision had affected about hundreds of minors and their relatives and it was “important to efficiently facilitate the supply of explanations so that minors and their parents can comprehend the logic behind this ruling, which has had such a devastating impact on their access to healthcare”.

Authorities Stance on Prohibition

The government has repeatedly said the prohibition would stay enforced until a review into trans healthcare had been finished.