🔗 Share this article

The Queensland government released confidential details about the parent of a trans teenager – information she claims potentially exposed her child – to a unknown individual.

Accusations of “Bullying” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The disclosure emerged as the state government was accused of “intimidation” and “an invasion of privacy” after requesting private health records from parents of trans youth who are contemplating a further legal challenge to its disputed ban on puberty blockers.

Latest Government Directive on Hormone Treatments

Recently, the Queensland health official, Tim Nicholls, issued a fresh directive banning the use of hormone blockers for transgender patients, shortly after the high court ruled the government’s first attempt was unlawful.

Guardian Australia has interviewed four mothers who have approached Nicholls for a official paper called a explanation of decision – a formal explanation of why the government made a decision to ban puberty blockers in the state. By law, the document must be provided under the state’s Judicial Review Act.

Demanded Health Information

All four were required by the health authorities for particulars of their child’s medical history, including “your child’s name, their birthdate and any other evidence which confirms your child having a clinical diagnosis of gender dysphoria”.

The details were sought before the explanation would be provided.

The email, which has been reviewed by the media, also instructed them to verify if your teen is a client of the Queensland Children’s Gender Clinic so that we can confirm the information submitted with Children’s Health Queensland,” reads the communication, which was sent recently.

Mothers Label Request as Breach of Confidentiality

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

One parent said she was reluctant to divulge the information because the authorities had mistakenly forwarded her data to a different parent.

“It feels like having to reveal 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 reveal or expose her child, was among those who asked for a explanation on multiple occasions.

In May, the agency emailed a response meant for her to someone else, revealing her name and address – and the detail that she had a transgender child – to a stranger. She said a department official later said sorry by telephone; the Guardian has obtained an message from the department confirming the error.

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

“My child is incredibly private. She is immensely fearful of being exposed in any social setting. She doesn’t like people to know that she’s trans,” the mother said.

“I honor that to my core as much as humanly possible. The only time I ever, ever disclose is out of need for gaining access to supports and exclusively to people I consider trustworthy and I trust completely.”

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

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

Additional Parent Voices Concerns

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

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

“To think that that data could accidentally be disclosed someday, in any way, you know, although that was unintentional, could be deeply, deeply distressing to them.”

She wrote back saying the department had requested an “extraordinary amount of information”.

“I wouldn’t provide that information to another entity that asked for it, particularly in the climate of the current political climate,” she said.

“It’s such highly confidential 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 provide any of that information to a group of officials, essentially.”

Advocacy Group Weighing Second Lawsuit

The advocacy organization, which represented the parent in her case, 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 “important to efficiently facilitate the provision of reasons 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 Stance on Prohibition

The government has repeatedly said the prohibition would remain in place until a review into gender-affirming care had been finished.