🔗 Share this article

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

Accusations of “Bullying” and “Privacy Violation”

The disclosure came as the government was charged of “coercion” and “a breach of confidentiality” after requesting private health records from parents of transgender children who are considering a additional court case to its disputed prohibition on puberty blockers.

Latest Government Directive on Hormone Treatments

Recently, the state health official, Tim Nicholls, issued a new order prohibiting the prescription of hormone blockers for transgender patients, shortly after the high court determined the initial ban was unlawful.

Guardian Australia has interviewed several parents who have approached Nicholls for a official paper called a explanation of decision – a detailed account of why the government decided to ban puberty blockers in the region. Legally, the document must be supplied under the legal statute.

Demanded Health Information

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

The information were sought before the explanation would be released.

The message, which has been reviewed by the media, also asked them to verify if your child is a patient of the Queensland Children’s Gender Clinic so that we can confirm the information submitted with the health service,” reads the communication, which was dispatched last Friday.

Parents Label Request as Invasion of Privacy

All four mothers characterized the demand as an invasion of privacy.

One parent said she was reluctant to divulge the information because the authorities had mistakenly sent her information to a another individual.

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

Case of the Mother

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

In May, the department emailed a reply meant for her to another parent, revealing her name and location – and the detail that she had a trans teen – to a third party. She said a department official later apologised by telephone; the media has obtained an email from the department confirming the error.

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

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

“I honor that to my very being as much as possible. The sole occasion I ever, ever disclose is out of need for gaining access to supports and exclusively to people I deem trustworthy and I know well.”

The parent was especially worried about the suggestion it would be “verified” by the hospital.

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

Other Parent Voices Worries

Sally* 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 data could accidentally be disclosed someday, in any way, you know, although that was unintentional, could be extremely upsetting to them.”

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

“I wouldn’t provide that information to any other organisation that asked for it, particularly in the context of the present environment,” she said.

“It’s such highly confidential stuff. You would not reveal, for instance, your HIV status to the government office, you know. You’d be hesitant and careful to submit any of that information to a bunch of bureaucrats, essentially.”

Legal Service Weighing Further Action

The advocacy organization, which represented the parent in her challenge, was considering a second lawsuit, it said recently.

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

Authorities Position on Prohibition

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