🔗 Share this article

The Queensland government released private details about the mother of a trans teenager – information she says potentially “outed” her child – to a stranger.

Allegations of “Bullying” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The revelation emerged as the state government was accused of “coercion” and “an invasion of privacy” after requesting confidential health records from guardians of trans youth who are considering a further court case to its disputed ban on puberty blockers.

Recent Official Directive on Hormone Treatments

Recently, the state health minister, Tim Nicholls, enacted a new order prohibiting the use of hormone 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 formal explanation of why the authorities decided to prohibit puberty blockers in the state. By law, the document must be supplied under the legal statute.

Demanded Health Information

All four were required by the Queensland health department for details of their teen’s health background, including “your child’s name, their date of birth and any other evidence which supports your child having a clinical diagnosis of gender dysphoria”.

The information were requested before the explanation would be released.

The email, which has been seen by the Guardian, also asked them to “please also confirm if your teen is a patient of the youth gender service so that we can verify the information provided with the health service,” states the communication, which was sent last Friday.

Mothers Label Demand as Breach of Confidentiality

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

A mother said she was reluctant to share the information because the state government had mistakenly forwarded her data to a another individual.

“It seems like having to ‘out’ 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 one of several who requested a statement of reasons on multiple occasions.

Earlier, the department emailed a reply intended for her to another parent, disclosing her name and address – and the detail that she had a trans teen – to a stranger. She said a department official later said sorry over the phone; the media has obtained an message from the agency admitting the error.

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

“My child is incredibly private. She is immensely fearful of being exposed in any social setting. She dislikes anyone to be aware that she’s transgender,” Louise said.

“I honor that to my very being as much as humanly possible. The sole occasion I ever, ever share is out of necessity for obtaining entry to supports and only to individuals I deem trustworthy and I know well.”

Louise was especially worried about the suggestion it would be “verified” by the medical facility.

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

Additional Mother Voices Worries

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

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

“To imagine that that information could accidentally be disclosed someday, in any manner, you know, even if that was unintentional, could be extremely upsetting to them.”

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

“I would not share that data to any other organisation that requested it, especially in the context of the present environment,” she said.

“It’s such intensely private stuff. You would not reveal, for instance, your medical condition to the government office, you know. You’d be hesitant and careful to submit such details to a bunch of bureaucrats, basically.”

Advocacy Group Weighing Second Lawsuit

The LGBTI Legal Service, which assisted the mother in her challenge, was evaluating a new legal action, it said last week.

Its president, Ren Shike, said the decision had impacted about 500 Queensland children and their families and it was “important to efficiently facilitate the provision of explanations so that minors and their parents can comprehend the logic behind this decision, which has had such a severe effect on their medical care”.

Authorities Stance on Ban

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