🔗 Share this article

The state government disclosed private information about the parent of a trans teenager – data she says potentially exposed her teen – to a unknown individual.

Allegations of “Bullying” and “Privacy Violation”

The revelation came as the government was accused of “intimidation” and “an invasion of privacy” after requesting private medical information from guardians of trans youth who are contemplating a additional court case to its disputed ban on hormone blockers.

Recent Government Order on Hormone Treatments

Recently, the Queensland health minister, Tim Nicholls, enacted a fresh directive banning the prescription of hormone blockers for trans individuals, shortly after the high court ruled the government’s first attempt was illegal.

Guardian Australia has spoken to four mothers who have approached Nicholls for a legal document called a statement of reasons – a formal explanation of why the authorities made a decision to prohibit hormone treatments in the state. Legally, the document must be provided under the state’s Judicial Review Act.

Requested Medical Details

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

The information were sought before the explanation would be provided.

The email, which has been reviewed by the Guardian, also instructed them to “please also confirm 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,” reads the communication, which was dispatched last Friday.

Parents Describe Request as Invasion of Privacy

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

One parent said she was reluctant to share the information because the state government had mistakenly forwarded her information to a different parent.

“It seems like having to ‘out’ your teen to actually get a reply; like, it’s terrifying,” she said.

Situation of Louise*

Louise*, who must remain anonymous because it would also identify or expose her teen, was among those who requested a explanation on multiple occasions.

In May, the agency emailed a reply intended for her to someone else, disclosing her identity and location – and the fact that she had a trans teen – to a third party. She said a department official later said sorry by telephone; the media has seen an message from the agency admitting the error.

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

“My daughter is incredibly private. She is immensely fearful of being outed in any public space. She doesn’t like people to know that she’s trans,” the mother said.

“I respect that to my core as much as humanly possible. The sole occasion I ever, ever share is out of need for gaining access to supports and only to people I deem incredibly safe and I trust completely.”

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

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

Other Parent Voices Worries

Sally* said she was unwilling disclosing the health background of her seven-year-old non-binary child.

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

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

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

“I wouldn’t provide 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 government office, you know. You’d be very reluctant and careful to provide any of that information to a group of officials, basically.”

Advocacy Group Considering Further Action

The LGBTI Legal Service, which represented the mother in her case, 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 reasons so that children and their guardians can understand the logic behind this decision, which has had such a severe effect on their access to healthcare”.

Authorities Position on Prohibition

The authorities has repeatedly said the prohibition would stay enforced until a examination into gender-affirming care had been finished.