🔗 Share this article

The Queensland government disclosed confidential information about the parent of a trans teenager – data she says potentially “outed” her teen – to a unknown individual.

Accusations of “Intimidation” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The revelation emerged as the state government was charged of “intimidation” and “an invasion of privacy” after requesting confidential medical information from parents of trans youth who are considering a further legal challenge to its controversial prohibition on puberty blockers.

Latest Official Order on Puberty Blockers

Recently, the state health official, Tim Nicholls, enacted a new order prohibiting the use of puberty blockers for trans individuals, shortly after the high court ruled the government’s first attempt was unlawful.

Media has spoken to several parents who have contacted Nicholls for a official paper called a explanation of decision – a detailed account of why the government made a decision to ban puberty blockers in the state. Legally, the paper must be supplied under the state’s Judicial Review Act.

Demanded Health Information

Each were asked by the health authorities for details of their teen’s health background, including “your child’s name, their date of birth and any other evidence which confirms your teen having a medical confirmation of gender identity disorder”.

The details were sought before the statement of reasons would be provided.

The email, which has been reviewed by the Guardian, also instructed them to verify if your teen is a client of the Queensland Children’s Gender Clinic so that we can verify the information submitted with the health service,” reads the communication, which was dispatched last Friday.

Parents Label Demand as Breach of Confidentiality

Each parent characterized the request as an violation of confidentiality.

A mother said she was hesitant to divulge the information because the authorities had accidentally forwarded her information to a another individual.

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

Case of the Mother

The parent, who must remain anonymous because it would also reveal or expose her teen, was among those who asked for a explanation on multiple occasions.

Earlier, the agency sent a response meant for her to someone else, disclosing her identity and location – and the fact that she had a trans teen – to a stranger. She said a government employee later said sorry over the phone; the media has obtained an message from the department confirming the mistake.

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

“My daughter is incredibly private. She is deeply afraid of being exposed in any public space. She doesn’t like people to be aware that she’s trans,” Louise said.

“I respect that to my core as much as possible. The sole occasion I ever disclose is out of need for obtaining entry to services and exclusively to individuals I deem trustworthy and I know well.”

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

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

Other Mother Voices Concerns

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

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

“To imagine that that information could accidentally be leaked one day, in any way, you know, even if that was accidental, could be extremely upsetting to them.”

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

“I wouldn’t provide that information to another entity that requested it, particularly in the climate of the present environment,” she said.

“It’s such highly confidential information. You wouldn’t disclose, for instance, your medical condition to the government office, you know. You’d be very reluctant and careful to provide such details to a bunch of bureaucrats, basically.”

Legal Service Considering Second Lawsuit

The advocacy organization, which assisted the mother in her case, was evaluating a second lawsuit, it said last week.

The head, Ren Shike, said the ruling had affected about 500 Queensland children and their relatives and it was “important to efficiently facilitate the supply of reasons so that children and their guardians can understand the reasoning behind this decision, which has had such a devastating impact on their medical care”.

Authorities Stance on Prohibition

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