🔗 Share this article

The state government released private details about the mother of a trans teenager – data she claims potentially “outed” her teen – to a stranger.

Allegations of “Bullying” and “Invasion of Privacy”

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

Recent Government Directive on Hormone Treatments

Last month, the state health official, Tim Nicholls, enacted a new order banning the use of hormone blockers for transgender patients, just hours after the high court ruled the government’s first attempt was unlawful.

Media has spoken to four mothers who have contacted Nicholls for a legal document called a statement of reasons – a formal explanation of why the government decided to ban hormone treatments in the state. Legally, the paper must be supplied under the state’s Judicial Review Act.

Requested Health Information

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

The information were requested before the statement of reasons would be released.

The email, which has been reviewed by the media, also instructed them to “please also confirm if your child is a patient 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 last Friday.

Mothers Describe Demand as Breach of Confidentiality

All four mothers described the demand as an violation of confidentiality.

A mother said she was hesitant to share the details because the state government had accidentally sent her data to a different parent.

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

Case of the Mother

The parent, who cannot be legally identified because it would also reveal or “out” her teen, was one of several who requested a statement of reasons both times.

Earlier, the agency sent a response intended for her to someone else, disclosing her name and location – and the fact that she had a transgender child – to a stranger. She said a government employee later said sorry over the phone; the media has obtained an message from the department admitting the mistake.

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

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

“I respect that to my very being as much as humanly possible. The only time I ever share is out of need for obtaining entry to services and only to individuals I deem trustworthy and I trust completely.”

Louise was particularly concerned about the implication it would be “confirmed” by the medical facility.

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

Additional Parent Voices Worries

Another mother said she was not comfortable disclosing the health background of her young non-binary child.

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

“To imagine that that data could inadvertently be leaked someday, in any way, you know, even if that was unintentional, could be deeply, deeply distressing to him.”

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

“I wouldn’t provide that information to another entity that asked for it, especially 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 government office, you know. You’d be very reluctant and careful to submit such details to a bunch of bureaucrats, basically.”

Advocacy Group Considering Second Lawsuit

The advocacy organization, which assisted the parent in her challenge, was evaluating a new legal action, it said recently.

Its president, Ren Shike, said the ruling had impacted about 500 Queensland children and their families and it was crucial to efficiently facilitate the provision of reasons so that children and their guardians can comprehend the reasoning behind this decision, which has had such a severe effect on their medical care”.

Government Stance on Ban

The government has consistently said the prohibition would stay enforced until a review into gender-affirming care had been finished.