🔗 Share this article

The state government released private details about the mother of a transgender teenager – information she says potentially exposed her teen – to a unknown individual.

Accusations of “Intimidation” and “Privacy Violation”

The disclosure emerged as the state government was charged of “coercion” and “an invasion of privacy” after demanding confidential medical information 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

Last month, the Queensland health official, Tim Nicholls, issued a fresh directive prohibiting the use of puberty blockers for trans individuals, just hours after the high court ruled the government’s first attempt was unlawful.

Media has spoken to four mothers who have approached Nicholls for a official paper called a statement of reasons – a formal explanation of why the authorities decided to ban puberty blockers in the region. Legally, the document must be supplied under the state’s Judicial Review Act.

Demanded Health Information

Each were asked by the health authorities for particulars of their child’s medical history, including the minor’s identity, their date of birth and any supporting documents which confirms your child having a medical confirmation of gender identity disorder”.

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

The message, which has been reviewed by the Guardian, also asked them to verify if your child is a client of the youth gender service so that we can confirm the data provided with the health service,” states the email, which was sent recently.

Mothers Describe Request as Invasion of Privacy

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

A mother said she was hesitant to share the details because the state government had accidentally forwarded her data to a another individual.

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

Situation of the Mother

Louise*, who cannot be legally identified because it would also identify or expose her teen, was one of several who asked for a explanation both times.

In May, the department emailed a reply meant for her to someone else, disclosing her identity and address – and the detail that she had a transgender child – to a third party. She said a department official later said sorry over the phone; the Guardian has seen an message from the department admitting the error.

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

“My daughter is incredibly private. She is deeply afraid of being outed in any public space. She dislikes people to be aware that she’s trans,” the mother 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 gaining access to supports and only to people I consider incredibly safe and I know well.”

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

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

Additional Mother Expresses Worries

Another mother said she was unwilling revealing the medical history of her seven-year-old gender-diverse child.

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

“To think that that information could inadvertently be disclosed one day, in any way, you know, even if that was unintentional, could be deeply, deeply distressing to him.”

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

“I wouldn’t provide that data to another entity that asked for it, particularly in the context of the present environment,” she said.

“It’s such intensely private stuff. You wouldn’t disclose, for example, your medical condition to the minister’s office, you know. You’d be very reluctant and very cautious to provide such details to a group of officials, essentially.”

Advocacy Group Considering Further Action

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

Its president, Ren Shike, said the ruling had affected about 500 Queensland children and their relatives and it was “important to promptly enable the supply of explanations 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 Ban

The government has repeatedly said the prohibition would remain in place until a examination into trans healthcare had been finished.