The Queensland government disclosed confidential details about the mother of a trans teenager – information she claims potentially exposed her teen – to a stranger.
The revelation came as the state government was charged of “intimidation” and “an invasion of privacy” after demanding private health records from guardians of transgender children who are considering a further legal challenge to its controversial ban on hormone blockers.
Recently, the state health minister, Tim Nicholls, issued a new order banning the prescription of hormone blockers for transgender patients, just hours after the state’s supreme court ruled the government’s first attempt was illegal.
Media has interviewed several parents who have approached Nicholls for a legal document called a explanation of decision – a formal explanation of why the authorities decided to ban hormone treatments in the state. By law, the paper must be supplied under the state’s Judicial Review Act.
Each were required by the Queensland health department for particulars of their teen’s health background, including the minor’s identity, their birthdate and any supporting documents which confirms your teen having a clinical diagnosis of gender dysphoria”.
The information were requested before the statement of reasons would be provided.
The message, which has been seen by the media, also instructed them to verify if your child is a client of the youth gender service so that we can confirm the information provided with Children’s Health Queensland,” reads the communication, which was dispatched recently.
Each parent characterized the demand as an violation of confidentiality.
One parent said she was hesitant to share the information because the state government had mistakenly forwarded her data to a different parent.
“It feels like having to ‘out’ your teen to actually get a response; like, it’s terrifying,” she said.
Louise*, who cannot be legally identified because it would also identify or “out” her child, was one of several who asked for a statement of reasons both times.
Earlier, the agency sent a response intended for her to another parent, revealing her name and location – and the detail that she had a transgender child – to a third party. She said a government employee later apologised over the phone; the Guardian has seen an email from the department confirming the error.
She said she felt “sick and unsafe” as a result of the blunder.
“My child is incredibly private. She is deeply afraid of being outed in any public space. She dislikes people to be aware that she’s transgender,” 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 individuals I deem incredibly safe and I trust completely.”
Louise was particularly concerned about the implication it would be “verified” by the hospital.
She said the request was “intimidating” and “seems coercive”.
Sally* said she was unwilling revealing the medical history of her young gender-diverse child.
“It’s not my information, it’s a seven-year-old’s information,” she said.
“To think that that information could inadvertently be disclosed someday, in any manner, you know, although that was accidental, could be extremely upsetting to him.”
She wrote back saying the agency had requested an “excessive level of detail”.
“I wouldn’t provide that information to any other organisation that requested it, especially in the climate of the current political climate,” she said.
“It’s such intensely private information. You would not reveal, for instance, your HIV status to the government office, you know. You’d be hesitant and careful to provide such details to a bunch of bureaucrats, essentially.”
The advocacy organization, which represented the parent in her challenge, was evaluating a second lawsuit, it said recently.
The head, Ren Shike, said the decision had affected about hundreds of minors and their relatives and it was crucial to efficiently facilitate the supply of explanations so that children and their parents can comprehend the logic behind this ruling, which has had such a severe effect on their access to healthcare”.
The authorities has consistently said the ban would remain in place until a examination into gender-affirming care had been finished.
A tech enthusiast and lifestyle blogger with a passion for sharing practical insights and inspiring creativity in everyday life.
New
New