Parent of Trans Teen Accuses Queensland Government of Privacy Breach That Could Have Revealed Her Child

The state government disclosed confidential details about the parent of a trans teenager – information she says potentially exposed her child – to a stranger.

Accusations of “Intimidation” and “Privacy Violation”

The disclosure came as the state government was charged of “coercion” and “a breach of confidentiality” after requesting private medical information from parents of transgender children who are contemplating a additional legal challenge to its controversial prohibition on hormone blockers.

Recent Official Order on Hormone Treatments

Recently, the Queensland health official, Tim Nicholls, enacted a new order banning the prescription of puberty blockers for transgender patients, just hours after the state’s supreme court determined the initial ban was unlawful.

Media has interviewed several parents who have contacted Nicholls for a official paper called a statement of reasons – a detailed account of why the authorities made a decision to ban hormone treatments in the state. Legally, the paper must be supplied under the legal statute.

Requested Medical Details

Each were asked by the Queensland health department for details of their teen’s health background, including “your child’s name, their birthdate and any supporting documents which supports your teen having a medical confirmation of gender dysphoria”.

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

The message, which has been seen by the media, also asked them to “please also confirm if your teen is a patient of the youth gender service so that we can confirm the data provided with the health service,” states the email, which was sent last Friday.

Parents Describe Demand as Breach of Confidentiality

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

A mother said she was reluctant to divulge the information because the state government had accidentally sent her data to a another individual.

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

Case of the Mother

Louise*, who cannot be legally identified because it would also identify or “out” her teen, was among those who requested a statement of reasons both times.

Earlier, the agency emailed a reply meant for her to someone else, disclosing her identity and location – and the fact that she had a transgender child – to a third party. She said a department official later apologised by telephone; the media has seen an email from the agency confirming the error.

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

“My child is incredibly private. She is deeply afraid of being exposed in any social setting. She dislikes people to know that she’s transgender,” the mother said.

“I respect that to my very being as much as possible. The only time I ever, ever share is out of necessity for obtaining entry to supports and only to individuals I consider trustworthy and I know well.”

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

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

Other Parent Expresses Worries

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

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

“To think that that data could accidentally be disclosed someday, in any way, you know, even if that was accidental, could be extremely upsetting to them.”

She responded saying the agency had asked for an “excessive level of detail”.

“I wouldn’t provide that information to any other organisation that asked for it, particularly in the climate of the present environment,” she said.

“It’s such intensely private information. You would not reveal, for example, your medical condition to the government office, you know. You’d be very reluctant and careful to provide such details to a group of officials, basically.”

Legal Service Weighing Second Lawsuit

The LGBTI Legal Service, which assisted the mother in her challenge, was considering a second lawsuit, it said recently.

Its president, Ren Shike, said the decision had impacted about 500 Queensland children and their relatives and it was crucial to promptly enable the provision of reasons so that minors and their guardians can understand the logic behind this decision, which has had such a severe effect on their medical care”.

Government Stance on Prohibition

The government has repeatedly said the prohibition would remain in place until a examination into gender-affirming care had been finished.