Parent of Transgender Teen Alleges State Government of Privacy Breach That Could Have Revealed Her Child

The state government disclosed private details about the mother of a transgender teenager – data she claims potentially exposed her teen – to a stranger.

Accusations of “Bullying” and “Privacy Violation”

The revelation emerged as the government was accused of “intimidation” and “a breach of confidentiality” after demanding private health records from guardians of transgender children who are contemplating a further court case to its controversial prohibition on puberty blockers.

Recent Official Order on Hormone Treatments

Recently, the state health official, Tim Nicholls, issued a new order banning the prescription of hormone blockers for transgender patients, shortly after the state’s supreme court determined the initial ban was illegal.

Media has interviewed several parents who have approached Nicholls for a legal document called a explanation of decision – a detailed account of why the government made a decision to prohibit puberty blockers in the state. Legally, the document must be supplied under the state’s Judicial Review Act.

Requested Medical Details

Each were required by the Queensland health department for details of their child’s medical history, including “your child’s name, their date of birth and any other evidence which supports your child having a clinical diagnosis of gender dysphoria”.

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

The email, which has been seen by the media, also asked them to “please also confirm if your teen is a patient of the Queensland Children’s Gender Clinic so that we can confirm the information submitted with Children’s Health Queensland,” states the email, which was sent last Friday.

Parents Describe Request as Breach of Confidentiality

Each parent described the demand as an violation of confidentiality.

A mother said she was reluctant to divulge the details because the authorities had mistakenly sent her data to a another individual.

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

Case of Louise*

Louise*, who must remain anonymous because it would also reveal or expose her child, was one of several who asked for a explanation both times.

Earlier, the department emailed a response meant for her to another parent, disclosing her identity and location – and the detail that she had a transgender child – to a stranger. She said a department official later apologised over the phone; the Guardian has seen an message from the agency confirming the error.

She said she felt “ill and vulnerable” as a consequence of the error.

“My child is very reserved. She is immensely fearful of being exposed in any public space. She dislikes people to be aware that she’s trans,” the mother said.

“I honor that to my core as much as humanly possible. The sole occasion I ever, ever share is out of need for gaining access to supports and only to individuals I deem trustworthy and I know well.”

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

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

Other Mother Expresses Concerns

Sally* said she was unwilling disclosing 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 data could inadvertently be disclosed someday, in any way, you know, although that was accidental, could be extremely upsetting to him.”

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

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

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

Legal Service Weighing Further Action

The advocacy organization, which assisted the mother in her challenge, was considering a new legal action, it said last week.

Its president, Ren Shike, said the decision had affected about hundreds of minors and their families and it was crucial to promptly enable the provision of reasons so that minors and their guardians can comprehend the reasoning behind this ruling, which has had such a devastating impact on their access to healthcare”.

Authorities Position on Prohibition

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