Mother of Trans Teen Alleges State Government of Privacy Breach That Could Have Revealed Her Child

The Queensland government released private details about the mother of a trans teenager – data she says potentially “outed” her child – to a unknown individual.

Accusations of “Bullying” and “Privacy Violation”

The revelation emerged as the government was charged of “coercion” and “a breach of confidentiality” after demanding private health records from guardians of transgender children who are considering a further legal challenge to its disputed prohibition on puberty blockers.

Recent Government Order on Puberty Blockers

Last month, the state health minister, Tim Nicholls, issued a new order banning the use of puberty blockers for trans individuals, just hours after the high court ruled the initial ban was unlawful.

Media has interviewed four mothers who have approached Nicholls for a legal document called a statement of reasons – a detailed account of why the government decided to ban hormone treatments in the region. Legally, the document must be provided under the legal statute.

Demanded Health Information

All four were required by the Queensland health department 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 clinical diagnosis of gender dysphoria”.

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

The email, which has been reviewed by the media, also instructed them to verify if your child is a client of the youth gender service so that we can verify the information provided with the health service,” states the email, which was dispatched recently.

Mothers Label Request as Breach of Confidentiality

Each parent described the request as an violation of confidentiality.

A mother said she was reluctant to divulge the information because the state government had accidentally forwarded her data to a different parent.

“It feels like having to reveal your teen to actually get a reply; like, it’s frightening,” she said.

Case of Louise*

The parent, who must remain anonymous because it would also identify or expose her teen, was among those who requested a explanation both times.

Earlier, the department sent a reply intended for her to another parent, disclosing her identity and address – and the detail that she had a transgender child – to a third party. She said a government employee later apologised over the phone; the media has seen an email from the agency admitting the error.

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

“My daughter is incredibly private. She is deeply afraid of being outed in any public space. She dislikes people to know that she’s transgender,” the mother said.

“I honor that to my core as much as possible. The sole occasion I ever, ever disclose is out of need for obtaining entry to services and exclusively to individuals I deem trustworthy and I trust completely.”

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

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

Additional Parent Expresses Worries

Another mother said she was not comfortable revealing the health background of her seven-year-old gender-diverse child.

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

“To think that that data could accidentally be leaked one day, in any way, you know, although that was unintentional, could be deeply, deeply distressing to them.”

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

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

“It’s such intensely private information. You wouldn’t disclose, for instance, your HIV status to the minister’s office, you know. You’d be very reluctant and very cautious to provide any of that information to a group of officials, essentially.”

Advocacy Group Weighing Second Lawsuit

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

The head, Ren Shike, said the ruling had affected about 500 Queensland children and their relatives and it was “important to efficiently facilitate the provision of reasons so that children and their guardians can understand the reasoning behind this ruling, which has had such a devastating impact on their access to healthcare”.

Authorities Stance on Prohibition

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