Mother of Transgender Teen Alleges State Government of Data Leak That Could Have ‘Outed’ Her Child

The Queensland government disclosed private information about the parent of a transgender teenager – information she claims potentially exposed her child – to a unknown individual.

Allegations of “Intimidation” and “Privacy Violation”

The revelation emerged as the state government was accused of “intimidation” and “an invasion of privacy” after requesting confidential health records from guardians of trans youth who are considering a additional court case to its controversial prohibition on hormone blockers.

Latest Government Directive on Puberty Blockers

Recently, the state health official, Tim Nicholls, issued a new order banning the use of hormone blockers for trans individuals, just hours after the state’s supreme court determined the initial ban was unlawful.

Media has spoken to four mothers who have contacted Nicholls for a official paper called a statement of reasons – a detailed account of why the authorities decided to ban hormone treatments in the region. Legally, the document must be supplied under the state’s Judicial Review Act.

Demanded Medical Details

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 teen having a clinical diagnosis of gender identity disorder”.

The information were requested before the explanation would be released.

The email, which has been reviewed by the media, also instructed 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 provided with the health service,” reads the communication, which was sent last Friday.

Mothers Label Demand as Invasion of Privacy

Each parent characterized the request as an violation of confidentiality.

One parent said she was reluctant to share the information because the state government had mistakenly sent her information to a different parent.

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

Case of the Mother

The parent, who must remain anonymous because it would also reveal or “out” her child, was one of several who asked for a statement of reasons on multiple occasions.

In May, the agency 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 government employee later said sorry over the phone; the Guardian has seen an message from the department admitting the error.

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

“My child is incredibly private. She is immensely fearful of being outed in any public space. She dislikes anyone to know that she’s trans,” Louise said.

“I honor that to my very being as much as possible. The only time I ever share is out of necessity for gaining access to supports and exclusively to individuals I consider incredibly safe and I know well.”

Louise was especially worried about the implication it would be “confirmed” by the medical facility.

She said the request was “threatening” and “feels threatening”.

Additional Parent Voices Concerns

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

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

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

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

“I wouldn’t provide that information to another entity that requested it, especially in the climate of the current political climate,” she said.

“It’s such intensely private information. You wouldn’t disclose, for instance, your medical condition to the minister’s office, you know. You’d be hesitant and careful to submit any of that information to a bunch of bureaucrats, basically.”

Legal Service Considering Second Lawsuit

The advocacy organization, which assisted the parent in her challenge, was considering a second lawsuit, it said recently.

The head, Ren Shike, said the ruling had impacted about 500 Queensland children and their families and it was “important to efficiently facilitate the supply of explanations so that minors and their parents can comprehend the logic behind this ruling, which has had such a severe effect on their access to healthcare”.

Government Stance on Prohibition

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