🔗 Share this article

The state government disclosed confidential information about the parent of a trans teenager – data she claims potentially “outed” her teen – to a stranger.

Allegations of “Intimidation” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The disclosure came as the government was charged of “intimidation” and “an invasion of privacy” after demanding private medical information from guardians of trans youth who are contemplating a additional court case to its controversial ban on hormone blockers.

Latest Official Directive on Hormone Treatments

Recently, the state health official, Tim Nicholls, issued a fresh directive prohibiting the prescription of hormone blockers for trans individuals, just hours after the high court ruled the initial ban was unlawful.

Media has interviewed several parents who have contacted Nicholls for a official paper called a statement of reasons – a formal explanation of why the government decided to prohibit hormone treatments in the state. By law, the paper must be provided under the legal statute.

Requested Medical Details

All four were asked by the health authorities for particulars of their teen’s health background, including “your child’s name, their birthdate and any other evidence which supports your child having a clinical diagnosis of gender dysphoria”.

The information were requested before the explanation would be provided.

The message, which has been reviewed by the media, also asked them to verify if your child is a client of the youth gender service so that we can verify the information submitted with the health service,” states the email, which was sent last Friday.

Parents Describe Demand as Breach of Confidentiality

All four mothers characterized the demand as an violation of confidentiality.

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

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

Case of Louise*

The parent, who cannot be legally identified because it would also identify or expose her child, was among those who requested a statement of reasons both times.

In May, the department sent a response meant for her to someone else, revealing her name and address – and the fact that she had a trans teen – to a stranger. She said a government employee later said sorry over the phone; the media has obtained an email from the department confirming the mistake.

She said she felt “sick and unsafe” as a result of the error.

“My daughter is incredibly private. She is immensely fearful of being exposed in any social setting. She doesn’t like anyone to know that she’s transgender,” Louise said.

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

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

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

Additional Parent Voices Concerns

Another mother said she was not comfortable disclosing the health background of her young non-binary child.

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

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

She wrote back 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, particularly in the context of the present environment,” she said.

“It’s such intensely private stuff. You wouldn’t disclose, for instance, your medical condition to the government office, you know. You’d be very reluctant and very cautious to provide such details to a group of officials, basically.”

Advocacy Group Weighing Further Action

The LGBTI Legal Service, which assisted the mother in her case, was considering a new legal action, it said recently.

Its president, Ren Shike, said the ruling had impacted about hundreds of minors and their families and it was “important to efficiently facilitate the supply of reasons so that minors and their parents can comprehend the logic behind this decision, which has had such a devastating impact on their access to healthcare”.

Authorities Stance on Prohibition

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