KIDS Act Bans Medicare/Medicaid Providers from Asking Minors About Gender Identity on Intake Forms

The Kids Information Data Security Act, or the KIDS Act, aims to change how healthcare providers collect data from minors. Specifically, Section 2 of this bill prohibits any healthcare provider participating in Medicare, Medicaid, or CHIP from asking individuals under the age of 18 about their gender identity or sexual preference on intake forms or during any data collection process. This change kicks in 180 days after the bill becomes law.

The New Rule: Only What’s Necessary

This isn't a blanket ban on all data collection, but it sets a high bar. Providers can only collect this kind of sensitive information if it is absolutely necessary for diagnosing, treating, or preventing the specific health condition the minor is seeking care for, and this must be based on established clinical guidelines. Think of it this way: if a teen is in the ER for a broken arm, the provider can’t ask about their sexual preference simply because it's on a standard intake form. The information must be directly relevant to the care being provided.

For parents and guardians, this means a little more privacy protection for their kids during routine medical visits, especially if the topic isn’t related to the reason for the visit. For the healthcare system, however, this creates a compliance challenge. Providers have to quickly revise their standard electronic and paper intake forms to scrub these questions for minors or implement a system to only present them when clinically justified.

Where the Wheels Could Get Wobbly

While the goal is clearly to protect minors’ privacy, the bill creates a potential gray area. The exception relies heavily on the provider’s interpretation of what is “absolutely necessary” and what constitutes “established clinical guidelines.” For example, a provider offering comprehensive mental health services might argue that knowing a minor’s gender identity is essential for providing identity-affirming care and assessing risk factors, placing the information squarely within the “necessary for treatment” exception. But another provider might avoid asking entirely to stay on the safe side of the new rule, potentially leading to incomplete data for comprehensive care.

This restriction could affect public health tracking, too. Researchers often rely on comprehensive demographic data collected during intake to spot health disparities and tailor public health campaigns. By restricting the collection of this data from minors in federally funded programs, we might lose valuable information needed to understand health outcomes for specific populations.

Holding Providers Accountable

To enforce this new rule, the bill requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to set up a formal system for reporting violations within 180 days of the law’s enactment. This means if a provider asks a prohibited question without a clear medical justification, parents or minors will have a direct channel to report that breach. This adds a layer of oversight, ensuring providers who take federal funding adhere to the privacy constraints imposed by the KIDS Act. It’s a mechanism designed to give teeth to the new privacy protections, making sure the rules actually stick.