Kids who grow up in children’s homes or with care families often have gaps in their memory or a general lack of understanding of their own life’s story. When they reach adulthood, they have the right to request a copy of their case files from the government.
I did research on the topic by interviewing an expert in the field, going to a presentation by another expert, and reading reports made by a special interest group that highlights the many problems/pain points with the process as it is today.
Over the course of my research, I gathered information on who these kids (now adults) are and crafted two user personas and one anti-persona.
The main part of my delivery was two flow diagrams made in Figma’s FigJam, both of which cover idealized user journeys. The first diagram is from the user’s perspective — that is, the previously institutionalized person — the second is from the municipality’s perspective.
I will not go into details for each persona here, other than to say the real people they are based on are very different and are in all kinds of different places in their lives. Some are young, some are old. Some are men, some are women. Some suffer from dyslexia, some don’t. Some lead perfectly fine lives, while others struggle with their existence.
I felt the inclusion of an anti-persona was important because there is a group of people whose personal issues are so numerous that reading their case files is impossible for them. Helping this group falls outside the scope of this case.
A Better Subject Access Request for Previously Institutionalized Kids
At
Gribskov Municipality, Denmark
Year
2026
Pain Points
It is difficult and time consuming to track down all case files due to them sometimes being scattered across the country in different institutions
Case files are often either incomplete (parts may be lost due to fires, floods, sloppy archiving practices, purposefully destroyed, etc.) or too meticulous, making it a slog to read through
Case files are almost always delivered haphazardly — they’re neither indexed, grouped, or sorted chronologically — which makes it difficult for the reader to know where to begin
Private information regarding other previously institutionalized is sometimes leaked due to poor redaction
It is often not explained why some content is redacted, which leads to confusion on the part of the reader
Case files are sometimes delivered at an inopportune time, for example while the recipient is on their way to a job interview or a funeral
Reading case files can be psychologically taxing and feel draining — special interest groups exist to help but readers are often not made aware of their existence
The application process itself is needlessly complex
Here, I will note that it was not possible to address pain point 1 as it requires a national effort. Paint point 2 falls outside of the scope of this case because we can’t recreate incomplete case files.
Personas
Flow Diagram 1
This first flow diagram represents the idealized user journey from the perspective of someone who grew up in a children’s home or with care families.
The user logs in via a Danish, nation-wide, digital identification system, MitID, and is immediately taken to the application form. Once the application is received, an auto-reply is sent to the applicant with a document showcasing interest groups that can help.
When the application is processed and case files have been gathered, sorted, indexed, and redactions made if needed, a phone call is made to the applicant by a government employee. The employee asks the applicant whether they want a hard copy of their case files sent to them via the postal service or digitally via a secure, government-run, email system called e-boks. If the applicant says they want their files digitally, the employee is supposed to asks if there’s a specific date and time that is convenient for the applicant to receive their files.
About two weeks later, the recipient of the case files is asked via e-boks to give their feedback on the entire process. Who exactly is supposed to receive this feedback and how it should be handled was not determined.
Flow Diagram 2
The second flow diagram is a little more complex than the first and covers two things.
Ways for the user to apply
How the municipality should handle applications
There is a need for a subpage on the municipality website that provides information to the user about the process. I began by identifying ways to access that subpage. For safety reasons, It is important to verify the identity of the applicant. While most Danes have their own MitID digital login, there are still a handful who do not. Those who do can simply log in and apply via the online form. Those who do not essentially have to show up in person at a government office with ID to get help.
The other half of the diagram covers how the municipality should handle applications and how case files should be passed on to the applicant.
In short, case files are sorted, indexed, redacted (where needed), and sent to the applicant either digitally or via the postal service, as explained earlier.