"South Korea, Only 1.3% of Youth Eligible for Support"...How to Address the Blind Spots? [Youth Trapped in Caregiving]

④Youth Care Policy Risks Being a 'Bitter Pill'
Statistics Korea Adds Family Care Time Question to Population and Housing Census
Care Difficult to Measure in Time... Need to Expand Discretion
"Youth Care Should Be Identified at Eup, Myeon, Dong Levels"

Editor's NoteThree years ago, a 22-year-old young man, driven by financial hardship and caregiving labor, caused the death of his father in the so-called 'caregiving murder' case. At that time, political circles clamored to enact support laws, but their slogans ended up as empty promises. Instead, local governments stepped in, naming young people caring for elderly or ill family members as 'family caregiving youth' and promising caregiving support policies. However, children who do not meet the age criteria for support were left in blind spots. Hoping that no more children will be deprived of care due to caregiving burdens, this [Youth Trapped in Caregiving] series diagnoses the caregiving labor of youth and contemplates the way forward.

It is a remarkable achievement that, three years after the caregiving youth issue became known in Korea, a dedicated agency was established and policy support such as self-care allowances and daily caregiving services has increased. However, the fact that the blind spots where support cannot be received remain wide is a challenge that must be addressed. Experts emphasize that accurately identifying the number of caregiving youth is crucial for support, suggesting that the current number in Korea is too low, possibly leading to inadequate understanding of the actual situation.

CEO Jo Gi-hyeon received a medical bill after his father, who had dementia in the past, was hospitalized. Photo by CEO Jo.

Family Caregiving Youth: 5-8% in Other Countries but Only 1.3% in Korea?

According to the 'Social Trends in Korea 2024' report released by Statistics Korea on the 19th of this month, the government estimates the number of caregiving youth at 153,000. This corresponds to 1.3% of the youth population aged 13 to 34. This estimate is based on the 2020 Population Census, focusing on youth aged 13 to 34 who live in households with family members requiring caregiving for six months or more, and without middle-aged family members (35-64 years old) who do not require care.

In contrast, countries with active caregiving policies estimate the proportion of caregiving youth as 5-8% of their youth populations: the UK (ages 11-18) at 8%, New Zealand (15-24) at 8%, Italy (15-24) at 7.2%, and Germany (12-17) at 5%. Seon-yu Ham, Associate Research Fellow at the Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs, who has proposed family caregiving surveys using population censuses since 2022, explained, "The government implements policies based on priorities, so it adopts the most conservative estimates. We believe that about 4-5% of youth in Korea bear family caregiving burdens. This is a minimum figure calculated only for cases involving illness or disability in the family."

Even applying just 5% to Korea's 13-34 population (12.7 million as of November 2024) yields an estimate of at least 635,000 youth caring for family members. Although direct comparison is difficult due to differences in survey age ranges across countries, the number of caregiving youth identified by the Korean government is far too low compared to other countries.

The government plans to add questions about family caregiving time in next year's Population and Housing Census. Ham expressed, "It is very welcome that family caregiving will be included in the census," but also pointed out the limitations of simply estimating caregiving intensity by time. Such a conservative approach may cause next year's census to also fall short of expectations."

Ham Seon-yu, Associate Research Fellow at the Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs. Provided by Associate Research Fellow Ham.

He criticized, "Family caregiving is an area difficult to quantify for each case. Even if caregiving hours per week are the same, say 40-50 hours, the burden differs greatly if one youth bears all responsibility versus if three to four family members share it. How can accurate assessments be made based solely on caregiving hours?"

He emphasized the discretion of caseworkers, stating, "One-on-one interviews with caregivers and care recipients and home visits are necessary to understand how much burden a household carries and what support is needed." In the UK, dedicated managers under the Care Act conduct health and psychological assessments and provide tailored support such as education and training programs for caregiving youth.

How to Reduce Blind Spots? Discover at Eup/Myeon/Dong Level and Match Perspectives

Experts stress that younger caregiving youth often do not recognize themselves as eligible for support, so policies should operate with a 'discovery-centered' approach. According to the 'Status and Policy Improvement Plan for Family Caregiving Children and Adolescents' by the Green Umbrella Children's Foundation in early September, when caregiving youth were asked whether they consider themselves family caregivers, more than half answered 'Don't know well' (49.5%) or 'No' (7.0%).

Currently, the government has established the 'Youth Future Centers' as dedicated agencies for caregiving youth in four metropolitan cities/provinces: Incheon, Ulsan, Chungbuk, and Jeonbuk. However, experts agree that policies at the eup/myeon/dong (township/village/neighborhood) level are necessary to properly discover hidden caregiving youth. Policies implemented at the metropolitan level through Youth Future Centers have limitations in identifying caregiving youth who need support within local communities.

Jok Gi-hyeon, CEO of the family care youth community 'Ninbun'. Photo by CEO Jo.

Jo Ki-hyun, CEO of the family caregiving youth community 'N-inbun,' criticized, "The metropolitan-level support system of Youth Future Centers only reaches those who apply, making it practically ineffective."

Ham also pointed out, "Providing family caregiving services is only possible at the eup/myeon/dong level, not at the city/province level, but there are only four Youth Future Centers nationwide. This makes it difficult to implement the project from the start." He added, "Would a young caregiving youth in northern Gyeonggi go all the way to southern Gyeonggi to apply? In reality, it's just creating a platform and saying 'Try applying once,' but expecting more than that is difficult."

He also highlighted the need for schools to assist in discovering caregiving youth. Ham suggested, "School counselors or programs like WeClass play important roles. Conducting family caregiving-related education once or twice a year and administering brief self-check surveys of two or three questions can easily identify caregiving youth. If psychological tests show excessively high depression or anger scores, examining the home environment often reveals caregiving youth." He added that students frequently absent or neglecting school supplies may also be caregiving youth, making it easier for teachers to detect such cases.

The shortage of personnel at Youth Future Centers is also a chronic problem. Long-term support is needed for caregiving youth to become independent, but with only 14 staff members per center, proper management is difficult. Jo criticized, "Although Youth Future Centers are designated as 'case management agencies,' the current staffing level essentially means they do not manage cases. Caregiving youth lack adults who can advise them about their future, so even if self-care allowances are provided, they do not know how to use them. Therefore, the role of dedicated personnel is crucial, but the roles of staff at Youth Future Centers are unclear."

Caregiving Youth Support Policies in Other Countries?

Many countries mandate schools and hospitals to identify caregiving youth. The UK Department of Health and Social Care collaborates with the Department of Education and caregiving-related nonprofits to support school nurses in identifying caregiving youth within schools. In Australia, staff intervene early by closely observing students who frequently arrive late or are absent or exhibit behavioral problems during class, and report family caregiving status in the school record system.

In the UK, dedicated family caregiving managers provide detailed case management tailored by age. According to the Seoul Welfare Foundation's 'Comparative Study of Overseas Family Caregiving Child, Adolescent, and Youth Support Systems,' the UK categorizes caregiving youth through a 'Family Caregiving Child and Adolescent Needs and Transition Assessment' into those needing care and support, those preparing for adulthood independently, and those caring for younger individuals while preparing for adulthood, providing separate support. The assessment includes items such as levels of isolation and loneliness, educational status, poverty status, relationships with friends, family, and spouses, and future plans.