20260507_COL_A: Children in need of care also have the right to live outs...

Kim Ye-won

The author is a lawyer at the Disability Rights Law Center.

Last month, Korea’s National Assembly passed the Act on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, formally writing the principle of deinstitutionalization into law. The measure recognizes the right of people with disabilities to live within their communities rather than in institutions, marking a policy shift away from viewing disabled individuals as objects of management and toward recognizing them as holders of rights.

Teenagers at the Nest Youth Recovery Support Center pose for a photograph. The facility, often described as an alternative family or judicial group home, serves as a second home for youths placed under protective measures by the court. The facility is not directly related to the specific case discussed in the article. [NEST YOUTH RECOVERY SUPPORT CENTER/JOONGANG ILBO]

In the postwar era and through rapid urbanization, community-based caregiving weakened, while institutional protection expanded to fill the gap. Institutions undoubtedly saved lives, but their operational structure was closer to efficient management than individualized care. People in need of assistance were gathered into one space, supervised and controlled in the name of protection.

The problem is that this system still functions as the default model. It is not simply because of limited budgets or resources. Few systems are as convenient for measuring visible outcomes as institutions. As a result, when Korea designs protection systems for vulnerable groups, institutions are often the first solution considered. People with disabilities, children and victims of crime are routinely sent to shelters or residential facilities.

What does this reality look like for children in ultralow birthrate Korea? In 2024, authorities identified 2,836 children in need of protection. Of those, 858 returned home or were placed with relatives, while 1,978 received protective measures. Among them, 1,583 children — about 80 percent — entered institutions. Even measured against the overall total, more than half ended up in facilities.

Because community-based alternatives remain insufficient, residential facilities for children remain overcrowded even in an era of declining births. For children requiring protection, institutions have become not the exception but the default option.

The United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child defines institutional care as a last resort and emphasizes family- and community-based support as the guiding principle. Korea’s child welfare system remains far from that standard.

At one policy discussion on deinstitutionalization for children, a senior official from the Ministry of Health and Welfare reportedly asked, “Children leave facilities once they become adults anyway, so why is deinstitutionalization necessary?” The remark revealed a perspective that views child protection largely as temporary separation and management.

Yet childhood is a continuous developmental process, and the environment in which a child spends each day has lasting effects into adulthood.

The current residential options available to children in need are largely limited to family homes or institutions. But many children fit into neither category. One middle school student whom the author once represented as a lawyer had been abandoned by her mother at a young age, while her father suffered from alcohol dependency. The child became the victim of sexual abuse by her father and was separated from him after reporting the crime.

But the child later experienced emotional abuse inside the facility where she was placed. Unable to return home, she repeatedly harmed herself in despair and was eventually admitted to a psychiatric hospital. Afterward, every institution refused to accept her. What she wanted was not extraordinary treatment but simply a safe place where she could be cared for. Yet the system offered no functioning option capable of meeting that need.

The problem extends beyond such cases. Children fleeing effectively collapsed or severely dysfunctional homes — often described as “youth outside the family” — have few realistic alternatives. Legally, minors can do very little independently. Securing stable housing or income is extremely difficult. Shelters also generally notify guardians when a child enters, creating another barrier for youths already afraid of returning home.

Youth living outside their families receive counseling as well as art and music therapy services at the Gangbuk Youth Dream Center, a youth shelter in Seoul. Located in Suyu-dong, Gangbuk District, the center provides temporary protection and counseling support for vulnerable youth. [JOONGANG ILBO]

Children require protection for many different reasons, including abandonment, abuse, poverty, illness, divorce and parental imprisonment. Each child requires tailored support, yet the system remains rigid. Adoptions number only around 200 cases annually, while returning children to families often exposes gaps between policy and reality. As a result, Korea’s child protection system continues to revolve around institutions.

Over time, this institutional dependence narrows opportunities to imagine or develop alternative forms of support.

Around the world, countries have introduced intermediate care models combining housing assistance with case management to bridge the gap between family care and institutionalization. Some systems also provide gradual independent housing tied to life skills education for teenagers preparing for adulthood.

As Korean society changes, family structures and relationships have also become more diverse, while limiting institutional care to a last resort has become an accepted international standard. Yet Korea’s child welfare system still revolves around only two choices: family or institution.

Under this structure, children who cannot safely return home and also struggle to remain in institutions paradoxically end up excluded from protection itself.

The recent disability rights law recognized the right to live outside institutions. It reflected a broader shift from management-based protection toward a rights-based approach. But child welfare has yet to fully reach that transition. After Children’s Day, the question remains: Can Korea also guarantee children who cannot return home the right to a life beyond institutions?

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.