The South Korean government has decided to consolidate its administrative and financial resources to address the leading cause of death among teenagers—suicide—amid a declining school-age population. The initiative aims to rescue students in emotional crisis by significantly reducing the youth suicide rate to below half of current levels by 2035.
On June 9, the Ministry of Education, along with 15 other relevant ministries including the Office for Government Policy Coordination and the Ministry of Health and Welfare, announced a comprehensive plan titled ‘Government-wide Measures for Preventing Youth Suicide.’ This initiative is the first outcome of the government’s broader ‘Nine Areas of Suicide Prevention Measures’ set to be released in phases by the end of this year. It reflects a strong commitment to proactively protect youth who have faced a continuous rise in emotional isolation over the past decade.
The government has set a medium- to long-term quantitative goal to reduce the youth suicide rate from 7.2 per 100,000 in 2025 (provisional figure) to 6.5 by 2030, and ultimately to 4.0 by 2035. To achieve this, five key initiatives will be implemented, focusing on prevention, detection, intervention, recovery, and infrastructure, while establishing a continuous cooperation system that breaks down barriers between ministries.
To block exposure to harmful environments for the digital-native generation, an AI-based monitoring system will be introduced to screen online information and harmful sites that may trigger self-harm and suicide. This system will be developed in collaboration with the Ministry of Science and ICT and the Korea Communications Commission.
Additionally, tools to assess students’ emotional and behavioral characteristics will be enhanced to detect crisis signs early, and a system will be established to monitor virtual spaces on social media and areas at risk of suicide.
The intervention and counseling infrastructure both inside and outside schools will also be significantly upgraded. The functions of the We Class Centers, which are managed by local education offices, will be specialized, and mental health professionals will visit schools directly to expand treatment networks.
To encourage timely treatment, the scope of financial support for treatment will be broadened. Vulnerable groups, such as those at high risk of suicide or families of suicide victims, will receive close support through psychological autopsies and tailored mental health care services from multiple ministries.
Following the announcement of these robust government measures, the education sector expressed mixed reactions. While there is strong agreement on the importance of the initiative, concerns were raised about its effectiveness and potential administrative burdens on schools.
The Korean Federation of Teachers’ Associations welcomed the government’s efforts to unite resources to protect students’ lives. However, they pointed out that the responsibilities and obligations of schools and teachers in all stages of suicide prevention would be disproportionately expanded without adequate protective measures or solutions to alleviate their workload.
They specifically noted that with the current surge in crisis students, the We Class facilities are already overwhelmed. If the new measures focus solely on expanding external professional institutions, schools will bear the excessive administrative burden of paperwork and reporting serious issues during the coordination process. They emphasized the need for legal protections for teachers and simplified procedures to shield them from unwarranted complaints and child abuse reports while guiding emotionally troubled students.
Conversely, the Korean Teachers and Education Workers Union criticized the government’s plan as superficial, claiming it ignores the root causes of the issue and merely seeks to control outcomes. They argued that the underlying factors driving youth to extreme choices include the pressures of early learning, excessive private education costs, and a competitive education system that labels individuals based solely on exam results.
The union stressed that without reflecting on the unique educational conflicts and the politics of fear surrounding failure in South Korean society, merely increasing the number of counseling teachers and expanding school records will not resolve youth emotional crises. They called for an immediate halt to the relentless ranking competition disrupting the public education ecosystem and for the restoration of warm school communities where students and teachers can rebuild mutual bonds, alongside fundamental reforms to the college entrance system.
On June 9, the Ministry of Education, along with 15 other relevant ministries including the Office for Government Policy Coordination and the Ministry of Health and Welfare, announced a comprehensive plan titled ‘Government-wide Measures for Preventing Youth Suicide.’ This initiative is the first outcome of the government’s broader ‘Nine Areas of Suicide Prevention Measures’ set to be released in phases by the end of this year. It reflects a strong commitment to proactively protect youth who have faced a continuous rise in emotional isolation over the past decade.
The government has set a medium- to long-term quantitative goal to reduce the youth suicide rate from 7.2 per 100,000 in 2025 (provisional figure) to 6.5 by 2030, and ultimately to 4.0 by 2035. To achieve this, five key initiatives will be implemented, focusing on prevention, detection, intervention, recovery, and infrastructure, while establishing a continuous cooperation system that breaks down barriers between ministries.
To block exposure to harmful environments for the digital-native generation, an AI-based monitoring system will be introduced to screen online information and harmful sites that may trigger self-harm and suicide. This system will be developed in collaboration with the Ministry of Science and ICT and the Korea Communications Commission.
Additionally, tools to assess students’ emotional and behavioral characteristics will be enhanced to detect crisis signs early, and a system will be established to monitor virtual spaces on social media and areas at risk of suicide.
The intervention and counseling infrastructure both inside and outside schools will also be significantly upgraded. The functions of the We Class Centers, which are managed by local education offices, will be specialized, and mental health professionals will visit schools directly to expand treatment networks.
To encourage timely treatment, the scope of financial support for treatment will be broadened. Vulnerable groups, such as those at high risk of suicide or families of suicide victims, will receive close support through psychological autopsies and tailored mental health care services from multiple ministries.
Following the announcement of these robust government measures, the education sector expressed mixed reactions. While there is strong agreement on the importance of the initiative, concerns were raised about its effectiveness and potential administrative burdens on schools.
The Korean Federation of Teachers’ Associations welcomed the government’s efforts to unite resources to protect students’ lives. However, they pointed out that the responsibilities and obligations of schools and teachers in all stages of suicide prevention would be disproportionately expanded without adequate protective measures or solutions to alleviate their workload.
They specifically noted that with the current surge in crisis students, the We Class facilities are already overwhelmed. If the new measures focus solely on expanding external professional institutions, schools will bear the excessive administrative burden of paperwork and reporting serious issues during the coordination process. They emphasized the need for legal protections for teachers and simplified procedures to shield them from unwarranted complaints and child abuse reports while guiding emotionally troubled students.
Conversely, the Korean Teachers and Education Workers Union criticized the government’s plan as superficial, claiming it ignores the root causes of the issue and merely seeks to control outcomes. They argued that the underlying factors driving youth to extreme choices include the pressures of early learning, excessive private education costs, and a competitive education system that labels individuals based solely on exam results.
The union stressed that without reflecting on the unique educational conflicts and the politics of fear surrounding failure in South Korean society, merely increasing the number of counseling teachers and expanding school records will not resolve youth emotional crises. They called for an immediate halt to the relentless ranking competition disrupting the public education ecosystem and for the restoration of warm school communities where students and teachers can rebuild mutual bonds, alongside fundamental reforms to the college entrance system.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.