[Edaily Yeom Jung-inn Reporter Jeong Yu-jin, Intern Reporter] An eldest son with a disability was found dead several days after his death. This tragedy occurred because his mother and younger brother, who lived with him—all of whom had intellectual disabilities—were unable to notice his death in time.

In households composed entirely of people with disabilities, such as this one, there is a high likelihood that they will face difficulties in coping with unexpected situations. However, it has been confirmed that support systems for these households are not yet in place. Experts have pointed out the need to establish a separate management and support system for households composed entirely of people with disabilities.

660,000 Households Where “Every Family Member Has a Disability”—No Policies in Place for Them

According to police on the 17th, Mr. A, a man in his 20s with an intellectual disability, was found dead in a home in Jungnang-gu on the 6th of last month. Police responded to a report from his younger brother stating, “My older brother isn’t moving,” and discovered Mr. A’s body. At the time of discovery, several days had already passed since his death, and the body had begun to decompose. Police determined that Mr. A had died two to three days before he was found and concluded there were no signs of foul play. An autopsy conducted by the National Forensic Service determined the cause of death to be acute cardiac arrest.

This incident is a clear example of how so-called “lonely deaths while living with others” can occur even when family members live together, if all members lack the awareness of the situation and the ability to respond. According to the “2025 Population and Housing Census Registered Census Results” from the National Data Agency, the number of households composed solely of people with disabilities last year was 660,000, accounting for 29.2% of all households with members with disabilities. This means that the possibility of a tragedy like the one involving Mr. A’s family cannot be ruled out for these 660,000 households.

The problem is that there is no significant difference in welfare provisions between households with a single person with a disability and those where all members have disabilities. According to the Ministry of Health and Welfare, current welfare services for people with disabilities are provided on an individual basis, depending on personal needs and the severity of the disability. While “integrated case management” can provide more attentive welfare benefits if the need for additional care is recognized, the criteria for such recognition do not specifically account for vulnerabilities in household composition, such as “all members having disabilities.”

The reality on the ground is not much different. Based on statements from officials at various local governments and community centers, there were no criteria for providing special care simply because a household consists solely of people with disabilities.

An official from a local government explained, “There are no guidelines that automatically designate a household as ‘at-risk’ or assign it a higher vulnerability rating simply because it consists of two or more people with disabilities or because they live together without others,” adding, “It is standard practice to comprehensively consider the severity of the disability and the care situation.”

“Warning Signs Not Apparent on Paper Must Be Identified on the Ground”

Furthermore, it was determined that there were limitations to comprehensive crisis management because, on paper, Mr. A’s family was registered as a four-person household that included one non-disabled member. When Edaily interviewed Mr. A’s family, neighbors, and others in the community, it was revealed that his father—the only non-disabled household member listed on record—had not been living with them until recently. Although the local government provided some emergency assistance to this household, it failed to systematically manage the crisis faced by a family that lacked an actual caregiver.

Although Mr. A has a record of finding employment with the help of the local government, he has not held a job where he regularly clocked in over the past three years. While families like this require a system that allows for ongoing external monitoring, the external channels through which crisis situations could be detected were effectively severed.

Voices from the front lines also point out that there is a severe lack of capacity to closely monitor these families. An official at a community center in Jongno-gu lamented, “Contacting at-risk households and rushing over at the drop of a hat has become a more significant part of our work than our core duties,” adding, “With limited personnel, it’s not a viable solution to emphasize responding to at-risk households without realistic countermeasures.”

Experts suggest that a more careful approach is needed for households composed entirely of people with disabilities.

Jeong Won-seok, president of the Korea Green Foundation for People with Disabilities, pointed out, “The key is to gain a detailed understanding of each household’s specific circumstances,” adding, “We must not underestimate the risk simply because a person is able to work or has a cohabitant.” He further emphasized, “We must be able to detect signs that aren’t evident in official documents.”

Cho Han-jin, a professor in the Department of Social Welfare at Daegu University, emphasized, “It is most important for local government officials to visit these households regularly to assess the situation.” He explained, “Households composed entirely of people with intellectual disabilities may appear not to require care staff because they have no difficulty moving around. However, they are more likely to be exposed to various risks, so their situation must be continuously monitored from the outside.”