[Seol Dong-hoon, Professor of Sociology at Chonbuk National University; Compiled by Reporter Lee Ji-hyun ] There are two children who struggle to keep up with their schoolwork because their Korean language skills are limited. One child was born into a family with an international marriage, and the other has foreign parents working in Korea. Both children equally need Korean language education. While both are eligible for support in the educational setting, their eligibility may differ under family-oriented support programs. This is because the applicable policies vary depending on the parents’ nationality and family structure. As policies supporting multicultural families are revised, these disparities arising from differing eligibility criteria must also be addressed.

South Korea’s support policies for multicultural families were established in the early 2000s as international marriages increased. The primary objective was to help foreign nationals who had immigrated after marrying a Korean adapt to Korean society and raise their children. However, as the types of foreign families living in Korea have become more diverse, it has become difficult to meet the needs of all immigrant families through existing systems alone.

The Multicultural Family Support Act defines its beneficiaries primarily as families composed of marriage immigrants and those who have acquired Korean citizenship. In contrast, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act includes foreign students residing in Korea among those eligible for educational support. While children of foreign workers can receive support in school settings—such as through special Korean language classes—eligibility for certain services provided on a family basis may differ.

We must also consider adolescents who have arrived in Korea midway through their education. Adolescents who have moved to Korea from abroad may face difficulties adapting to the Korean language and school life. Even if the necessary support is similar, eligibility criteria may vary depending on family structure, residency status, and the specific programs they wish to utilize.

What matters most for children is the opportunity to learn Korean and adapt to school life. We must first consider the actual difficulties the child is facing, rather than the parents’ nationality. In particular, if children do not receive the education they need during their formative years, an educational gap may widen, leading to ongoing difficulties later on.

Social security for immigrants should also be discussed based on the same principle. Foreign nationals can enroll in health insurance or the National Pension System if they meet certain requirements. However, the application process varies depending on nationality, residency status, and enrollment criteria. We must examine, on a system-by-system basis, how well immigrants working and living in Korea can prepare for risks such as illness, unemployment, and old age.

This does not mean that all foreigners should immediately receive the same welfare benefits as Korean nationals. The National Pension and Health Insurance systems, where benefits are provided in exchange for premium payments, operate differently from the Basic Livelihood Security System, which uses tax revenue to assist those struggling to make ends meet. The scope of support under each system must be reviewed, taking into account factors such as premium payment status and length of stay.

Above all, we must address situations where people’s lives are at risk due to a lack of medical treatment or where they struggle to maintain a basic standard of living. The issue of children facing developmental challenges because they cannot receive a timely education is also a priority.

The government needs to accurately disclose the current status of migrants’ enrollment in social insurance and receipt of benefits, as well as the eligibility criteria for each system. While it is necessary to correct unreasonable preferential treatment, the focus should not be solely on reducing existing support. Systems should be designed based on actual hardships and support needs, rather than simply under the label of “multicultural families.”