In March 2022, Hyundai Department Store sparked controversy for prohibiting a mother and her infant daughter from entering its VIP lounge. Its policy states, “People can use the lounge once a day with a companion, but children under 10 are prohibited.” Hyundai Department Store explained that the age-limit restriction aims to maintain a “luxurious, comfortable atmosphere” in the lounge and address potential safety concerns, adding, “We did not design the lounge with children in mind.”

In recent years, South Korea has witnessed a steady rise in child-free zones, also known as “no-kids zones”. While some argue that these zones address the practical concerns of businesses and customers, others see them as a reflection of growing social intolerance towards one another, leading to the marginalization of families. Since the expansion of no-kids zones is a multifaceted issue, this article delves into the perspectives of businesses, parents, and the public and government. Instead of understanding this issue as a binary between parents and those disturbed by children, this article introduces a promising balance of various opinions: the concept of “care kids zones.” By replacing “no” with “care,” South Korea gains an opportunity to address this issue in a way that promotes harmony. 

What are No-Kids Zones?

No-kids zones refer to spaces where access and usage are restricted to adults, prohibiting the presence of children. The concept first emerged around July 2014 in Gangnam and Hongdae, where cafes and restaurants started banning entry by children. The main reason behind this was children’s disruptive behavior without appropriate supervision from their parents. These zones are most commonly found in cafes and bakeries(76.1%) and restaurants(18%), according to a 2023 survey by the Ministry of Health and Welfare. Recently, leisure spaces such as department stores have also started to adopt these policies, as mentioned earlier.  

Why, then, should the rise of no-kids zones be considered a troubling issue in South Korea? No-kids zones are increasing across the country rapidly, which may have long-lasting impacts on societal fragmentation by removing families’ presence in public spaces. A report by the Jeju Research Institution identified at least 542 businesses operating as no-kids zones in Korea in 2021, with the actual number expected to be higher since these zones do not require registration. JongYik Jeong from Ewha Womans University noted that this number represents an increase of over 45% since 2018, underscoring the rapid expansion of no-kids establishments. Now, let us examine the different perspectives on this issue to understand the profound impact this has on societal cohesion.  

The Perspectives of Parents: Facing the Demographic Cliff

The proliferation of no-kids zones may lead parents to feel that their parental ability is insufficient since many attribute these establishments to children being disruptive without parental supervision. Moreover, the no-kids establishments uncover deeply entrenched attitudes that eliminate the presence of families with young children in public spaces. These days, children are not only considered as disturbances but nuisances in public spaces by many, and this sentiment may apply to parents. Particularly, as mothers are typically the ones carrying children in public, they are likely to feel excluded too by societal hostility towards their children. 

This sentiment coincides with the country’s dire demographic situation. Since 2018, South Korea has been the only OECD member with a birth rate below 1.0, and in 2024, the number of elementary school entrants declined by 10.3% compared to the previous year. Critics say that the proliferation of no-kids establishments may exacerbate this trend by marginalizing families with children. Since no-kids zones signify that children are considered burdensome in public spaces, people will perceive society as less accommodating for family life. The exclusionary nature of no-kids policies could also deepen generational divides, as individual convenience is prioritized over the needs of families with children. This, in turn, creates a vicious cycle where cultural individualism and diminishing population perpetuate.   

Furthermore, this exclusion aligns with South Korea’s demanding work culture, which leaves parents struggling to balance career and childcare responsibilities. According to OECD data, the average annual working hours for South Korea were 1,874 hours in 2023, which exceeds the average by 155 hours. The fact that this number has fallen by nearly 200 hours over the past decade highlights the pressuring working environments in South Korea. 

In these working conditions, parents find it difficult to find a work-life balance, leading to a significant source of stress and limited energy for child supervision. This creates a perception in society that children are unruly in public spaces, and parents are not taking full responsibility. In such a demanding environment, the rise of unwelcoming environments for families further alienates parents. 

The Business Perspective: Facing Practical Challenges

From the perspectives of business owners, the decision to implement no-kids policies stems from legitimate concerns, which makes this issue more complex. A 2023 survey by the Ministry of Health and Welfare revealed that 35.9% of businesses cited potential conflicts with other customers due to noisy children as a primary reason for implementing the policy. Another 35.2% expressed a preference for maintaining a quiet atmosphere, while 28.1% worried about disputes with parents who failed to supervise their children adequately. As these data show, businesses are facing practical challenges for their profit. They are trying to meet the customers’ needs while protecting themselves from having to be fully responsible for issues involving children. In this light, no-kids policies may seem like a good solution to mitigate risks and complaints.  

These concerns are not unfounded, indeed. In 2011, a child collided with a staff member carrying a hot pot in one of the restaurants in Busan, which resulted in a costly legal battle for the business. The Busan District Court ordered the restaurant to compensate the family with 41 million won, attributing 30% of the responsibility to the child’s parents and 70% to the restaurant. This case reveals that there is a lack of insurance programs that offer affordable, comprehensive insurance programs that cover businesses’ efforts in trying to incorporate the presence of children into their establishments. Specifically, businesses are not given enough subsidies to deal with accidents raised by children. Furthermore, there are no clear, consistent government guidelines for child safety measures in public spaces. This places a bigger psychological burden on business owners, as children are often unpredictable. 

The Public and Government Response: Balancing Opinions

The debate over the increase of no-kids zones has drawn attention from public institutions and the government too. The National Human Rights Commission of Korea has emphasized the need to balance business interests with human rights. It noted that companies have the right to establish policies for profit, but that right is limited. Policies prohibiting children restrict parents with young kids from accessing certain areas. Specifically, such policies may violate Article 11 of the Constitutional Law and Article 2, Clause 3 of the National Rights Committee Law, which forbid age-based discrimination. Having this in mind, in May 2023, Jeju Island’s local council, Song-Chang-Won, proposed the No-Kids Zones Prohibition Ordinance. However, it was met with significant protests by businesses and individuals, leading to the bill’s suspension. 

In fact, the public largely remains to support the adoption of no-kids policies. According to a survey conducted by the Korea Research Institute titled “What is the public opinion about the No Kids Zone,” 71% of respondents deemed no kids zones acceptable, while only 17% opposed them. Notably, among those who had been disturbed by children, 82% supported no-kids zones. This highly resonates with the broader cultural trend of prioritizing more peaceful, controlled spaces that offer people opportunities to escape from their overwhelming daily lives. Dr. Xander Tilland critically notes, “Koreans in their 20s and 30s have high expectations for private spaces and are intolerant of the noise made by young children and seniors. These attitudes reflect a reluctance to embrace others in public spaces.” While it is understandable that younger generations face extreme stress and seek peaceful spaces, the cultural shift from collectivism—where mutual tolerance was valued—to individualism raises concerns about societal cohesion. This transformation addresses individual needs but weakens communal harmony.  

A Promising Resolution Towards a Tolerant Society: The Care Kids Zones

Viewed from different perspectives, it becomes clear that a balance is mandatory. Specifically, parents should teach their children appropriate public behaviors and take responsibility when their children disturb customers. If children act inappropriately, parents should address the situation and apologize. Businesses, at the same time, should strive to create safe environments for children by clearly marking potential hazards so that parents can proactively manage their children’s safety. These mutual efforts can lead to a more harmonious society. 

The concept of care kids zones—by replacing the exclusionary “no” with the inclusive “care”—presents a promising resolution by integrating conflicting opinions and addressing the needs of all stakeholders. These zones create a welcoming environment for families with children while emphasizing parental responsibility for supervision and businesses’ responsibility for ensuring a safe and accommodating space for all customers. Typically, a care kids zone would enforce clear guidelines such as the following: “XX is a care kids zone. Parents must accompany their children at all times due to safety risks. The café holds no liability for accidents, and parents are fully responsible for damages caused by children. Please respect others so that everyone can enjoy their time here.” This approach balances inclusivity and responsibility, providing families with a welcoming experience while addressing the practical concerns of businesses and other customers. 

However, critics argue that this campaign places the full responsibility for any issues caused by children solely on the parents. Hence, to truly tackle the issue, we should aim to seek a more comprehensive balance that includes proper parental supervision, strong support from governments and policies for businesses, and the fostering of mutual understanding. In this light, the “Seoul Kids OK Zone” initiative, an application of care kids zones, seeks to create more child-friendly spaces by encouraging businesses to offer child-friendly menus, utensils, and furniture. In return, businesses receive a 300,000 won subsidy for child-friendly equipment, which not only offsets the costs of preparing to welcome children but also increases their overall income in the long term.

In conclusion, the rise of no-kids zones calls for South Korean society to address growing intolerance, which, if left disregarded, could have long-lasting effects on social fragmentation. It is crucial to recognize that children are a natural and necessary part of society. By establishing more care kids zones with ample governmental support and fostering a culture of mutual respect, South Korea can take a meaningful step towards building a more cohesive society.