Young Carers Fall to 4.1% by Year 11 and Return to 6.2% in Their Third University Year — The Person Cared For Shifts From a Sibling to a Parent With Mental Illness
In figures from Japan's Children and Families Agency, the share reporting a family member they care for runs 6.5% in year 6, 5.7% in year 8, 4.1% in year 11, then returns to 6.2% in the third year of university. Over the same span the person cared for shifts from a sibling to a mother, and the most common condition given for that mother is mental illness. This piece reads the point where care that ends is replaced by care that does not, arriving alongside the search for work.
TL;DR
- The share reporting a family member they care for runs 6.5% in year 6, 5.7% in year 8 and 4.1% in year 11, then returns to 6.2% in the third year of university
- Siblings account for 71.0% of those cared for among primary pupils, while among university students a mother is most common at 35.4%
- For those mothers the most common condition given is mental illness, at 28.7%, so the substance of the care has changed in kind
Among university students, the most common person cared for is a mother, and the most common condition given is mental illness, at 28.7%. Caring for a younger sibling ends with time; caring for a parent with a mental illness does not. Note that 4.0% of university students answering "no" had cared for someone in the past, and the survey itself notes that cases such as keeping a young sibling company while a parent is at work may be raising the figures.
What Is Happening
The share dips by year 11 and returns at university, as the person cared for shifts from sibling to mother
A paper compiled by the Children and Families Agency sets out figures by school stage. The share answering that they have a family member they care for runs 6.5% in year 6, 5.7% in year 8 and 4.1% in year 11 at full-time secondary schools. It falls as the school years rise.
Then comes the third year of university. 6.2%. Up again from 4.1% in year 11. And among university students, 4.0% of those answering that they have no one to care for had cared for someone in the past.
As the figure returns, the substance changes. The family member most often named as needing care is a sibling, at 71.0% among primary pupils, then 61.8% in lower secondary and 44.3% in upper secondary, falling throughout. In its place, among university students, a mother is most common at 35.4%. And the condition most often given for that mother is mental illness, at 28.7%.
Two things carried under one word have swapped places here.
Background & Context
Care that ends is replaced by care that does not, while the person says nothing is wrong
Caring for a young sibling is resolved by time. It ends when the sibling grows. The survey itself notes that cases such as keeping a young sibling company while a parent is at work are included and may be raising the figures. That is not to say the burden is nothing, but it is a burden with an end in sight.
Caring for a parent with a mental illness does not work that way. The person does not grow up and become independent. If anything, the need persists precisely when the carer is deciding whether to take a job and whether to leave home. The third year of university coincides with the search for work. Where to work, and whether it is possible to move away, bear directly on family care.
Yet this group is hard to find. Asked what they want to do but cannot because of caring, the largest answer at every stage is nothing in particular: 63.9% of primary pupils, 58.0% of lower secondary, 52.1% of upper secondary and 51.9% of university students, above half throughout. Next comes not having time to themselves. To the person, this is family life rather than a problem.
An inter-ministerial project team set this out as far back as May 2021. Young carers are structurally hard to surface because it is a sensitive matter inside the household; awareness is low, and neither the child nor the adults around them notice when support is needed. The same report goes one step further.
There is no clear support measure or point of contact for connecting young carers to help, and there are cases in which welfare professionals and others treat them as caring capacity when arranging service provision.
Those doing the supporting had counted the child as part of the care supply. Not an oversight by the system, but an entry in its arithmetic.
Reading the Structure
Detection sits in schools, but the substance changes just as young people leave them
Detection, as arranged today, sits in schools. Following the legal amendment strengthening young carer support, the Children and Families Agency notified local authorities of its background and entry into force in June 2024. A school, as a place where the same child is seen every day, suits the role of noticing.
But the substance of the care changes just as young people leave school. That a share falling to 4.1% in year 11 returns to 6.2% by the third year of university means that either people missed by the net during school years, or people whose caring began after them, are sitting there. If the former, the net has holes; if the latter, a mechanism routed through schools was never going to reach them. Either way, placing it in schools alone is not enough.
These decisions are also hard to undo. Choosing an employer, giving up further study, staying in the family home. Each is expensive to reverse. In terms of information asymmetry, the person does not know their situation qualifies for support, and those offering support do not know where they are. Neither side knows, and the path is set anyway.
So where to place the effort? Three possibilities.
One is to change the words at the entry point. Ask whether anything is wrong and the answer is nothing in particular. Ask a factual question, such as how many hours in a weekday go to caring for family, and the answer changes. Capture the stage before difficulty has been named, as a quantity of fact.
Two is to widen the places where detection happens beyond schools: university careers services and student counselling, local authority services for young adults, and psychiatric care. The clinic treating a parent is in a position to know there are children in that household.
Three is the design of work itself. Family care leave is built mainly around an ageing parent. Someone in their early twenties beginning a career while continuously supporting a parent with a mental illness is not squarely anticipated by the present framework.
Needing to count separately what has been provided and what has arrived is the same structure taken up in policy exclusion and non-take-up（このサイトの記事）. How to design an entry point can draw on the method in mapping stakeholders（このサイトの記事）. The figure of 6.2% is better read not as a share that fell and came back, but as a different thing appearing.
Further Reading
- ちょっと気になる社会保障 V4 (Social Security: A Closer Look, V4)（外部サイト、新しいタブで開きます） (Yoshikazu Kenjoh, Keiso Shobo). An introduction that explains, from the design principles outward, who pays for social security and whom it supports. It sits behind the question raised above of how far care once carried by families should be taken on by society.
References
Current State of Young Carer Support, FY2025 (Reference Material 6) — Abuse Prevention Division, Support Bureau, Children and Families Agency (2026). Children and Families Agency
Background and Entry into Force of the Legal Amendment Strengthening Young Carer Support — Children and Families Agency (2024). Children and Families Agency
On Young Carers — Children and Families Agency (2026). Children and Families Agency
Research Report on the Actual Situation of Young Carers — Japan Research Institute (2022). FY2021 Child and Childcare Support Promotion Research Project
Statistics cited in this article
- 1Children and Families Agency, Current State of Young Carer Support, FY2025（FY2025） Open source
