After Decriminalization: Has Abortion Access been Improved for Sexual Assault Victims?
Authors:   Korean Association of Victimology, Kim Jeonghye , Lee Mikyoung , Tong Cheyon 
Published: May 2024

Access to safe abortion is a key aspect of sexual and reproductive rights. However, even after the decriminalization of abortion in 2021, abortion care has not been normalized in South Korea. This study analyzes the current state of medical assistance and access to abortion after decriminalization, with a focus on abortion due to sexual violence, keeping in mind that abortion, even before decriminalization, was not punished and it was included in the government’s medical expenses subsidy. In-depth interviews with sexual violence victim support workers and healthcare providers revealed that while decriminalization has improved access to care and information, many interviewees did not see any significant changes in medical support for abortion for sexual violence victims. Both support organizations and providers often felt that “abortion has not been legal yet” and as a result, they felt that they were under pressure to make sure that a pregnancy was the result of sexual violence in order to justify providing assistance to victims. As a result they tend to impose strict requirements on victims for providing medical assistance for them. In some cases, support organizations required a complaint of sexual violence, DNA matching of the perpetrator and the fetus, a case conference decision by an external advisor, or parental consent for adolescent victims as prerequisites for medical assistance, which made it impossible for victims to receive assistance. In addition, the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family’s guidelines discourage supporting organizations to apply for assistance as the guidelines stress the possibility of being accused of false accusation and redeeming of support money. It was also pointed out that the guidelines do not specify whether to support medical expenses for pregnancies resulting from prostitution, so the possibility of support is ambiguous. The most difficult thing with regard to supporting abortion was to find a medical professional who would provide medical care ad abortion to victims. Despite being a victim of sexual violence, women were frequently rejected by healthcare providers and were not officially provided with information on which hospitals could provide abortion care. The experiences of being rejected by medical professionals or support organizations in itself caused worse stigma and pain of abortion for victims. Even at hardly found hospitals, it was often the case that hospitals refuse abortion operation expenses be covered by medical insurance and charged high fees while abortions were mostly performed surgically. Parental consent was required for all processes of investigation and medical assistance, leading adolescent victims to abandon their requests for assistance because they were unable to inform their guardians about their problems. There were also challenges in ensuring the right to self-determination for victims with developmental disabilities. Secondary victimization has been found occurred during the medical assistance, investigation, and victim assistance processes. Post-abortion support for contraception was limited, and counseling and follow-up support were scarce. Since the decriminalization of abortion, amendments to the abortion law were submitted to the National Assembly which maintain the punishment of abortion but limiting them based on respective of reasons. The Ministry of Women and Family Affairs’ policy regarding abortion is that it will only fund abortions in some cases of sexual violence. However, the results of the in-depth interviews show that no support for abortion is possible while criminalizing or stigmatizing it in principle. Given the above-mentioned interview results, this study recommends the measures to ensure the right to abortion for sexual violence victims.