Although the criminal provision lost effect, laws governing drug approval, insurance coverage and clinical procedure were never rewritten.

As a result the oral medication widely used in early pregnancy had no formal approval, and reliance on overseas purchases or informal channels was reported. Dosage, timing and management of adverse reactions were repeatedly noted as falling outside medical supervision.

With the introduction, the medication gains a route through prescription and clinical management. Health authorities must also set prescribing requirements, counselling procedures and adverse-event reporting.

What the gap left behind

The Constitutional Court ruled in April 2019 that the provision was incompatible with the constitution and set a deadline for new legislation. The National Assembly did not pass one. The provision lapsed; no replacement arrived.

As the gap lengthened, the burden fell on individuals. It was unclear which clinics offered what procedures, and those with least access to information fared worst.

For foreign residents the problem was more tangled still, combining language barriers, questions of insurance coverage and differences in access tied to residence status. Some Chinese women in Korea are said to have delayed decisions for want of reliable information.

Introducing the drug is only the start. Clinicians note that the system works only once it is also clear which clinics can counsel in which languages, and at what cost.