Literature DB >> 15889684

Sex selection: laissez faire or family balancing?

Edgar Dahl1.   

Abstract

In a recent comment on the HFEA's public consultation on sex selection, Soren Holm claimed that proponents of family balancing are committed to embrace a laissez faire approach. Given that arguments in support of sex selection for family balancing also support sex selection for other social reasons, advocates of family balancing, he asserts, are simply inconsistent when calling for a limit on access to sex selection. In this paper, I argue that proponents of family balancing are in no way inconsistent. Provided their advocacy of family balancing is aimed at preventing a severe distortion of the natural sex ratio, they are entirely justified in insisting on restrictions to sex selection. The real question is whether a concern for the sex ratio does indeed call for a limit on sex selection. Based on a recent survey on gender preferences and data from several Gender Clinics, I argue that a restriction on sex selection to family balancing is unwarranted. In the absence of any evidence for a pending sex ratio distortion, we are actually required to adopt a laissez faire approach to sex selection.

Keywords:  Genetics and Reproduction

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15889684     DOI: 10.1007/s10728-005-2572-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Care Anal        ISSN: 1065-3058


  10 in total

Review 1.  Preconception gender selection.

Authors:  J A Robertson
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 11.229

2.  Preconception sex selection for non-medical reasons: a representative survey from the UK.

Authors:  Edgar Dahl; Klaus-Dieter Hinsch; Manfred Beutel; Burkhard Brosig
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 6.918

3.  Like a frog in boiling water: the public, the HFEA and sex selection.

Authors:  Søren Holm
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2004-03

4.  The presumption in favour of liberty: a comment on the HFEA's public consultation on sex selection.

Authors:  Edgar Dahl
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 3.828

5.  Sex control, science, and society.

Authors:  A Etzioni
Journal:  Science       Date:  1968-09-13       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  Births of normal daughters after MicroSort sperm separation and intrauterine insemination, in-vitro fertilization, or intracytoplasmic sperm injection.

Authors:  E F Fugger; S H Black; K Keyvanfar; J D Schulman
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 6.918

7.  Family balancing as a morally acceptable application of sex selection.

Authors:  G Pennings
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 6.918

8.  Sex preselection in New York City: who chooses which sex and why.

Authors:  M A Khatamee; A Leinberger-Sica; P Matos; A C Weseley
Journal:  Int J Fertil       Date:  1989 Sep-Oct

9.  Procreative liberty: the case for preconception sex selection.

Authors:  Edgar Dahl
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2003 Oct-Nov       Impact factor: 3.828

10.  Social aspects of > 800 couples coming forward for gender selection of their children.

Authors:  P Liu; G A Rose
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 6.918

  10 in total
  4 in total

1.  Social sex selection and the balance of the sexes: empirical evidence from Germany, the UK, and the US.

Authors:  E Dahl; M Beutel; B Brosig; S Grüssner; Y Stöbel-Richter; H-R Tinneberg; Elmar Brähler
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2006-09-17       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  The Ethical Standards of Sunni Muslim Physicians Regarding Fertility Technologies that are Religiously Forbidden.

Authors:  Ya'arit Bokek-Cohen; Limor Dina Gonen; Mahdi Tarabeih
Journal:  J Relig Health       Date:  2022-05-26

3.  The Israeli National Committee for sex selection by pre-implantation genetic diagnosis: a novel approach (2005-2011).

Authors:  Nirit Pessach; Saralee Glasser; Varda Soskolne; Amihai Barash; Liat Lerner-Geva
Journal:  Isr J Health Policy Res       Date:  2014-10-28

4.  Engendering Harm: A Critique of Sex Selection For "Family Balancing".

Authors:  Arianne Shahvisi
Journal:  J Bioeth Inq       Date:  2018-01-24       Impact factor: 1.352

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.