Ethical Arguments For and Against Sperm Sorting for Non-Medical Sex Selection

Much has been written about the ethics of sex selection. This article thoroughly explores the ethical arguments put forth in the literature both for and against non-medical sex selection using sperm sorting. While most of these arguments come from philosophers, feminist scholars, social scientists and members of the healthcare community, they are often echoed in empirical studies that have explored community values. This review is timely because the first efficacious method for sex selection via sperm sorting, MicroSort, is currently in clinical trials and moving closer to FDA approval for marketing in the USA. While the clinical trials are currently focused on the use of MicroSort to avoid X-linked genetic diseases, MicroSort can also be used to satisfy parental preferences

Sex Selection: Sorting Sperm As a Gateway to the Sorting Society?

The Sorting Society: The Ethics of Genetic Screening and Therapy. Edited by Loane Skene & Janna Thompson, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 200

Lifestyle Sex Selection: Reproduction, Transnational Flows, and Inequality

This dissertation examines new practices and technologies of sex selection with a particular focus on the interrelationship between the scientific products that enable these practices; the discursive production of these practices through news media, promotional literature and self-help communication; and the institutional operations of U.S. clinics both within and across national borders. In the late 1990s mass print and television media began heralding the emergence of new technologies as the answer to a long quest for scientifically proven methods for selecting the sex of a child. MicroSort and preimplantation genetic diagnosis gained considerable attention as methods of sex selection that diverged from earlier technologies because they do not require an abortion. Instead, both methods are applied before pregnancy and must be used in conjunction with assisted reproduction such as in-vitro fertilization. Along with the technologies appeared new discourses that make-meaning of these practices and new institutional mechanisms that embed them within a larger phenomenon of cross-(national) border reproductive practices. Using a genealogical approach, I trace how these three processes (material, discursive and institutional) configure a new form of sex selection at the same time as they construct a stratified system of global sex selection practices, contrasting reasonable, lifestyle motivations in the West with gender-biased forms in the East. The research uses qualitative, multi-sited modes of analysis and extends feminist STS scholarship on reproductive technologies by shifting focus to a transnational realm as manifested in what is currently conceptualized as "cross-border" reproductive practices. Against a shifting terrain of transnational reproductive practices, the study aims to displace a dichotomous framing of global sex selection practices that polarizes western from eastern practices with the more varied and complex movements that take place in cross -bordered sex selection. The study examines an emerging form of sex selection as an optic through which to theorize and reframe the meanings and interconnections among reproduction, transnational, and inequality, thereby generating new directions in feminist theorizing on reproduction

Ethical Considerations of Nonmedical Preconception Gender Selection Research

Technological advances in reproductive science now afford prospective parents the ability to potentially choose the gender of their infant prior to conception; however, the bioethical considerations of preconception gender selection (PGS) research remain an ongoing debate in the scientific community. Opponents of PGS research argue it is unethical as it has the potential to cause a sex ratio imbalance, its availability is restricted to those with financial means, it promotes gender discrimination, and it may lead to further genetic discrimination based on desired traits (eugenics). Proponents of PGS research argue it is a parental right to choose the sex of a child, it could reduce atrocities toward unwanted children and the number of abortions, and it could assist in family balancing. Based on eleven bioethical concepts, it appears researchers may be unethically capitalizing on the emotional vulnerability of prospective parents in order to further genetic research into PGS for nonmedical reasons

Global Legal Responses to Prenatal Gender Identification and Sex Selection

Over one hundred million women in the world are estimated to be “missing” from the world’s population due to some form of gendercide. Gendercide exists on almost every continent and affects every class of people. Gendercide has traditionally taken the form of sex-selective abortion, infanticide, or death caused by neglect. Sex-selective abortions occur when a pregnancy is terminated due to the sex of the fetus. In the last few decades, technological advances have allowed potential parents to identify the gender of their baby early in the first trimester. Recently, with the advent of newer technology that allows one to choose a baby’s gender, such as preimplantation genetic diagnosis (“PGD”) and MicroSort, it is possible for those who can afford it to select their child’s gender instead of resorting to getting rid of a fetus of an unwanted gender. This Article examines the issue of gender selection technology. If the technology is available to choose a child’s gender, is there any reason to restrict access to such technology? Does the answer depend upon how the technology is being used? Many countries have attempted to curb this issue through legislation restricting sex-selective abortions, and some have even gone further to restrict access to ultrasound and other gender identification technology. This Article provides a global overview of such restrictions and examines their bioethical implications. Part I of this Article discusses the practice of sex selection and its impact worldwide. This part examines the impact of sex-selective practices on birth rates in various countries, including the United States. Then, Part II outlines the technological methods available to identify or even choose a child’s gender and what this means for the practice of sex selection. Part III discusses legal efforts to restrict sex selection in India, the United States, and other countries around the world. Part IV analyzes these legal efforts through a bioethical lens, specifically giving consideration to autonomy, justice, and class issues. Although the practice of sex-selective abortion or sex selection is certainly disturbing, this Article concludes that restricting access to the technology that allows sex selection is not an effective answer

Sex Selection: Morality, Harm, and the Law

Given that sex selection does not harm anyone, there is no moral justification for a legal ban

Preconception Sex Selection: Demand and Preferences in the United States

Preconception sex selection for nonmedical reasons raises important moral, legal, and social issues. The main concern is based upon the assumption that a widely available service for sex selection will lead to a socially disruptive imbalance of the sexes. For a severe sex ratio distortion to occur, however, at least two conditions have to be met. First, there must be a significant preference for children of a particular sex, and second, there must be a considerable interest in employing sex selection technology. Our objective was to ascertain such demand and preferences among the United States general population

Preconception Sex Selection for Non‐Medical Reasons: A Representative Survey from the UK

BACKGROUND: Preconception sex selection for non-medical reasons raises serious moral, legal and social issues. The main concern is based on the assumption that a freely available service for sex selection will distort the natural sex ratio and lead to a severe gender imbalance. However, for a severe gender imbalance to happen, at least two conditions have to be met. First, there must be a significant preference for children of a particular sex, and second, there must be a considerable demand for preconception sex selection. To ascertain whether or not these two conditions are met, we have conducted a survey in Germany. METHODS: As a representative sample of the German population, 1094 men and women aged 18-45 years were asked about their gender preferences and whether or not they could imagine selecting the sex of their children through flow cytometric separation of X- and Y-bearing sperm followed by intrauterine insemination. RESULTS: 58% of respondents stated that they do not care about the sex of their offspring. 30% wish to have a family with an equal number of boys and girls. 4% would like to have more boys than girls, 3% more girls than boys, 1% only boys and 1% only girls. For first-borns, however, there is still a preference for boys over girls. While 75.6% claimed to have no gender preference, 14.2% would like their first child to be a boy and 10.1% would like their first child to be a girl. Whereas 6% could imagine taking advantage of preconception sex selection, 92% found this to be out of the question. Even in the hypothetical case that a medication for sex selection were ever to become available, 90% stated that they would not want to use it. CONCLUSION: Given that a majority does not seem to care about the sex of their offspring and only a minority seem to be willing to select the sex of their children, a freely available service for preconception sex selection for non-medical reasons is rather unlikely to cause a severe gender imbalance in Germany

Sex Preference and Interest in Preconception Sex Selection: A Survey Among Pregnant Women in the North of Jordan

BACKGROUND Preconception sex selection for non-medical reasons is a controversial issue in bioethics. Little research has described preferences for preconception sex selection among Arab populations. This study describes the sex preference and interest in employing sex selection techniques among pregnant women in northern Jordan. METHODS A self-reported questionnaire was administered to 600 pregnant women in Irbid, Jordan. χ2 test and binary logistic regression were used to examine the factors associated with interest in preconception sex selection. RESULTS In general, the interest in using sex selection was low. Women who preferred boys were more likely to be interested in sex selection, if paid for by the couple [odds ratio (OR) = 4.40, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.75–11.11] or by health insurance (OR = 3.42, 95% CI: 1.94–6.06), or, if feasible, administered through oral medication (OR = 8.84, 95% CI: 5.05–15.63). Women with lower education were more likely to be interested in sex selection, if paid by health insurance (OR = 1.96, 95% CI: 1.10–3.45) and were more likely to believe that sex selection is legal (OR = 1.79, 95% CI: 1.06–2.86). Women who had no boys were more likely to be interested in sex selection, if paid by health insurance (OR = 1.94, 95% CI: 1.10–3.42) or, if feasible, through medication (OR = 3.03, 95% CI: 1.82–5.00). CONCLUSIONS The majority of participants were not in favor of using preconception sex selection. Those with a preference to have boys, with lower education, and those with an imbalanced family were more likely to be interested in using sex selection technology