Hi again,
Sorry for anoher long post from me. Thanks for all your posts which have been hugely thought provoking for me. I feel strongly that there is a problem with the UK law, because I see the option of sex selection as a matter of choice, (or at least an area that potential parents should have the freedom to negotiate on between themselves.) for me, making a choice between harmless things is harmless and people should be allowed to do it, especially where it means a lot to them.
I believe choice around how/whether/when/ to have children is crucial as these issues are so personal and individual to each person/couple/family. so the law should have the lightest possible touch here. As a woman I feel even more strongly about the choice issue because if women are going to be able to live their lives with equality to men, we need to be free to be able to decide how/whether/when to have children.
So because sex selection is available to people having IVF, I see it is as also right that couples/individuals should legally get to choose for themselves if they want to use it.
To those posters making the 'selfish' accusation, sorry but I don't see it. Who are the couple 'selfishly' denying the choice of whether they should use one particular one embryo of their embryos instead of another one? The embryologist? ..Nature? .. Chance? ...God?
And to those who would say- 'they are being selfish to the embryo who didn't get picked'.. That attitude is anti IVF which can destroy embryos inadvertantly through its processes and also can create more embryos than a couple want/need to use, so the surplus will get destroyed or donated to another couple or to research.
That attitude is also anti-contraception- are you also against the morning after pill and the coil- because they don't allow embryos to implant?
And you could also argue that that attitude is also anti-natural conception because naturally 1/3 of all embryos don't make it, apparently. So the only way to these issues is to swear yourself to celibacy or only have sex with people of your own gender, which is clearly not going to work for everyone...
The above are just arguments against having a choice in reproduction altogether, not in themselves arguments against sex selection . So I disagree with all this 'you'll get what you're given and you should be jolly well grateful' guff. It's a baby for a family we are talking about, not an overboiled Brussels sprout.
i think parliament should MIOB and allow the very few people who really care about this, what they want. i have still not read any good evidence it would cause harm (population skewed to one gender) if allowed. however, not allowing it is causing harm to people right now (distress or upset, medical trips to oher countries, financial hardship for unnecessary costs abroad, social stigma because it is a criminal act, and maybe even carrying on having children when you would really prefer to have had a smaller family).
Also it is hypocritical that the law butts in only where people need medical help to get pregnant but leaves people alone where they don't.
Sexist people are free to bring up their naturally conceived kids and limit their life choices etc but people who would like a boy or girl child (and need not be sexist people just because they feel that way) are forbidden to even attempt to have that child because they might be sexist?
This sort of legal interference is not an example of society's moral rectitude but of political convenience, because the necessity to involve medical professionals in IVF allows the anti-choice mob to get in and throw their weight around and dictate everyone else's private choices for them. So even if sec selection isn't something you would choose for yourself you should be worried by this.