To say why not use IVF to choose the sex of a baby?

[Poppycattlepetal]

If people could save up for the IVF required, just don't see who else's business is it if they have a boy or a girl baby, really?

It seems U that we are not legally allowed to try for this in Britain. Clearly, we'd not all choose boys. See this mother of five sons in the Indy today: www.independent.co.uk/news/science/ban-on-sex-selection-of-ivf-embryos-is-not-justified-says-ethicist-8683940.html

It is allowed in US to do this, and you don't hear of a population imbalance over there. Just what seems like an incannily high proportion of celebrities who have twins, one of each!

I do get the issues about things being very different in other countries where there can be a cultural pressure to have sons of course. And i'm only talking about methods used before pregnancy begins. And obviously this would have to be genuinely freely chosen. Just feel that as the majority in the UK doesn't share any particular preference, why not let the people who do really mind, have the choice?

It's clearly wrong (medical reasons aside)to want to choose your baby's gender : a [hopefully] healthy baby is a gift :folk shouldn't go smugly and ARROGANTLY assuming they can pick and choose, like wallpaper :by denying the 'wrong' gender the life it would have , all it's other individual characteristics and traits are likewise denied to everyone.
If a girl wants to join the cubs she cant be legally denied that so surely he/she shouldn't be denied life itself???
Also, what about Natural Selection??? sometimes this causes more of a certain gender to be born for good reason, and we are interfering with Nature way too much as it is.....this is yet another 'step too far'

On breakfast TV they had the shocking statistics of mental health problems in the under 16's- bound to get worse if children feel they were 'bought' to fulfil parental expectations. If you choose your car, house etc you can change it- you can't send the child back.

I don't agree with it either.

I had three boys with my ex husband and I admit to wanting a girl and I was sad that I thought I would never get to experience it. As silly as it may sound it was how I felt. I actually ended up divorced and now have two daughters with my husband.

So I understand the feelings that come along with wanting a certain sex but IVF to choose it doesn't sit right with me at all.

People often asked me if I was going to keep trying until I got a girl I hated that question, do people really keep getting pregnant in hopes of having a certain sex? I am sure there are some but my wish for a girl was never strong enough to bring kids into the world just because I wanted a girl and I think it is really sad that anyone would have IVF and choose the sex of their baby as well.

Completely disagree with giving people the chance to choose the sex of their baby. Wrong, completely and utterly wrong.

One sex is not better or more worthwhile than the other.

I had to go through IVF. I had a son. I would have been happy with a healthy child of either gender. I fully support IVF as without it I would not have become a Mum but it should be the means to try to help people become parents of a healthy child, whatever sex that child might be.

Why shouldn't people pick and choose demi? Nature does it, why shouldn't we?

If I were to choose sex I'd go for the same sex as I currently have, not "gender balancing" or a preference for boys or girls. Currently having two of the same "type" I find it makes family life easier in the culture we live in. That will be especially true when they hit secondary school as the ones round here are single sex and I would like them to be able to go to the same school.

I might be inclined towards choosing other characteristics - health in particular, long active live life genes etc. I might also be inclined to opt for genes more likely to lead to a higher IQ. And genes that would tend to make them taller. My reasons for those are all that I think a child with those characteristics is more likely to have a happier and easier life. Don't think I'd actually go for it at all though, and I'm pretty certain I wouldn't bother for sex, but I'm not really seeing a need to ban those who do want to - there's no clear indication of harm and overall I think we should trust people to make their own best choices.

But, equally, why should people pick and choose? Choice has become an emblematic concept of contemporary western societies, to the extent that many people are assuming that people must have choice and that more choice is always better. It isn't necessarily that straightforward.

emme because a person is a whole person. it is ethically wrong to discriminate against them on the basis of one aspect of their genetic make up on the basis of stereotyping.

I as posted earlier, if it isn't fair that I am discriminated against at work purely on the basis of gender, then how can it be ethical to deny a fair shot at life purely on the basis of gender?

Knowing a babies gender tells you almost nothing about who that baby will become. It is morally wrong in the extreme to terminate, or in the case of IVF fail to implant a baby purely on the basis of it's gender.

But you might not be being discriminated against on the basis of stereotypes. There maybe other reasons - I explained above how I could see a particular sex making family life slightly better for my family for instance.

We discriminate all the time when hiring. It is illegal to discriminate on the basis of sex when hiring because there has been demonstrated harm to society. In the US where sex selection is possible there isn't evidence of harm is there?

Out of interest, and I dont think this question has been asked,
to the posters who want to choose,
are there any who would choose boys?

I wonder if people really understand what PDG is when they say they would do gender selection, its not just IVF and then the drs can tell by looking at the embryo if it is a girl or boy. Dr's need to remove 1 or 2 cells from a 8 cell embryo to test if it is xx xy this to me is a risk and i would not want to do it unless it was medically necessary. Like i said in an earlier post i am a carrier of a genetic condition so PGD is an option but risks worry me.

emme please explain more how having one gender will be easier for your family than the other without reverting to comments based on stereotyping then!

I have one girl...if I had another child, a boy or a girl may be more similar to my daughter. There is no way to know. If you follow the childs actual interests and personality rather than conforming them to stereotypes there is no way to predict what either gender will 'be like'.

In the 60s, an aquaintance of mine who was 38, adopted a boy as her first child. She told me she was very lucky, as boys were more in demand than girls. < I was too young to ask her why?>

I think gender selection for babies, other than on serious medical grounds, is an expression of something ugly on many levels. If you're that bothered, I don't think you should be becoming a parent.

In the culture we live in they are more likely to share clothes and equipment (not toys, but for instance, sporting equipment built for women and girls' bodies) and play together. Mainly it will mean they'll go to the same schools and do some of the same activities (like Guides).

Even if I don't revert to stereotyping (and I try hard not to) the culture I live in does. So with three girls I am more likely to get invitations which include all of them and they are more likely to conform to social expectations with regard to interests (I am particularly annoyed by this last, but I sadly think it is true).

I also won't have to deal with things like others thinking the boy must be the science-y one when actually the microscope is one of the girl's favourite possession. Similarly I won't have to delicately attempt to counter their grandparents comparing their non-gender conforming behaviour with similar behaviour in their opposite gendered sibling with an annoying mixture of shock, pride and slight disapproval. (This happens with their cousins, who are different sexes, but my two just get praise because they aren't usurping their brother's right to be whatever-"boyish"-behaviour, or being usurped in "girlish" behaviour by a brother).

That last to ICBINEG

Ah okay so no attempt to come up with anything not to do with gender stereotyping. That's fair enough.

Is there any point saying that boys and girls can share clothes? or that the scouts take boys and girls? Or that, because the grandparents might make tiresome comparisons might not be a valid reason to terminate/fail to implant a baby by gender?

Like bebemad said I wonder how many people really understand what IVF and PGD actually involve. IVF can be an extremely invasive procedure and for every successful embryo implanted there are many, many more that die or are discarded. Personally (although I can understand why other people have differing views) I think that the loss of embryos is just about acceptable to allow infertile individuals to have a child or to avoid genetic disorders but I have a real issue with the idea of throwing away healthy "boy" embryos just to have a girl, or vice versa.

I do wonder if a person/couple who feel that desperate to have a child of a certain sex probably need some sort of counseling or support to help them through something that is obviously so important to them. I'm not trying to reduce the psychological affect that this must have on someone but if the lack of a girl is that upsetting to them then maybe there is another underlying issue that should be tackled instead. What is it that means that a girl is so important?

Obviously this whole thing can be changed to say "boy" rather than "girl" and actually I understand it more if there are cultural reasons. If having a boy means you are accepted by your family and society then surely that is a better reason than "to have a new best friend" or "to complete my family"?

ICBINEG Well my main reason as I stated is the school thing - having them in separate schools would be a pain (though I will do it if I think they'll benefit from different schools). And while Scouts does take boys and girls, Scouts isn't Guides. And Guides don't take boys.

Clothes and equipment they could share when they are younger, but as they get older their bodies will not be so similar. Of course there are other differences in body shape too, but there would be those differences whatever their sexes, so the sex-derived ones would be in addition. A minor matter probably, I would expect gender conformity would be a much bigger driver for the clothes issue in later years.

But, I had thought when you said stereotyping you meant my stereotyping and having a preference based on that. A personal - you need to get over your sexist assumptions - thing. I think that position has some validity but lacks compassion for people and tackles things the wrong way. It also leaves children exposed to being the "unwanted child" to a greater extent than sex-selection.

But if you mean to say it is not reasonable to look at the culture I live in and take that into account, then I don't really think your objection is valid. This is the culture I live in. It is the culture I bring my children up in. It is gendered. I cannot bring them up outside of it, it pushes expectations on us regardless of my stance. While I can and do challenge it, it still exists and it is the culture which would make having same sex children easier for me. Changing the culture is the answer to this. Banning sex selection does not do it.

I don't see a desire to avoid tiresome comments as being a less valid reason for destroying an embryo than pure chance is. Saying chance is a less bad reason is fatalistic. I think philosophies and ethical codes based on fatalism are distasteful; an attempt to avoid taking responsibility.

Well I agree you can't take on the whole of society single handed...BUT, you can draw the line at single sex schools, single sex activities like Guides and buying clothing only considered suitable for one sex. If you choose to engage with discriminatory schools, clubs and clothing, then yes you will find that gender is an issue. But that really is your choice.

Banning sex selection in IVF sends a clear message to society that is isn't okay to judge people solely on their gender.

Legalising sex selection in IVF sends a clear message to society that it IS okay to judge people solely on their gender.

Which of these messages would you rather have the government of this country broadcasting?

As a woman attempting to forge a career in a traditionally male dominated area, not to mention as the mother of a DD, I really really want the government to have a strong anti-sex discrimination policy.

blonde

No,it being desired by your culture doesn't make it "better". There is a reason India, for example has banned gender reveal scans,private paying or not.

Exactly ice and if we allow gender selection you are giving the message that gender discrimination is OK. And this is the ultimate in discrimination, refusing to implant an embryo and give it the chance to grow purely because it is the 'wrong gender'.

Its not OK to discriminate according to gender and we need to send a clear message about that.

DIGERD I happen to KNOW that in the 60's some people were told it was easier to get boys , as girls were more 'in demand'

I suspect, that the majority of posters on this thread want girls.
If the population of this country wanted that too, we could for instance end up with 75% girls.
Where are all these girls going to get partners from?
Who are going to do the jobs that almost exclusively males do at the moment?
And the competition for certain jobs usually done by females would be phenominal.

Yams, I have no idea why you suspect the majority would want girls, but if you read the thread, the only way PGD would be sanctioned for gender selection is if the couple use it for "family balancing" so they would have to have at least one of the opposite gender. Prevents any huge skew in gender ratios. Thats not a reason to prevent it

"Banning sex selection in IVF sends a clear message to society that is isn't okay to judge people solely on their gender.

Legalising sex selection in IVF sends a clear message to society that it IS okay to judge people solely on their gender.

Which of these messages would you rather have the government of this country broadcasting?"

This is a really good point. If you look at it as a gender equality issue rather than what a particular couple wants for their family, then it becomes much more serious. I can see its not as harmless as I first thought, although some of the arguments against it on here are pants.

Personally I think the reason nobody has given a list is because there arent any satisfactory answers. I think gender selection would only ever be done for selfish reasons, such as fancying pretty clothes and hairstyles etc. Not that that in itself is wrong, but I do appreciate legalising PGD would have far reaching consequences which I hadnt considered.