Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

Should we choose the sex of our babies?

106 replies

MrsDoolittle · 24/03/2005 13:24

Guardian article I have been thinking about this all morning (first day of annual leave) and I am interested to see how other mums feel about this. Should we not let nature decide this for us? So far I haven't been convinced by any of the arguements for it.

OP posts:
suzywong · 24/03/2005 13:26

No
we shouldn't

nutcracker · 24/03/2005 13:27

I don't think anyone should be allowed to choose unless there is a medical reason that they can't have one sex or another.

katzguk · 24/03/2005 13:28

i have to say i think you get what your given and should be grateful!!

In the case of families with sex-related conditions, then selected a child so that it won't be ill is kinda understandable but to select to have a girl because you've got 3 boys and want a girl is wrong.

Surely if we choose then we will alter the natural 50/50 male/female ratio. There are still groups in society who think males are better. Until recently our local hospital wouldn't tell the sex of babies because they had an increased number of aborted female babies when they gave out that info.

Tinker · 24/03/2005 13:28

No, don't think we should. For health reasons (eg genetic conditions particular to one sex) maybe. But just because you've had 4 boys and want a girl, no.

nutcracker · 24/03/2005 13:28

I meant what Katzguk said

PsychoFlame · 24/03/2005 13:30

I don't think we should be able to decide - we are given the children that we have for a reason (even those with illnesses), and are never given more than we can handle (whether we believe it or not) - poorly children are given to those who have the strength and love to raise them.

Choosing sex just seems like playing with that too much

Flame
xxx

katzguk · 24/03/2005 13:30

also couldn't it lower your chance of getting PG if using IVF, because maybe the only embroyos that had grown were male and you wanted a female, then want, would you forgo that round of IVF because you wanted a girl?

laneydaye · 24/03/2005 13:31

No bloody way...
stop messing around with nature,

I think its good that we can help people have babies when they are unable, but i believe we cant choose for a reason.... Its nature

blueteddy · 24/03/2005 13:33

I also don't think we should start playing God & tampering with nature.
It could well alter the male female balance & could also lead to late abortions if it goes wrong (it is meant to have a 90% success rate)
I think they should spend more time & money into finding cures for life threatening diseases personally.

elliott · 24/03/2005 13:36

I'm against this as well and I can't understand why they have argued for it. it will only encourage people to elevate gender above humanity (what I mean is, a person is a person first and of fundamentally equal value whatever their gender) and to make rather important decisions based on spurious whims and preferences. I think a lot of people have vague ideas about what gender it would be 'nice' to have but I don't think we should be permitted to act on these feelings. Sometimes we need to be protected from ourselves!
i wouldn't assume that it would mean fewer girls though - I think in our society there is currently a lot of anti-boy prejudice (boys needing adoption are much harder to place for example)

Noggermum · 24/03/2005 13:38

No one should have that choice. I agree - it upsets the balance of nature which seems to have done an OK job so far in ensuring the correct M/F ratio in the population! Its a pretty tricky issue though if a family does have genetic conditions that only pass via one sex (usually boys, isn't it) but that opens up a whole can of worms about whether people with special needs have any less right to life than "normal" people. Personally wouldn't want to be arguing any case on that one!

elliott · 24/03/2005 13:39

Also presumably it would then be allowable for people who don't need IVF to choose it in order to allow gender selection. I'm totally against that because we don't actually know whether there may be risks for the child - especially following PGD - and therefore there needs to be a good reason for it.
I am in favour of some of the things in the report though - for example I think PGD shoudl be allowable for IVF patients in general because it seems to me illogical not to permit detection of for example Down's at the preimplantation phase, and then offer screening for an established pregnancy. Totally bizarre.

victoriapeckham · 24/03/2005 13:43

Elliot I agree. Would definitely mean fewer boys. These days i rarely meet a pregnant woman who wants a boy: they all want little mini-mes to dress up in pretty clothes, who are less physically tiring and will go shopping with them when they're old. Also girls more obedient at school and exceding boys in exams.

Giving a choice would lead to gazillion girls. But at least my sons would have the pick of 'em.

we mess with nature enough. I can't understand why anyone wants to know sex of baby in advance, let alone dictate it. It is one of life's few truly great surprises and is something to speculate about during agony of labour.

ThomCat · 24/03/2005 13:44

no we bloody shouldn't it's disgusting. I find it hard enough to deal with the fact that it's okay to choose of you child should or should not be born if they have Down's syndrome, let alone now chosing their sex, ffs, why can't some people just be happy to have a healthy happy child?

Original poster
MrsDoolittle · 24/03/2005 13:44

Thats what I thought.

OP posts:
blueteddy · 24/03/2005 13:46

Well said Thomcat!

elliott · 24/03/2005 13:50

The thing is, I think most people ARE happy with a child of whatever gender when it arrives, but given the choice in advance, I think they will use it because I think lots of people probably woudl admit to a preference. And making it permissible will in effect sanction that preference and make it seem ok - and before you know it it will seem odd NOT to have a preference...(witness the difficulty many of us have in refusing DS tests)
vv dangerous stuff imo.

victoriapeckham · 24/03/2005 13:55

It is a charter for control freaks. Already people say "I wanted to know the sex so I knew what colour to paint the nursery." Soon they will say "I wanted a girl, because pink fits better with our colour scheme." And I'm only half-joking.

blueteddy · 24/03/2005 13:55

I agree.
Did you see that woman who paid thousands of pounds to go to Spain to have it done?
She was on GMTV with her 4 lovely little boys around the breakfast table & she said in front of them "I didn't mind what sex my first child was, but I wanted # 2,3 & 4 to be a girl."
She has now had this treatment done & has twin dd's.
Those 4 boys will always know that Mummy wanted their sisters so much that she was willing to pay thousands of pounds for them.
I found it very

ThomCat · 24/03/2005 14:01

Who here thought they really wanted a boy, or visa versa, and then got a girl, and who here was disappointed?

I was sure I was having a boy, strangers in the street were convinced I was having a boy, people who had never guessed wrong before thought I was having a boy. I was so pleased, wonderful a baby boy, so much easier than a girtl and all the worry of teenage girls etc, yep great, perfect. had a little girl. I was over the moon, oh how wonderful, someone to go shopping with, a freind for life, and so on and so on.

you get my drift here.

I thought having a boy was the best thing and that's what i wanted.
I got a girl, a girl with Down's syndrome, it better than i could ever have ever imagined, I have the perfect child and wouldn't want anything else other than what i have right now.

Okay you should be able to find out if your child is going to be born with a life threatening condition and everyone should have the right to decide if they want to still go ahead knowing that child will be severely disabled or won't live very long, other than that, life should just go on.

ThomCat · 24/03/2005 14:05

That's so sad isn't it blueteddy.

blueteddy · 24/03/2005 14:15

It is really sad.
Those poor boys will grow up knowing that they only exist because their Mummy wanted a girl.

suedonim · 24/03/2005 16:25

I don't think we should be able to choose the sex of a baby. It's just a gut reaction with me. You should want a child not a boy or a girl. And I don't really get this 'balanced family' thing. That could apply to all sorts of things - one blonde, one red-haired and one brunette child? A musical child, a sporty child and an artistic child? Having a baby is like a lucky dip in lots of ways, you don't know what you're getting in many aspects but whatever turns up, it's likely to be pretty amazing.

coppertop · 24/03/2005 16:37

I was thinking about this earlier today. We have 2 boys on the autistic spectrum and know that if we were to have a 3rd boy there would be a greater chance of them being autistic than if we were to have a girl. Even so, I really don't believe that we should be able to choose which gender we would like. It just feels very wrong.

tarantula · 24/03/2005 16:39

I dont agree with it either. Im from a family of 5 girls and 1 boy and everyone assumes that the youngest is the boy (hes not hes the middle child) and that my mum kept having children till she had a boy. Ive always thought it was very wierd thing to think. I wanted a baby and I got one and am very happy. The boy girl thing didnt matter to me at all (and dds got a blue room too cos I HATE pink and also HATE shopping so not happy to go traising round the shops when shes older either)