WP,p1:Boy for You,Girl for Me:Technology Allows Choice,Stirs Ethics Debate

[DeepModem Mom]

A Boy for You, a Girl for Me: Technology Allows Choice
Embryo Screening Stirs Ethics Debate
By Rob Stein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, December 14, 2004; Page A01


....The Magills are part of a small but growing number of Americans who are selecting the sex of their children, using techniques developed to help couples who are infertile or at risk for having babies with genetic diseases.

In addition to the standard in vitro fertilization procedure that Kristen underwent, a Fairfax clinic is testing another approach that can sort sperm by sex -- an easier and far less expensive method, albeit not quite as reliable.

The doctors offering the services, as well as some medical ethicists who defend them, argue the procedures make it possible for parents to fulfill a natural desire, harm no one, and enhance the joys of parenthood and family life....

***

But others say the practice, which is prohibited in many countries, uses expensive medical care for frivolous purposes, destroys some embryos just because they are the "wrong" sex, and promotes gender discrimination. Moreover, the critics say, the trend is a dangerous first step toward transforming childbirth from a natural process full of surprise and wonder into just another commodity in which a baby's features are picked like options on a new car....


http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A62067-2004Dec13?language=printer

[LeftyMom]

1. I wouldn't put my body through IVF for sex selection

but I would do Shettles in a heartbeat and consider would microsort if I was attatched to the idea of one sex over the other.

[Kenneth ken]

2. a potential porblem the story doesn't address

" Because MicroSort is not 100 percent reliable, critics fear it may lead to the selective abortion of fetuses, particularly females. "

So, what if a couple doesn't abort, and then turn around and sue because they didn't get a child of the sex they wanted?

There are just so many things wrong with this idea. But it isn't surprising; science never asks should we, just can we. Combined with a consumer-oriented culture that expects to have a plethora of choices in all things.

[no_hypocrisy]

3. Look at what happened with China. It now has a disparate ratio of males

over females, making it improbable for many men in the future to secure wives. This is the result of the one-child policy, compelling many families to abort female fetuses if not secretly allowing them to die (or otherwise) as sons are literally more valuable than daughters (a universal sentiment, I know).

With "progress" in genetic-determination, the same scenario could be down the road for countries that embrace sex-selection.

P.S. No studies yet whether too many men in a country lends itself to a rise in homosexuality by necessity.