Sex Selection Craze

[lexiem]

My problem with gender selection is that it can be a slippery slope from something as "innocent" (in quotation cause it depends on how you feel about the subject) as gender selection to genetic screening and trait selection. Somehow it feels like it takes away from the miracle of IVF giving childless couples the ability to conceive. If you can then just say "sorry this one isn't good enough, I want the other model" it becomes less about the miracle and more about perfection.
Nobody is perfect. But if we start screening for everything else, ie cancer, disabilities, physical attributes...etc we will miss out on some of the best things a varied society has to offer. And some of it's most influential people. If their parents could have screened for learning disabilities Albert Einstein, Agatha Christie, Leonardo Da Vinci, Magic Johnson, Thomas Edison, Winston Churchill, Whoopi Goldberg, Woodrow Wilson, and George Patton might not have existed.

[emiliaj]

Gender selection is excellent if there is a genuine medical genetic issue which needs to be avoided. Other than that it is extremely naive to choose gender for a personal whim. The person selecting the gender is assuming the child will fit a stereotype, that in itself is madness.

People like me spend top dollar just trying to GET pregnant on IVF. If the people who are so desperate to select a boy or girl could walk a day in my shoes they might realise that ANY baby is a miracle and blessing regardless of gender.

Emilia

[stripedsocks]

Thomas Edison, [...] Woodrow Wilson, [...]might not have existed.

Small loss, there's plenty of other thieves and Klansmen available on backorder.

[thefuturemrsb]

My fiance's parents went through trial and error to get a daughter. After my fiance was born his mom said she wanted a daughter. Martin was followed by 4 boys. She finally had a daughter. A year later they contemplated adopting another girl. Shortly after researching they concieved their second daughter.
My fiance and I have talked about this simply because of his family. He wants at least one of each so we've decided to have two children and if they happen to be of the same gender we want to adopt one of the other. If we have one of each we still want to adopt another child.
@emiliaj: I agree on the medical/genetic issue. If I carried a serious (affecting quality of life) x-linked genetic condition I would be much more concerned of the gender of my child. As it stands I have a mild issue (color-blindness) that doesn't affect you in anyway you can't work around so my future son(s) will have to learn to adapt.
As to the couple in the article, I can imagine how their sons feel. All the money time and effort to get a daughter. And the poor youngest son, he's only there because they thought he was girl! Poor kid. I wouldn't want to spend $40,000 on something that may not work. They could have saved so much money and time if they adopted.

[sophiarose]

Small loss, there's plenty of other thieves and Klansmen available on backorder.

O_____________O

Someone's clearly unappreciative. And neither of them were thieves!

[mamamaassy]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the eggs that are discarded are fertilized correct? That, to me, is murder. I believe in life at conception, so gender-selction would be totally off the table. This coming from someone who has only been praying for a gaggle of little boys. If I get a plethora of daughters, well, I'll take it God was trying to teach me patience and acceptance.

[strawberry shortcake]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the eggs that are discarded are fertilized correct? That, to me, is murder. I believe in life at conception, so gender-selction would be totally off the table. This coming from someone who has only been praying for a gaggle of little boys. If I get a plethora of daughters, well, I'll take it God was trying to teach me patience and acceptance.

Yes, that is correct. There was a really good documentary on a UK channel a few months ago, called "8 Boys and Wanting a Girl". It followed a UK couple as they made their 3rd attempt to have a girl, after having 8 boys. The 3 youngest boys were only born because the mother had thought they were girls.
Anyway, they went to the US and had her eggs fertilised in a lab, and the doctors implanted the female ones. When asked what she wanted done with the male eggs, they offered her the chance to have them donated to a woman with no eggs so she could have IVF. She declined, she wanted them to be destroyed. And so they were.
It made me feel physically ill that not only did she refuse to have any male eggs implanted, but she wouldn't give a childless couple the chance to be parents either because she insisted they were destroyed when they could have been donated. Why would she destroy her eggs when they could have brought joy to another family? It was very uncomfortable viewing. I couldn't believe what I was seeing.

[pansy]

O_____________O

Someone's clearly unappreciative. And neither of them were thieves!

Actually, stripedsocks is correct. If you know anything about Edison past what they teach in elementary school, you know that he wasn't so much a great inventor as a great businessman. In most cases, Edison didn't actually invent things (such as the light bulb) but would take someone else's invention/idea, tweek it, then get a patent on it so he could make money off of it.

[amberdaydream]

Medical problems aside: IMO, nature is the only dictator of the world. It’s science after all, and science says there is a 50/50 chance you will get a girl or a boy – egg cells have XX, sperm is XY, so two combos have to be XX and the other two have to be XY. It’s an exact 50% chance, so that the world’s population has a more or less consistent proportion of half girls, half boys. And nature hasn’t just done that for the fun of it – it keeps our species going. It seems silly to go to such lengths to alter all this. I reckon you can want something but still just be happy with what you get. In very remote areas in some countries, baby girls are left to die so there aren’t as many women, which leads to bride kidnappings. That’s why it shouldn’t be tampered with – socially, it’s dangerous.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thomas Edison, [. . .] Woodrow [. . .] might not have existed.

Small loss, there's plenty of other thieves and Klansmen available on backorder.

O_____________O

Someone's clearly unappreciative. And neither of them were thieves!

Arguably, this is all pointless. Because if Edison hadn’t been born and therefore hadn’t stolen the light bulb, do you honestly think no one else would’ve? Invention is an ongoing process – yet people are always looking to attribute it to one name. And some people decide it should be their name. Sad, true, and nothing to do with Edison in particular being born. If it hadn’t been him claiming it then it would have been someone else I guarantee you. It's not like Edison came into the world with full intention on stealing the lightbulb anyway.

[bmm]

I don't think it's wrong but I wouldn't do it myself. The reason is very practical - I think it would be hard to ensure a balance of genders if people were able to choose.

I don't have a problem at all if other women want to have their own fertilized eggs destroyed. But if I were in their position I would gladly give out the male fertilized eggs. And again the sole reason is it would help balancing out the genders.