Sex selection: laissez faire or family balancing?
In a recent comment on the HFEA's public consultation on sex selection, Soren Holm claimed that proponents of family balancing are committed to embrace a laissez faire approach. Given that arguments in support of sex selection for family balancing also support sex selection for other social reasons, advocates of family balancing, he asserts, are simply inconsistent when calling for a limit on access to sex selection. In this paper, I argue that proponents of family balancing are in no way inconsistent. Provided their advocacy of family balancing is aimed at preventing a severe distortion of the natural sex ratio, they are entirely justified in insisting on restrictions to sex selection. The real question is whether a concern for the sex ratio does indeed call for a limit on sex selection. Based on a recent survey on gender preferences and data from several Gender Clinics, I argue that a restriction on sex selection to family balancing is unwarranted. In the absence of any evidence for a pending sex ratio distortion, we are actually required to adopt a laissez faire approach to sex selection.
Dahl
Edgar
E
Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia. edahl@unimelb.edu.au
D026688:Bioethical Issues; D005191:Family Characteristics; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D026684:Personal Autonomy; D012743:Sex Preselection / Q000941:ethics*; D012744:Sex Ratio