Some couples will do anything to make sure they have a boy or a girl, including, these days, plunking down thousands of dollars for fertility treatments like IVF even if they're fertile. According to the well-researched article "Pick a Sex, Any Sex," couples are opting for procedures like MicroSort to ensure that their odds of getting the baby they want will be better than 50-50.
It's increasingly popular, but it's still controversial.
"Should a child's gender be selected like a brand of flour off the grocery store shelf?" asked one mom.
And of course there are broader cultural fears about what this trend could lead to: unethical engineering of "designer babies" or laws that would curtail women's reproductive freedom.
From the article: Georgia Republican Rep. Paul Broun introduced what he calls the Sanctity of Human Life Act to the House (H.R. 4157) last November in an attempt to make the federal government recognize "each human life begins with fertilization, cloning, or its functional equivalent, at which time every human has all legal and constitutional attributes and privileges of personhood." He's earned fifty-five co-sponsors in the House - including six other Georgia Republicans and Republican Congressmen in nineteen other states and Puerto Rico.
Read the full story here.What do you think? Is going to great lengths to have a boy or a girl unethical, or something you'd do in a heartbeat?
Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 2)
1. There should be no restraint on reproductive freedom.
Unintended consequences should be expected.
Genetic engineering is possible, probable, and realistically inevitable.
My four granddaughters constantly impress me, as do my two grandsons, and my sons and their wives, who, if they were compelled to choose, would have an equal number of boys and girls.
In my opinion, genetic engineering is desireable. Let's go for brighter, prettier, healthier, more socially acceptable, more imaginative, more creative, and more inovative humans.
You go, twenty-first century!
naturalpuppy at 12:42PM on Aug 15th 2008
2. You have got to be kidding? Shouldn't parents be thankful for thier baby regardless of the sex? Unthankful, an unholy generation....
Man_in_Wilderness at 12:52PM on Aug 15th 2008
3. . You have got to be kidding? Shouldn't parents be thankful for thier baby regardless of the sex? Unthankful, an unholy generation....
Man_in_Wilderness at 12:52PM on Aug 15th 2008
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
MiW - I hope you were responding to Ada, and not me. I totally don't understand your post.
But I rarely understand your posts, so when, if ever, you direct your posts to me, please make an effort to be more intelligible, as I may be a little dense in regard to your reasoning.
Thanks.
naturalpuppy at 1:30PM on Aug 15th 2008
4.
Forget about engineering a boy or a girl.
I say we should go straight for the hermaphrdite.
Think about it.
No more problems with those pesky homosexuals. One could be free to love anyone they want. Eventually the hatred associated with this poor unfortunate group would diminish. Who hates their sons/daughters?
No more lonely nights without a sexual partner.
No more worrying if our son/daughter knew anything about the oppisite sex.
No more sexual harassment in the workplace.
With the correct 'mix' we could eliminate sterility problems among these folks.
BUT, seriously, don't tell the folks in China about this. We may never see another girl come from that country again !
mac at 3:50PM on Aug 15th 2008
5. Couples spending big time money on IVF when they have no fertility issues, just to have a boy or girl? Sheesh, talk about selfish. Hey, how about adopting some children - then you can pick the gender in a less narcisisstic way.
David S. at 4:04PM on Aug 15th 2008
6. I personally would not like to have chosen the sex of my babies, but have no problem with couples that want to. The troublesome thing about government interference and passing laws to restrict it is for those couples who are doing it to avoid passing known genetic defects that affect "just boys" or "just girls." Some of them are devastating, life long, or life threatening...and if only they had been able to have the OTHER sex. What a shame. It is a reasonable, responsible thing to do, and I would wager a good portion of parents being accused of creating "designer babies" are doing no such thing. Not to say some aren't, but gov't should stay out of this very personal choice. Why is it always the Republican "smaller gov't." types that want to rule on our babies, marriages, end of life decisions, etc? Leave people alone. Just my opinion.
Jude at 5:54PM on Aug 15th 2008
7. The troublesome thing about government interference and passing laws to restrict it is for those couples who are doing it to avoid passing known genetic defects that affect "just boys" or "just girls."
Jude at 5:54PM on Aug 15th 2008
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Very good point.
To comment on your other point, The radical right is committed to control. Control how you are conceived, how you may die, and control of your life and body in all points in between, especially if you are female.
naturalpuppy at 8:21PM on Aug 15th 2008
8. The government has no place in reproductive choice. These issues are a lot more complex than the media is capable of conveying. I'm sorry, but I have never read a mass media story on reproductive technology that isn't sensationalistic nonsense - and I doubt I ever will.
These are medical issues that when legislated do nothing but endanger women. Keep the government out of reproductive medicine and repeal all laws currently on the books concerning reproduction. The world would be a better place if society quit sticking its nose in other's reproductive lives.
MLO at 12:44AM on Aug 16th 2008
9. The goverment has no right to patrol our sex lives or our reproductive choices. There is a seperation of church and states, at least there is supposed to be.
When the right makes choices based on religious belief, such as the Sanctity of Human Life Act bill in which the House which seeks to make the federal government recognize "each human life begins with fertilization" as oppsed to implataion. While science and medice define that pregency starts with implantation. The barrier/protection of seperation of chruch and state is disolved.
This bill states that at fertilation,"at which time every human has all legal and constitutional attributes and privileges of personhood". This makes that fertilized egg a person and protected as such.
Just to make this clear to everyone defining life with fertiazation will make birth controll pills, IUD and abortion illegal. Becuase birth control and IUD's prevent implantation of a fertialized egg. This takes away any and all sexual privacy and reproductive rights we as woman now have. If this passed we all have to follow the catholic opinion/rules on birth control becuase that is where these rules come from. And that is a violation of seperation of church and state.
sati97 at 3:26AM on Aug 16th 2008
10. I went to a fertility clinic YEARS AGO. We wanted a girl. We already had SIX, (yes six) boys. The person I spoke told me we did NOT have to go through IVF. There is amuch easier way. Needless to say, we got our girl. The more SAME sex babies you have, the least likely you are to have an opposite sex baby. The female DOES have some say in the gender due to high acid or alkaline in her body. Here is the recipe:
Boy---douche with a baking soda and water douche before sex. Ejac. should be deep penetrating.
Girl---vinegar douche prior to sex and ejac. should occur part way away from the cervix.
This method has worked for every person I know who has tried it.
barb at 4:36AM on Aug 16th 2008
11. I went to a fertility clinic YEARS AGO. We wanted a girl. We already had SIX, (yes six) boys. The person I spoke told me we did NOT have to go through IVF. There is amuch easier way. Needless to say, we got our girl. The more SAME sex babies you have, the least likely you are to have an opposite sex baby. The female DOES have
some say in the gender due to high acid or alkaline in her body.
Here is the recipe:
Boy---douche with a baking soda and water douche before sex. Ejac.should be deep penetrating.
Girl---vinegar douche prior to sex and ejac. should occur part way away from the cervix.
This method has worked for every person I know who has tried it.
Barbara at 4:40AM on Aug 16th 2008
12. If we all decide to chose the sex of our children...wouldn't that have terrible effects on us. Think about if say 70% want boys and 30% girls...it could make for some population problems.I agree about the China comment. Female Chinese...extinct. I say unless there are extreme problems such as you have a trait for a disease that only effects a certain gender...then yes, go for. No one wants to see a child live in pain and then die or worst just live and suffer...being trapt inside its own body, but if it is just because you are a girly girl and want a daughter to shop with then....by all means just don't have children period. You aren't selfless enough to do so. Let nature decide what is best for you and be happy the child is heathy and happy.
Jessie at 6:43PM on Aug 16th 2008
13. Oh, and before I forget...That are alot of things that people have the freedom to do, but if you keep having people misuse it then what? Should the government tell us whats right for our bodies? No, but like most things that are held as bad now, once upon a time they were good. The question is where do it stop. Once we can pick a sex...next it might be eye color or hair color. maybe you are brown eyed, olive skin, and black hair and you want a daughter who is pale, red head, and blue eyes. What if you are thin and want to you child to not have the pesky overweight gene from granny. What if you are 4'11 and want for your dear son to be tall. I could go and on some more, but that is pretty much the gest of it. It is a wonderful technology, but I don't feel that most people would use it morally wise....better yet wisely at all.
Jessie at 6:43PM on Aug 16th 2008
14. We should all be able to shop for the children we want. Healthier, happier, prettier, more curious, more creative, more inovative, more imaginative, more social, more intelligent, whatever you like. Better hope they can get along with their less advantaged parents.
If they can't, well maybe they can learn to get along with their own designer children.
naturalpuppy at 9:26PM on Aug 16th 2008
15. Jessie at #12 and 13, I find your willingness to allow the government the right to make laws regarding personal and individual choices frightening. Who has the right to make those decisions, and who really has your best interest at heart? Not *somebody else.* Also, you hold a very dim view of humanity, I give people much more credit. You can't honestly believe that the vast majority of people in general and women in particular think that way about their babies, do you? If it were true for so many people that not regulating would cause a problem, then everyone should just stop reproducing RIGHT NOW. I don't fault natural puppy for her desire to see excellent children. After all, doesn't everyone want the best for them? But, I also had a child with mild birth defects whom I wouldn't trade for a *perfect child* for anything. He is the child of ME, with no attempts to change him. Had I messed with nature, I wouldn't have had him. And he's perfect for me. But if I knew I was going to have a boy with Duchennes Muscular Dystrophy, (this is not what my son had, just an example) I would most definitely try for a girl so as not to knowingly force a child into that life.
Jude at 1:07PM on Aug 17th 2008