Sex selection: choice and responsibility in human reproduction ...

Sex Selection: Choice and Responsibility in Human Reproductionhypothetical possibilities. Hence as long as those arguing for permissiveness endorsethe judgement that these possibilities are objectionable, something further needs tobe added about the acceptability of the reasons prospective parents might have for sexselection which does not carry over to the selection of other physical or character traits.Family balancing96. As indicated earlier, it is an implication of these arguments against sex selection thatthe best case for sex selection for non-medical reasons is where it rests on the wishesof prospective parents who already have one or two children of one sex, to have achild of the other sex. For where this is the rationale behind it, objectionable formsof sex discrimination are not involved.2997. But it can still be argued that even family balancing remains objectionable for someof the other reasons outlined above:●●●it involves the attempt by parents to exercise control over a fundamental aspectof their future child, thus potentially interfering with the unconditional love thatparents owe to their children and giving rise to anxiety about the attitude of theparents if a child of the ‘wrong’ sex is bornit is liable to involve the imposition of stereotypical gender roles on a child ofthe ‘right’ sex who has been born by this techniqueunless more is said about the special nature of the rationale for family balancing,it is unclear what distinguishes it from objectionable forms of selection, such asthe hypothetical selection of character traits98. The reply to these points will be that for some prospective parents there isdistinctive value in having a family in which there are children of both sexes –both because the children will grow up with a member of the other sex and becausesome parents relate more directly to a child of the same sex than to one of the othersex. These are contentious claims, and many will say that there is nothing wrongor ‘unbalanced’ about a family in which the children are all of one sex. Thosewho take the permissive view might respond that their argument does not involvethe claim that there is anything wrong about such families; all it does claim is that,for some people, there is something potentially better about families where childrenare of both sexes – a claim which is much less contentious. The argument then turnson why, if this greater good can be realised by sex selection in a way which doesno harm to others, should the state seek to prevent it?99. Many will find this unpersuasive and will point back to the objections identifiedabove as reasons against allowing this form of sex selection. As was remarked earlier,it is not the purpose of this document to argue for a position one way or another.Instead, the aim is to facilitate rational debate on this sensitive issue so that anydecisions taken by Government are informed by public opinion. Therefore we verymuch hope that you will complete and return the enclosed questionnaire.Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority