A Feminist Critique of Justifications for Sex Selection
- 575 Downloads
This paper examines dominant arguments advocating for the procreative right to undergo sex selection for social reasons, based on gender preference. I present four of the most recognized and common justifications for sex selection: the argument from natural sex selection, the argument from procreative autonomy, the argument from family balancing, and the argument from children’s well-being. Together these represent the various means by which scholars aim to defend access to sex selection for social reasons as a legitimate procreative choice. In response, I contend that these justifications are flawed and often inconsistent and therefore fail to vindicate the practice.
KeywordsSex selection for social reasons Assisted reproductive technologies Procreative autonomy Sexism Gender essentialism Harm
- Bayles, M.D. 1990. Genetic choice. In Ethical issues in the new reproductive technologies, edited by R.T. Hull, 241–258. Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Company.Google Scholar
- Bhatia, R. 2010. Constructing gender from the inside out: Sex-selection practices in the United States. Feminist Studies 36(2): 260–291.Google Scholar
- Birdsall, M.L. 2010. An exploration of “the ‘Wild West’ of reproductive technology”: Ethical and feminist perspectives on sex-selection practices in the United States. William & Mary Journal of Women and the Law 17(1): 223–247.Google Scholar
- Browne, T.K. 2017. How sex selection undermines reproductive autonomy. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 14(2). Doi. 10.1007/s11673-017-9783-z.
- Butler, J. 1990. Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Council of Europe. 2011. Resolution 1829: Prenatal Sex Selection. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.Google Scholar
- Darnovsky, M. 2003. Sex selection moves to the consumer culture—Ads for “family balancing“ in the New York Times. Genetics and Society, August 20. https://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article/sex-selection-moves-consumer-culture. Accessed May 11, 2016.
- ———. n.d. Revisiting sex selection. https://pol285.blog.gustavus.edu/files/2009/08/Darnovsky_Revisiting_Sex_Selection.pdf. Accessed June 28, 2017.
- De Wert, G., and W. Dondorp. 2010. Preconception sex selection for non-medical and intermediate reasons: Ethical reflections. Facts, Views and Vision in Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2(4): 80–90.Google Scholar
- ———. 2000. Sexing the body: Gender politics and the construction of sexuality. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
- Fine, C. 2010. Delusions of gender. London: Icon Books.Google Scholar
- Habermas, J. 2003. The future of human nature. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
- Harris, J. 1992. Wonderwoman and Superman. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- ———. 2005. Sex selection and regulated hatred. Journal of Medical Ethics 31(5): 291–294.Google Scholar
- Hendl, T. Forthcoming. Queering the odds. The case against “family balancing.” International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 10(2).Google Scholar
- Mackenzie, C. 2015. Autonomy. In Routledge companion to bioethics, edited by J. Arras, E. Fenton, and R. Kukla, 277–289. New York & London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- ———. 2007. Parental virtue: A new way of thinking about the morality of reproductive actions. Bioethics 21(4): 181–190.Google Scholar
- National Health and Medical Research Council. 2014. Review of Part B of the Ethical guidelines for the use of assisted reproductive technology in clinical practice and research, 2007. http://consultations.nhmrc.gov.au/public_consultations/assisted_reproductive. Accessed May 10, 2017.
- Robertson, J. 1996. Children of choice. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- ———. 2001. Preconception sex selection. American Journal of Bioethics 1(1): 2–9.Google Scholar
- Rothman, B. Katz. 1998. Genetic maps and human imaginations: The limits of science in understanding who we are. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
- Rothschild, J. 2005. The dream of the perfect child. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
- Sarkaria, M. K. 2009. Lessons from Punjab’s “missing girls”: Toward a global feminist perspective on “choice” in abortion. California Law Review 97: 905–942.Google Scholar
- Savulescu, J. 2001. Procreative beneficence: Why we should select the best children. Bioethics 15(5–6): 336–352.Google Scholar
- ———. 2006. Sex selection: The case for. In Bioethics: An anthology, edited by H. Kuhse, and P. Singer, 145–149. Malden, MA: Balckwell.Google Scholar
- Stryker, S. 2008. Transgender history. Berkeley: Seal Press.Google Scholar
- The Fertility Institutes. 2014. Sex selection. http://www.fertility-docs.com/programs-and-services/gender-selection/select-the-gender-of-your-baby-using-pgd.php. Accessed May 9, 2016.
- United Nations. 2007. International women’s day 2007: Take action to end impunity for violence against women and girls. http://www.un.org/events/women/iwd/2007/factsfigures.shtml. Accessed October 13, 2016.
- United Nations Development Programme. 2010. Human development report 2010. New York: United Nations Development Programme.Google Scholar
- United Nations Population Fund. 2012. Sex imbalances at birth. http://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/Sex%20Imbalances%20at%20Birth.%20PDF%20UNFPA%20APRO%20publication%202012.pdf. Accessed June 7, 2017.
- Wertz, D.C., and J.C. Fletcher. 1992. Sex selection through prenatal diagnosis: A feminist critique. In Feminist perspectives in medical ethics, edited by H. Bequaert Holmes and L.M. Purdy, 240–253. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
- Wilkinson, S., and E. Garrard. 2013. Sex selection. https://www.keele.ac.uk/media/keeleuniversity/ri/risocsci/eugenics2013/Sex%20Selection%20Low%20Res.pdf. Accessed May 7, 2016.