Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Ethics of Nonmedical Sex Selection

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Health Care Analysis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to demonstrate that there are significant ethical problems with nonmedical sex selection, and that prohibitive legislation is justified. The central argument put forward is that nonmedical sex selection is a sexist practice which promotes socially restrictive conceptions of sex, gender and family. Several steps are taken to justify this position: background information on technology and legislation is provided, the neoliberal position that is supportive of nonmedical sex selection is described, and preliminary reasons for rejecting this approach are given. A detailed description of how a harm/benefit based analysis contributes to the argument against nonmedical sex selection, and how it successfully counters most criticism, is provided. The paper concludes by suggesting that virtue ethics further strengthens the moral argument against nonmedical sex selection.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

PGD:

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis

IVF:

In vitro fertilisation

HFEA:

Human fertilisation and embryology authority

ASRM:

American society for reproductive medicine

References

  1. Adoption and Children Act. (2002). Crown copyright. Available online at: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2002/ukpga_20020038_en_1.

  2. Baruch, S., et al. (2008). Genetic testing of embryos: Practices and perspectives of US IVF clinics. Fertility and Sterility, 5(105), 3–58.

    Google Scholar 

  3. BBC News. (2008). Parents queue to select baby gender. Available online at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7696698.stm.

  4. Beauchamp, T. L., et al. (1994). Principles of biomedical ethics (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Berkowitz, J., et al. (1998). Racism and sexism in medically assisted conception. Bioethics, 12(1), 25–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Blackless, M., et al. (2000). How sexually diamorphic are we? Review and synthesis. American Journal of Human Biology, 12, 151–166.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Civil Partnership Act. (2004). Crown copyright. Available online at: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2004/ukpga_20040033_en_1.

  8. Ethics Committee of The American Society for Reproductive Medicine. (1999). Sex selection and preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Fertility and Sterility, 72(4), 595–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Harris, J. (2003). Sex selection and regulated hatred. Journal of Medical Ethics, 31, 291–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. (2008). HFEA code of practice (7th ed.). Available online at: http://cop.hfea.gov.uk/cop/pdf/CodeOfPracticeVR_4.pdf.

  11. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. (2007). PGD licensed conditions. Available online at: http://www.hfea.gov.uk/docs/PGD_list.pdf.

  12. Holm, S. (2004). Like a frog in boiling water: The public, the HFEA and sex selection. Health Care Analysis, 12(1), 27–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kant, I. (1797). The metaphysics of morals (M. Gregor, Trans. (1991)). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  14. Karkazis, K. (2008). Fixing sex: Intersex, medical authority and lived experience. Durham and London: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  15. McDougall, R. (2005). Acting parentally: An argument against sex selection. Journal of Medical Ethics, 31, 601–605.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Moazam, F. (2004). Feminist discourse on sex screening and selective abortion of female foetuses. Bioethics, 18(3), 205–220.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Parfit, D. (1986). Reasons and persons. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  18. Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology. (2003). Parliamentary office of science and technology postnote: Sex selection, parliamentary copyright, 198. Available online at: http://www.parliament.uk/post/pn198.pdf.

  19. Rogers, W., et al. (2007). Is sex selective abortion morally justified and should it be prohibited? Bioethics, 21(9), 520–524.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Savulescu, J. (1999). Sex selection: The case for. Medical Journal of Australia, 171, 402–405.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Scully, J., et al. (2006). Chance, choice and control: Lay debate on prenatal social sex selection. Social Science and Medicine, 63, 21–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Wilkinson, S. (2008). Sexism, sex selection and ‘family balancing’. Medical Law Review, 16(3), 369–389.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Zilberberg, J. (2007). Sex selection and restricting abortion and sex determination. Bioethics, 21(9), 517–519.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The support of the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) is gratefully acknowledged. The work was part of the Programme of the ESRC Research Centre for Economic and Social Aspects of Genomics. http://www.genomicsnetwork.ac.uk/cesagen.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. cesagen (ESRC Centre for the Economic and Social Aspects of Genomics), Cardiff University, 6 Museum Place, Cardiff, CF10 3BG, UK

    H. Strange & R. Chadwick

Authors
  1. H. Strange
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. Chadwick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to H. Strange.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Strange, H., Chadwick, R. The Ethics of Nonmedical Sex Selection. Health Care Anal 18, 252–266 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-009-0135-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-009-0135-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation