Ethics Governance
Ethics & Governance - Resources and Articles |
| Articles indexes: a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | i | j | k | l | m | n | o | p | q | r | s | t | u | v | w | x | y | z | other | |
|
|
| Article - Abstract. To view full article click on the article title. | |
eMJA: Savulescu, Sex selection: the case for Sex selection: the case for There is a strong argument in favour of sex selection, based on respect for procreative autonomy -- the autonomy of couples to decide for themselves how to procreate, and what children to have. Objections based on possible harm to the child, the parents, or society, are not compelling, particularly in Australia. Julian Savulescu MJA 1999; 171: 373-375 Various methods now exist for attempting to choose to have a baby of a desired sex (see Box). With the recent advent of flow cytometric separation of X and Y sperm and preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) (see Box), couples no longer have to employ abortion to select sex. Sex selection may therefore become more acceptable to some couples, and requests for clinics to provide it may become more common. In Australia, requests for medically assisted sex selection are not common; for example, one in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) clinic in Australia receives about 15-20 requests for sex selection each year (L Wilton, Consultant, Melbourne IVF, personal communication). Medically assisted sex selection for non-medical reasons is banned in the United Kingdom and Canada.7 In Australia, sex selection employing artificial insemination or IVF is banned explicitly in Victoria by section 50 of the Infertility Treatment Act 1995. In South Australia, section 13 of the Reproductive Technology Act 1988 requires that artificial fertilisation only be used for the treatment of infertility. Both Acts provide exceptions to avoid the risk of transmission of a genetic defect (assisted reproduction for medical reasons). Full Article: http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/171_7_041099/savulescu/savulescu.html |
|
2006 Ethics-Governance.com |
|||