At the moment it is illegal to choose the sex of your child unless for medical reasons.

A committee is now suggesting to M.P's that this should be changed and you should be allowed to choose the sex for
'Family Balancing' in other words - if you have a certain number of one sex you should be then allowed to make sure your next child is of the sex you do not have!

I am a mother of 3 girls by my ex and then went on to have a boy with my new partner. Although it was nice to get a boy I would never have medical intervention to ensure a particular sex. Nature should take its course and you should be grateful you are even capable of having any children.

I do agree though that choosing the sex for medical reasons is acceptable - but not just because you already have one certain sex and so want the other.

Choosing eye colour, hair colour and sex is getting silly. Where will it all end?

Didn't Hitler try something like this, and everyone was shocked at such evil doings, now it seems as if it to become acceptable.

Sorry but it's not for me, nature has her own way of evening things out not scientists.

Surely the IVF system is stretched enough just providing help for those who cannot have children naturally; proposing treatment for those who can have children and just want to be more fussy about the type they get is just going to stretch it even further, possibly preventing those who simply want ONE child!!!

Its all about the consumerisation of everything.

"I want a baby, therefore if I pay someone I should be able to choose what sort of baby I want"

As long as it is possible it is going to be very difficult to stop it happening as long as people want to do it.

We are taught that the market is always right and we are all consumers and everything can be seen in those terms.

ahhh designer babies... personally I think its wrong, people have lots of one sex for a reason, because some other family somewhere has lots of the other sex :P

my dads side of the family are known for producing men very well but girls are really rare... my mum got fed up after the 2nd boy, she wishes she could have a girl but she said she wasn't going to produce a football team before she finally got a girl :hihi:

these people really should be lucky that can have kids at all, there are lots of couples that cant have kids, either due to a disability, or due to some problems with their repoductive system... of course I would assume anything like this would be 100% in the private market and would cost an arm and a leg!

whats next? designer hair colour and getting rid of ginger people? :o

It's not for me - children aren't something that should be designed. They are people after all; who's to say I should choose whether they are a boy or a girl, or what their eye / hair colour is. To play "God" is wrong in my opinion.

Originally posted by JonJParr
To play "God" is wrong in my opinion.

thats a whole other debate mate ;) playing God includes not rushing someone to hospital when they get hit by a bus... or treating someone with cancer, or giving a crippled child a wheelchair...

we break the laws of nature everyday with science :P

Originally posted by xafier
thats a whole other debate mate ;) playing God includes not rushing someone to hospital when they get hit by a bus... or treating someone with cancer, or giving a crippled child a wheelchair...

we break the laws of nature everyday with science :P

That's why I put it in inverted commas Xafier. I don't think it's playing God to rush someone to hospital in an ambulance; it's the modern equivalent of applying a dressing to a wound if we're shot with an arrow. That isn't science it's common sense. Designing life is a whole different kettle of fish.

or its our new way of doing what was done in caveman era of selection of the fittest... find a mate that will produce what you want... except now scientists are picking the right sperm to produce what is needed instead of us just sleeping around with random people to get a boy or a girl

we don't do that anymore, we find someone and settle down... cavemen/women just went around mating with anyone, much more dispersing of gene's thus producing a whole good selection of males and females.

science and religion ruin the world ;)

Originally posted by xafier
or its our new way of doing what was done in caveman era of selection of the fittest... find a mate that will produce what you want... except now scientists are picking the right sperm to produce what is needed instead of us just sleeping around with random people to get a boy or a girl

we don't do that anymore, we find someone and settle down... cavemen/women just went around mating with anyone, much more dispersing of gene's thus producing a whole good selection of males and females.

science and religion ruin the world ;)

So by that argument you're saying that male or indeed female is somehow 'fitter' than its opposite sex? Picking a baby's sex isn't natural selection - it's the raping of mother nature!

actually what I'm saying is that in a world that isn't governed by morals of sleeping with lots of people, or laws regarding marriage and settling down

if you was a woman, you had 3 boys, and you wanted a girl, you'd just find some other guy if its obvious the father of yours wasn't capable of producing girls... of course that is morally wrong in our world... but back in the day of cavemen, thats probably what would have happened

If you realy want a boy or a girl you could adopt one, you can pick which one you want.

Originally posted by xafier
actually what I'm saying is that in a world that isn't governed by morals of sleeping with lots of people, or laws regarding marriage and settling down

if you was a woman, you had 3 boys, and you wanted a girl, you'd just find some other guy if its obvious the father of yours wasn't capable of producing girls... of course that is morally wrong in our world... but back in the day of cavemen, thats probably what would have happened

I disagree. We can't for sure say that happened because there are no records from the time. To make vast assumptions of prehistoric man's behaviour would be foolish. What can be said for sure is that nature has a way of balancing itself; this equilibrium is achieved not with test tubes or chromosome selection it just simply happens. Whether this is serendipitous or pre-determined is difficult to say.

If an old man is knocked over by a car and dies in the road is he replaced by a man or a woman born the exact instant he ceases to exist? Who knows. But what is certain is that it's entirely random. When we seek to pre-define our own future or our children's future then we begin to unravel the very fabric of our world. We've got to where we are now purely by chance - surely where we're heading should be by chance also?

Mankind / people in general always seem to me ... just a little too eager to mess with nature ...

We do things and only consider the immediate positive results of our actions (both as individuals and as a race) ... I don't think we really fully consider the long term consequences of our actions.

Upsetting natures delicate balance for short term pay-offs ... is a very dangerous game in the long term ...

I'm all for it.
And whilst were at it (or further down the road) we'll engineer everyone to be fit and healthy, intelligent and well adjusted, etc...

I'm not really clear on what your (all of you) arguments against this are.

Some sort of vague respect for blind chance or 'mother nature' a feeling that since we made it this far by luck in an otherwise pretty hostile universe we should damn well take our chances and carry on the same way?

No one is suggesting that this will be available on the NHS, no one is going to miss out on their chance to have a baby by IVF because someone else wanted a girl this time around.

Maybe 90 years ago you lot would have been arguing that making penicilin was interfeering with mother nature and that the end of society was ni because you had kept someone alive by science(said in hushed tones) when they should have died...

We're having a ***** in six weeks and although I was a little disppointed and wanted a *****, I'm now just pleased that we're having one at all and that it's going to be fit and healthy. (Edited the sexes out just in case there are any friends and relatives watching - they want to be surprised!)

If you're really wanting a child and are having to use IVF, surely you shouldn't care what you have, just as long as you're blessed with a baby.

Originally posted by Cyclone
I'm all for it.
And whilst were at it (or further down the road) we'll engineer everyone to be fit and healthy, intelligent and well adjusted, etc...

I'm not really clear on what your (all of you) arguments against this are.

I don't have anything against science / technology advancement etc ... however I do have something against the blind stupidity of the human race ...

If we empower ourselves so that we can choose the sex of our babies ... there is a real danger that there will be a general preference for either male or female babies (this preference may be based on cultural values or financial reasons).

What is to prevent a situation where there is an imbalance of the sexes (more girls or boys etc) !?

Or do you not consider this to be a problem !?

Originally posted by alchresearch
We're having a ***** in six weeks and although I was a little disppointed and wanted a *****, I'm now just pleased that we're having one at all and that it's going to be fit and healthy. (Edited the sexes out just in case there are any friends and relatives watching - they want to be surprised!)

If you're really wanting a child and are having to use IVF, surely you shouldn't care what you have, just as long as you're blessed with a baby.

it won't be available just to people that need IVF, what makes you think that it would be.

Jamie - yes that would be a concern. If everybody started doing it.
But as it will probably cost something like £10k I doubt that it will be that popular.

The problem would be self correcting anyway, over a few generations if one sex became much less common (assuming heavy use of the process and a cultural bias towards 1 sex) then a few generations in, when that sex is rare, it will naturally increase in value and the cultural bias will have changed.

Why can`t we just have babies without pre-determining their sex or illiminating the illness they may have.

I have passed on to 2 of my four children, illnesses that i feel guilty for, But
I would not have wanted to change anything, these are children, not something to tamper with.They have learned to live with what mother nature gave them and what I passed on.

Humans are just that human, despite their flaws.

I don`t and won`t ever agree to tampering with mother nature for whatever benefit it may have.

firstly we should stop anthropromorphising blind luck and the harsh world we live in. It's not 'mother nature', it doesn't care, it's random.

So, if we have the option to improve our lives, be that by taking penicilin when we have an infection, by stitching up a wound when we cut ourselves, or by tweaking our genes and elliminating an illness I see no reason why we shouldn't, and many many reasons why we should.
It becomes slightly more ambiguous when we are talking about something cosmetic, or something that is simply a want of the parent and will have no direct benefit/disadvantage to the child in question. But then given that we do have that capability, why deny someone the choice.

You can`t self correct when you feel you want to.

How do you think you feel when you give birth and find out something is wrong, you learn to cope.

What do you suggest we live in a perfect world , where we correct everything that is wrong and don`t learn to cope with what we have to.

I have 3 son`s and one daughter and what I have passed on caught one of my son`s and my daughter so should I not have had any children.

I don't believe you should have the choice of what sex your child is. If you want children badly enough why would you care?

I think personally people wanting to choose the sex of their child(ren) are selfish and not worthy of having children.

It makes me sick that the government would even entertain this is idea - a child is not an accessory like choosing what hand bag to go with your outfit! :rant:

i dont mind what sex my child is as long as it isnt a boy, or a girl.:suspect:

Originally posted by rosie
You can`t self correct when you feel you want to.

How do you think you feel when you give birth and find out something is wrong, you learn to cope.

What do you suggest we live in a perfect world , where we correct everything that is wrong and don`t learn to cope with what we have to.

I have 3 son`s and one daughter and what I have passed on caught one of my son`s and my daughter so should I not have had any children.

why not, we do it all the time. We don't like our face we have cosmetic surgery, we don't like being ill we take medicine, we don't like being unfit we go to the gym.

Ermm, if we corrected something then we wouldn't have to learn to cope with it would we. And why would that be a bad thing.
If we could regrow entire limbs, then people who lost them wouldn't have to learn to live without them.
Unless someone was arguing that we shouldn't tamper with mother nature and they should be happy to live with an arm missing.

I didn't even imply that you shouldn't have had any children. But if you've had the option of medical intervention to make sure you didn't pass on whatever it is, would you have refused it?

Yes I would have refused it.

My belief is you learn to live with what you have got. I don`t believe in plastic surgery, if I am ugly, thats tough if I can live with it, and you can`t thats your fault.

You are a stronger person by what you were born with or without, and you can`t play god by deciding what sex you want or if you want someone illness free.

This is how we were created with flaws, you can`t decide now you want a flawless society.

Originally posted by rosie
Yes I would have refused it.

My belief is you learn to live with what you have got. I don`t believe in plastic surgery, if I am ugly, thats tough if I can live with it, and you can`t thats your fault.

You are a stronger person by what you were born with or without, and you can`t play god by deciding what sex you want or if you want someone illness free.

This is how we were created with flaws, you can`t decide now you want a flawless society.

so you refuse all medical help based on this morality? You don't use medicine or medical services of any kind, you don't play god by using contraception. You don't go to the gym because you want to be stronger, or eat less because you want to be slimmer...

Sounds like an abrogation of responability for yourself in a mistaken belief that suffering somehow makes us a better person.

I'm glad you didn't have to make the choice between medical help or taking your chances on passing on whatever to your children. I'd hate to be you if I had to explain that I could have chosen not to give them this illness, but I don't agree with medical techniques.

Do you approve of fire, it's not natural for us to utilise it to keep warm you know.

Yes I have used the meducal services. I also used contraception when necessary to make the adult decision I did not want children at a certain time.

I do exercise but don`t pay for it, not to make me slimmer but healthier.
I can`t have penicilian ever again and so use natrual remidies.
I am a coeliac and thefore can`t eat what I would like but you learn to cope.

My beliefs arn`t for everyone and yes people have a go at me for them. I am just glad I have them, unlike some.

My children know I am the one who gave them there disability, they don`t hate me, they would not become the strong minded people they are without what they have been through, they know they can also pass it on.

I didn`t say that medical breakthroughs are all bad, but no I don`t believe you should touch genetics.

Its a tricky road to travel down. It wont be long before people are choosing a specific sex so that they can farm out doubled up organs like kidneys for their other children if they are needed. They have already done it to secure certain blood products for ill children. Darwin will be turning in his grave :(

Speaking as one of three girls, if my parents had been able to choose the sex of their children, it's a fair bet that myself or one of my sisters wouldn't be here.

My husband and I were so thrilled that both of our children were healthy and well, we didn't care which sex they were. And we still don't care.

In China, sex selection (and boys are favored) combined with the one child policy has turned into a problem so immense it is threatening to destabilize China.

There are millions of young men who will never be able to marry because there simply aren't enough women.

I'm all for genetic engineering where someone's health is concerned, and there are diseases that are sex specific. But sex selection simply because you want a girl, when you've already got two boys is unnecessary and entering the realm of what you want, rather than what you need.

:) Sierra

Originally posted by Sierra
[B]Speaking as one of three girls, if my parents had been able to choose the sex of their children, it's a fair bet that myself or one of my sisters wouldn't be here.


But you may still have been here, just male? ooo the mind boggles!



I don't really see a huge problem in people choosing the sex of their baby. I wouldn't want it on the NHS, but I dont think enough people will want to do it to make it a problem. I agree with cyclone that we all often try too hard to romantacise 'mother nature'. It could be useful if there are hereditrary diseases which only affect men/women in the family.

Originally posted by kathythebean
But you may still have been here, just male? ooo the mind boggles!

True, true! I never thought of it that way. :hihi:

:) Sierra

And if you had been born male, would you be on this forum saying, you see, I could have been born female? The more I think about it the more I go cross eyed!!

technically there is nothing stopping us given the technology to give you a retro virus and turn you into a man now.
Whilst I wouldn't doubt that growing up as man would make you a very different person, that's nurture not nature. X or Y, that's a minor thing...

There is nothing mystical about genetics that means we should keep our hands off. Sure it's powerful, but then what isn't when it's pushing the limits of what you know.

Fine, penicilin is a bad example, what about paracetamol. Or for that matter, what makes it so special that you take a chemical via a plant that happens to make it, instead of it being manufactured in a chemical plant (pardon the pun).

I can't believe that you would knowingly (if you'd had the chance) pass on coleac disease to your children rather than have gene therapy to fix it. It just beggars my understanding.

If you can (I'm sorry if this comes across as personal, i'm attacking your belief, not you) please explain why you believe genetics is a bottle that should have been left unopened...

I am a mother of 3 boys and fair to say when pregnant with the 3rd I really did want a girl to balance the family & for me!!

When we found out I was carrying a boy I was really disappointed but as soon as he was born the love was immediate!! and healthy...Thank Goodness!!

I was worried that I would find it difficult to bond with the baby because he wasn't what I would've chosen. Back then I would've welcomed being able to choose the sex at conception.

Now when I think about it I realise I am now actually against choosing the sex of your baby!! I think we are becoming a very materialistic nation - blame culture - keeping up with the Jones's seems to take up more time than ever!! We are becoming consumed with selfishness and perfection!!

Very sad indeed - I think it would be very wrong to introduce generalised sex screening !! Even for IVF couples!!

And imagine the damage to the child if for example the couple chose a boy and got a girl (mistakes happen - look at the white IVF couple who gave birth to someone else's black child!!) Mistakes can happen...human error cannot be completely eradicated from the procedure so inevitably it will happen somewhere and a huge court case will no doubt follow!!)




:|

Perhaps we should look at this another way. The scientists aren't able to fertilise an egg in such a way that it will be a boy or a girl. They fertilise a number of eggs, and implant them, which is why so many IVF pregnancies result in multiple births. So if you choose the sex of your child, what you are doing is denying the right to live to an embryo not because it carries a disease, or is malformed in some way, but just because you happen to want a baby of the other sex. At least, that's how I understand it. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

You are slightly wrong in that with general sex selection it would be the sperm that is screened before injecting/combining with the egg.

The embryo's are screened in cases of genetic disorder or general IVF - the healthy/compatible embryos are implanted often in batches of 2 or 3 (with parents consent to increase success rates).

It is the sperm that carries an X or Y sex gene - all eggs are female X - I think the joining of XX produces a girl and XY produces a boy!!

Though it is true in general IVF screening embryos are discarded if not required etc

Some parents choose to freeze them or donate them to infertile couples but the majority I suspect are destroyed.

Again... I believe childless couples should be helped to produce a child, couples who have lost/will lose a child due to hereditary conditions should be helped to produce a healthly child but at no time should their embryos be screened to give them a choice of sex, hair colour, eye colour etc!!!!!!!!!!!

And couples seeking this should be ashamed!!!

You are not choosing the family car!!!! :rant:

Yahoo have conducted a straw poll:

http://post.euro.polls.yahoo.com/quiz/quizresults.php?poll_id=4477&wv=1

Im with Cyclone on this one.

I wanted my first and only baby to be a blonde blue eyed female, and she is. I wanted her to be born by caesarean section (shock horror, its not natural) and she was.

I am pro choice, for everything.

If this was an option available, then I WOULD choose to determine features/characteristics that I would like my child to have.

My husband wanted a son, but as we had a girl, he, in future, would like us to have another baby. I would have another baby if I was guaranteed to have a boy.

Nature should take its course and you should be grateful you are even capable of having any children.


Sorry, I've not read all of this thread yet, but I feel very strongly about this subject, and just wanted to say I agree 100% with the OP.

Babies are a very special gift, and people should just be truly grateful to have a child that is born safe and healthy. It worries me that doctors are prepared to play God in this way. Stinks of eugenics.

Excellent post, Dawny1

StarSparkle

PS Aww, just realised this is an old thread. I'm all disappointed now, I thought JonJParr and Xafier were back posting on the Forum :(