David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Ethical Perspectives 10 (3):204-214 (2003)
The article examines the arguments for and against the practice of sex selection for non-medical reasons in the light of the new technology of Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis . It distinguishes between arguments about the risks to the future child, the mother and society, on the one hand, and the inherent wrongness of the practice as an illegitimate interference in the natural course of reproduction, on the other. The article tries to show that at least in the well defined context of sex selection by PGD, when IVF was performed for independent medical reasons, there is no danger to either the child or the mother and hence that the practice should be permitted. Furthermore, the alleged dangers to society are demonstrated to be mostly illusory. On the one hand, the demographic danger is usually overstated and lacks historical support.On the other hand, the feminist claim that sex selection is necessarily discriminatory is found to be both theoretically and empirically groundless. The article’s conclusion is that despite widespread intuitive objection to the practice of sex selection, it can be justified in terms of parental autonomy and falls within the value of family planning. This liberal view does not, however, imply that having a child of the desired sex is the parents’ right, nor does it apply to sex selection in later phases of gestation
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Satish P. Deshpande, Jacob Joseph & Vasily V. Maximov (2000). Perceptions of Proper Ethical Conduct of Male and Female Russian Managers. Journal of Business Ethics 24 (2):179 - 183.
P. P. Schoderbek & Satish P. Deshpande (1996). Impression Management, Overclaiming, and Perceived Unethical Conduct: The Role of Male and Female Managers. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 15 (4):409 - 414.
Jeaneen M. Kidwell, Robert E. Stevens & Art L. Bethke (1987). Differences in Ethical Perceptions Between Male and Female Managers: Myth or Reality? [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 6 (6):489 - 493.
PhD Rudolph Bauer, Rudolph Bauer (2012). The Nonduality of Male and Female Elements. Transmission 1 (Awareness).
J. Michael Bailey (2000). Accounting for Female Strategic Variation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (4):589-589.
Gérard Journée (2012). Lumière et Nuit, Féminin et Masculin chez Parménide d'Elée : quelques remarques. Phronesis 57 (4):289-318.
Regina M. O'Neill & Stacy D. Blake-Beard (2002). Gender Barriers to the Female Mentor – Male Protégé Relationship. Journal of Business Ethics 37 (1):51 - 63.
Michael Burke (2004). What Would Happen If a 'Woman' Outpaced the Winner of the Gold Medal in the 'Men's' One Hundred Meters? Philosophy in the Contemporary World 11 (1):35-43.
Ishmael P. Akaah (1989). Differences in Research Ethics Judgments Between Male and Female Marketing Professionals. Journal of Business Ethics 8 (5):375 - 381.
David C. Geary (1998). Sexual Selection, the Division of Labor, and the Evolution of Sex Differences. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (3):444-447.
Joseph N. Abraham (1998). An Ecological Theory of Sexual Dimorphism in Animals. Acta Biotheoretica 46 (1):23-35.
Rosemarie Tong (1998). The Ethics of Care: A Feminist Virtue Ethics of Care for Healthcare Practitioners. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 23 (2):131 – 152.
Added to index2010-09-02
Total downloads34 ( #103,447 of 1,781,168 )
Recent downloads (6 months)12 ( #64,141 of 1,781,168 )
How can I increase my downloads?