taylor@hplabsc.UUCP (Dave Taylor) (09/29/86)
From a fairly reputable source last night, I heard that a product has just been introduced on the market that allows parents to choose the sex of their unborn child. There is also a big uproar about it, with people claiming that it is a form of that ultimate bad thing, genetic engineering, and it is really REALLY bad to allow people to have this power. Words like "morality", "blasphemy" and "sacriligious" are being tossed about rather callously at demonstrations against the product. I'm interested in hearing what people think about this product - do you think it's good or bad? Why? Also, what do you think of the whole area of genetic engineering? Why? Are there lines that need to be drawn in this area (like "don't touch humans") and if so, what? Why? As usual, I'll post my thoughts in a few days... -- Dave
taylor@hplabsc.UUCP (Dave Taylor) (10/01/86)
This article is from topaz!berman@hplabs.HP.COM (Michael Berman) and was received on Tue Sep 30 14:54:21 1986 If this is the same thing I saw on TV, the uproar is premature. It's based on some unproven theory that says that the time of conception determines the sex of the baby. (I think there is actually a statistical link, but it's weak.) Anyway, it's clever marketing -- they give you a money-back guarantee if they're wrong. So for every $20 they receive, they keep at least $10, and send back some refunds. Sounds like snake oil to me. There is a sneakier way to determine the gender of a child that is probably already practiced occasionally, and really works. While many, perhaps most people would find it morally reprehensible, it seems likely it's been tried. All you do is use amniocentesis to determine the gender of the fetus, and abort it if you don't like it. I understand that a doctor will not normally do amniocentesis if he believes that this is the only purpose, but certainly this could be circumvented. For example, the couple goes to one doctor, reporting a phoney family history of appropriate genetic defects which are standard indicators for amniocentesis. Then, based on the outcome, they may go elsewhere for an abortion. This is virtually 100% effective.
taylor@hplabsc.UUCP (Dave Taylor) (10/02/86)
This article is from decvax!osiris!jcp and was received on Thu Oct 2 08:04:37 1986 My understanding is that the product is actually more of a 'system' which depends on the same factors that have been understood for years - cervical mucous, pH of the vagina, etc. It is not nearly as reliable as its developer claims. The arguments against being able to enhance the chances of conceiving a child of a particular sex as opposed to the other sex have also been used against amnios and ultrasound. The fear is that parents who want a baby of a particular sex will have an abortion if they discover the fetus is of the opposite or "wrong" sex. Unfortunately, many more people seem to be interested in having boys than girls. It is also true that the sex-selection methods that are available (sperm filters, etc) favor those sperm carrying the Y chromosome over those carrying the X chromosome. Some people fear that this will lead to further devaluation of women in society. (For those who are unaware how this works, all the sex selection methods depend on the fact that Y-bearing sperm are small and quick- moving but fairly fragile, whereas X-bearing sperm are large and slow but fairly hardy. Thus an acid environment favors Y-bearers and an alkaline environment favors X-bearers. Y-bearers will slip through filters which will "weed out" X-bearers.)
taylor@hplabsc.UUCP (Dave Taylor) (10/03/86)
This article is from hplabs!well!mandel (Thomas F. Mandel)
and was received on Thu Oct 2 09:44:29 1986
>What about a technology for pre-selecting the sex of one's child?
Well, the only substantial issue here, in my view, involves upsetting
the natural balance of so many girl babies versus so many boy babies.
I am not sure what the specific outcomes will be -- critics will
undoubtedly argue that most people will feel inclined to choose
boys (because girls still have somewhat lower status, even in modern
societies) -- but I would be generally concerned about the long-term
impacts on the makeup of human populations. Beyond this, if there is
a significant shift resulting, toward more boys or more girls, there
would eventually be *profound* social and political repercussions
having to do with the roles and status of each gender in society.
Personally, I don't share the concerns of the moralists who may claim
that such practices are against "God's plans" for us. But as is often
the case, the underlying issue reflected in the moralists' position is
worth attending to. And it is the question of a healthy balance of
men and women in future populations.
I have no idea whether the advertised technology is as effective as
its promoters indicate. Whether it is or not is probably beside the
point, because if this technology doesn't do the trick, someone will
come along soon with another that does have this effect.
I can elaborate on impact scenarios of too many women or too many men
if there's an interest.
Tom Mandel ...well!mandel mandel@sri-kl.arpataylor@hplabsc.UUCP (Dave Taylor) (10/03/86)
This article is from The lost Bostonian <gds@SPAM.ISTC.SRI.COM> and was received on Thu Oct 2 17:47:58 1986 The problem with the "select the sex" product, and genetic engineering in general, is the same problem with any technology ... in can be abused or misused in the wrong hands. People who scream "sacrilege" are probably of the opinion that the knowledge of selecting the sex should be withheld from humans. -- spoiler follows -- A good fiction book to read about a genetic engineering project is Ira Levin's "The Boys from Brazil". 94 boys were cloned from Hitler's blood and hair. The boys were then raised separately in various parts of the world in environments such as Hitler had in his youth. I don't think genetic engineering has reached that level of sophistication yet, or if there are any plans to move in that direction. I would think a large number of people are worried about such projects as in "The Boys from Brazil", and this new sex-selecting product brings us one step closer in the minds of those who are concerned. --gregbo
taylor@hplabsc.UUCP (10/05/86)
This article is from ihnp4!houxm!mtuxo!mtune!jrh
and was received on Fri Oct 3 19:44:12 1986
Re: your question about being able to select the sex of your child.
The report I saw on TV (sorry, I don't recall which station but
probably one of the "Big Three") said the technique was only applicable
(or being applied -- again sorry) to women who for medical reasons could
only have one child.
The person interviewed said they were aware of the problem to society
as a whole of wide-scale sex selection, but indicated that the number
of people that their technique was being used to treat was so small that
it didn't make much difference, and since they could only have one
child, it was ok to let them choose its sex.
I know this does not address your wider question, nor do I know if
the technique *could* be used in general, but is being restricted for
ethical / social / moral reasons.
Just trying to add more information.
John Hutchinson
ATT Information Systems
Middletown NJ
{ATT|backbone}!mtung!jrhtaylor@hplabsc.UUCP (10/07/86)
This article is from Paul Gloger <Gloger.es@Xerox.COM> and was received on Mon Oct 6 22:36:24 1986 I believe that I recall an article some time this year in the Los Angeles Times, reporting that Koreans are apparently engaging heavily in fetal sex detection and selective abortion, sufficiently so to produce a significant increase in the proportion of male to female children being born. (I cannot resist noting that I am highly amused by all the mindlessly egalitarian outrage over such behavior. I do not know whether abortion is ethical or unethical, but I am very sure that it is no more or less ethical if done for sexual selection than otherwise. Go on, flame me!) Paul Gloger <Gloger.es@Xerox.com> [WARNING: we will *NOT* discuss abortion in this forum!! There are other, very heavily trafficked, forums for that sort of stuff...so I will reject any followups that discuss that aspect of this posting. -- Dave]
taylor@hplabsc.UUCP (10/07/86)
This article is from garry@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu (Garry Wiegand) and was received on Mon Oct 6 19:40:57 1986 In a recent article in Dave Taylor wrote; > From a fairly reputable source last night, I heard that a product has > just been introduced on the market that allows parents to choose the > sex of their unborn child. > > There is also a big uproar about it... We were just talking about this yesterday: my own thought was that at first, in many societies, boy babies would be preferred. There would be more cannon fodder to fight wars with, and more male competition and violence in general. And that would be a Bad Thing. But as female babies and females became less numerous in the population, the societies and families might discover that the numerous males were always throwing themselves into wars and getting killed (I'm thinking of Iran and Iraq), less able to procreate (by the numbers), and in general being not-too-useful for one's declining years and for society. Then female children would become, willy-nilly, more valuable and more valued. Things might or might not recover to equality of numbers, but at least there would be equality of *value*. It would be a dramatic change of thinking. And that would be a Good Thing. (The U.S., on the average, might go against the grain - purely subjective, but the women I know seem to hope for girl children, and the men I know do too.) garry wiegand (garry%cadif-oak@cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu)
taylor@hplabsc.UUCP (10/09/86)
This article is from sun!tc.fluke.UUCP!kurt@hplabs.HP.COM
and was received on Wed Oct 8 14:16:50 1986
There is no long-term problem with allowing people to select the sex of
their children. Suppose 75% of all couples selected male children.
There would soon be a noticable decrease in the observed number of girl
children playing on the playground, buying clothes, and doing the things
girl children do. Suddenly all those parents would be wondering who their
little boys would be dating in 5 or 6 years. Who would they marry? The
media would be full of the 'female crisis'. Existing girls would suddenly
become very popular. It would be like any shortage situation in economics,
it would suddenly become VERY attractive to have girl children and the
imbalance would be corrected.
In fact the natural equilibrating process operates much faster than this.
The actual population would only have to get a few percent out of balance
for a few years. It would never get to the extreme scenario above.
Remember, every boy-child is going to wish when he grows up that there was a
girl-child born about the same time. That's just the way it is with
boy-children. Furthermore, how many people out of the total pupulation are
so totally set on having a particular sex of child that they will go have
sperm drawn, centrifuged, and artificially implanted in the mother, when
there is a mechanism for obtaining randomly sexed children that is so much
more convenient and enjoyable?
Kurt Guntheroth
John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc.
{uw-beaver,decvax!microsof,ucbvax!lbl-csam,allegra,ssc-vax}!fluke!kurt