Gender Selection in the News

All Boys? It's Only Chance
Oct-2004, UK Telegraph
"Chance and not predisposition accounts for parents having large numbers of children all the same sex, according to researchers." A U.S. clinic that performs PGD for family balancing analyzed the gender of embryos produced during IVF for couples having 3 or more children of the same gender. They found that there were actually more embryos of the opposite sex produced, and concluded that "ordinary chance" was responsible for having children of the same gender.

Imho, this is a fascinating study, but it only shows that embryos of both genders were produced, which is not the same thing as producing babies of both genders. There could be other factors making embryos of one gender more likely to survive; for example, suppose one couple's boy embryos were unable to implant in the womb, for some reason.

I'd like to see a study of U.S. Census data, analyzing just how many families there are with all same-gender children, and whether there are more than we would expect just by chance. If so, that would tell us that something causes some couples to be more likely to have only boys or only girls. By chance, we would expect 12.5% of families with 4 children to have all boys or all girls -- does actual population data show this to be the case?

By the way, I'll try to find this actual study to see what the numbers really say; I learned with the "Demand for Sons" study (claiming that daughters cause divorce) that media reports don't necessarily get the facts straight.

Hong Kong clinic says it offers designer babies without surgery, genetics
Oct-2004, Hindustan Times
Boy or girl? Clinic swears by calendar
Oct-2004, The Straits Times, Singapore
Several Asian news outlets have published articles about CHOIX, a new gender selection clinic in Hong Kong which claims to be able to allow parents to choose their baby's gender by working out a calendar "to identify when a woman will have the eggs -- or ova -- that will produce a child of the required sex".

Although the classic "Chinese gender calendar" is free (and worth every penny), a Choix calendar costs over $6,400 in US dollars.

The method's practitioner, businessman Min Yoo admits that, "there's no medicine involved". No, but there's probably a business plan to cash in on the well-known desires of Chinese families to have at least one son.

Couple tell MPs of test tube baby battle
Oct-2004, Scotland Today
Scottish couple Alan and Louise Masterson report their story of trying to use gender selection to have a daughter in Britian, where the government's HFEA denied their request.
Sexing babies: Will sex selection create a violent world without women?
Oct-2004, Reason Online
The author examines claims that gender selection in western countries could lead to the sex ratio imbalance seen in China and India. He concludes not, and cites some revealing studies.

Interestingly, a survey of Germans found that they had very little preference for their children's gender, would completely ignore MicroSort if it were available, and wouldn't even be interested in a pink or blue "magic pill" for choosing a baby's gender. An admirable attitude I wish I could share.

Sick Child's Father Defends Saviour Sibling Move
Sep-2004, Scottish News
An update from the father of Charlie Whitaker, who calls the term "designer baby" a "schoolyard insult". I am so happy to hear that Charlie is improving! What a miracle.
Giving birth to ethical dilemmas
Sep-2004, Wales News
A "slippery slope" debate: "On what basis does the HFEA take it upon itself to sit in judgment of parents who want to attempt to have a girl rather than a boy, or vice versa? Why should we expect that parents will do anything but love that child, or their other children, in anything but a healthy way?"

Dr. David King of the Human Genetics Alert argues that "designer babies" are "like the standard industrial process for producing consumer goods". Mr. King, you are clueless: PREGNANCY and CHILDBIRTH will never ever be an "industrial process". Using assisted reproduction technologies is NOT a "pay your money, get your baby" proposition, it is a grueling roller coaster ride where the outcome of a successful pregnancy is never a guarantee.

A step too far or progress?
Sep-2004, Wales News
The story of the Mastersons, parents of 4 boys whose 4-year-old daughter died in a bonfire accident. The U.K. government's HFEA refused to allow them to use gender selection in Britian to have another daughter. So the Mastersons went abroad in hopes of conceiving a girl, but after 3 attempts, failed to become pregnant.

Mr. Masterson reports he was told by doctors that naturally, he had a 90% chance of fathering a son each time he had a child. He was probably misled; nearly all men have 50/50 X/Y sperm.

"We had been parents for 20 years, we were a loving family who had lost our precious daughter. There was no valid reason for anyone trying to prevent us from having another daughter."

Boy or Girl?
Jun-2004, Newsday
A comprehensive article covering MicroSort and PGD.
Engineering More Sons Than Daughters
Jul-2004, New York Times
This article makes the preposterous statement that "sex selection technology" is responsible for the skewed sex ratio in China. The truth is that abortion, abandonment, and infanticide are to blame, and these practices can hardly be called "technology". China has discarded its daughters, not "engineered" more sons.

The Chinese call the resulting surplus of young men, who have no prospect of marriage or family, "bare branches", and it's the subject of a new book, Bare Branches: The Security Implications of Asia's Surplus Male Population.

Who's Afraid of Gender Selection?
Apr-2003, Better Humans
"The number of couples who choose to use clinical gender selection may turn out to be insignificant in reference to the six billion occupants of Earth. It simply won't result in any statistically significant change to the global sex ratio."
Choosing the Gender of Your Baby?
Jun-2004, ABC News in Washington, DC
Brief segment covers the Gen-Select and also the $1,000 Zavos self-insemination kit. According to Dr. Zavos, "Placing semen inside the vaginal cavity when they receive it is not a rocket engineer's type of a procedure." Although, as I noted previously, the "at-home" kit's disclaimer actually says only a physician should perform artificial insemination.More about the Zavos kit.
Boy or Girl?
Jun-2004, New York's Newsday
"The lengths some couples will go to select the sex of their child - and the sticky social issues they’re raising along with the baby"
PGD: Doctors reluctant
Jun-2004, New York's Newsday
Hoping for a Girl
Jun-2004, Psychology Today
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) ethics committee says, “The very idea of preferring a child of a particular sex may be interpreted as condoning sexist values, and, hence, [could] create a climate in which sex discrimination can more easily flourish.” ACOG, you've made a fundamental error in logic here. US parents don't prefer a child of a particular sex; in fact, the opposite is true. Those seeking sex selection desire the chance to experience and treasure BOTH genders.

Mom's Asthma Symptoms May Hint At Baby's Gender

May-2004
Study shows women carrying baby girls have more asthmatic symptoms.
Family plannning: More parents are selecting the gender of their children
May-2004, South Florida Sun-Sentinal
Opinions masquerading as fact: "couples are more likely to have a boy, when given the choice"

The opinion that US parents prefer boys is so often repeated that it masquerades as a fact in almost every article about Gender selection. The truth is, there's good evidence to the contrary. Parents who adopt get to choose their baby's gender, yet recent US adoption data shows an almost equal number of girls and boys are adopted from foster care -- even though more boys are waiting to be adopted (53% boys to 47% girls). (Source: Statistics.Adoption.com and many others.)

Gender selection in babies?
May-2004, Bill O'Reilly Show
Q: How is gender selection like a rubber hammer? A: Both get a knee-jerk reaction. We get "look at China" and TWO "slippery slope" references in this article from the incredibly dense Christine Rosen, a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy center in Washington. Christine, say it with me: We are not like China. We are not like India. Christine, look up some adoption statistics: US parents want daughters just as much as sons.

The oft-interviewed Mandolesi's appear here as well, but their charming story is muddled and the baby-book-worthy quote from Grandfather Eddie isn't even mentioned! Their story is better told here:

  • 'Family Balancing' Act, Apr-2004, Religion News Service
Gender Selection: Fact or Fiction?
May-2004, CBS
Jennifer and Rachel In the CBS morning show segment on gender selection, reporter Susan McGinnis pooh-poohs Shettles, GenSelect, and BioTranz, and mentions MicroSort and PGD as the only proven methods for sex selection.

The highlight of the segment is, of course, the appearance of Jennifer Merrill Thompson and her cutie-pie daughter Rachel, plus her adorable sons!

Although CBS didn't bother to mention to interested viewers that Jennifer is the author of the only comprehensive guide to Gender selection methods, "Chasing the Gender Dream", they did manage to show the Shettles book while a doctor told us, "none of this really makes a difference."

Congratulations! It's A (Insert Choice)!
Apr-2004, ABCNews.com
The unlikely-named Amanda Onion gives us a brief overview of gender selection technology including MicroSort, Ericsson-related methods, GenSelect, and at-home methods. The most interesting part of the article explores whether Americans would prefer to have boys, if the choice is available, citing data from a Gallup poll and the U.S. Census. Nice to see an article that doesn't just assume everyone in the world wants only sons.
Choose the sex of your baby
Apr-2004, CBS News / 60 Minutes II
Sex selection by PGD was the answer to a prayer for the Millers, who had three sons and are now expecting twin daughters, thanks to Dr. Jeffrey Steinberg at Fertility Institutes. Steinberg says that he has seen an "onslaught" of couples seeking family balancing in the two years that gender selection has been offered; his clinic handles 10 cases each week.

But Dr. Mark Hughes, who helped develope the PGD procedure, says it was meant to prevent disease, not select gender. "Your gender is not a disease, last time I checked. There’s no pathology. There’s no suffering. There’s no illness. And I don’t think doctors have any business being there,” says Hughes.

Note to CBS: My 6-year-old takes better pictures than the one you chose to use of the Millers. This couple was kind enough to grant you an interview about a very personal matter, and THIS is how you choose to show them? Why not just change your caption to, "We think these are BAD PEOPLE so here's a bad picture of them."

Doctors Say Beware Of Baby Sex-Selection Kits
Apr-2004, Associated Press
GenSelect is featured in this article about Internet sales of at-home baby sex selection kits. Although GenSelect claims a 96% success rate "in a scientifically controlled environment", the system's developer, Dr. Scott Sweazy, said he had no information on the gender results from the thousands of kits sold from their Web site. Sweazy comments, "We have some people who didn't get the gender that they chose, but virtually every one of them didn't do it right."

And the enterprising Dr. Zavos (see March story) is now offering a do-it-yourself artificial insemination kit. According to this article, here's how it works:

  • You ship Dr.Zavos some sperm, and don't forget to include your $975. Oh yes, make that overnight express.
  • The sperm is processed using a "sedimentation method" to select gender (sounds like Ericsson to me) and claims to be 78% effective for girls, 80% for boys.
  • The sperm is shipped back to you, and you thaw and inseminate.
After reviewing HomeFertility.com, the purveyors of the Home Gender Selection kit, there seem to be a couple of steps that weren't mentioned in the article:
  • Before ordering your kit, Dr. Zavos strongly recommends that you purchase a "trial" kit for $300 or $400, which includes a semen analysis. (Normal cost of a semen analysis in a lab is about $50.)
  • The kit's disclaimer includes: "Also, any form of artificial insemination is a physician prescribed procedure and it should be performed by or under the guidance of a qualified physician." Wait a sec, if I need a physician, how can I do the "Home Gender Selection" kit at home???
New Book Details How To Choose a Baby’s Gender With the Latest Technology
Apr-2004, eMediaWire
A former newspaper journalist recounts her experience attempting to conceive a daughter with MicroSort, and shares her exhaustive research into high tech and at-home sex selection methods. If you're confused by all of the methods and acronyms, let Jennifer guide you through it -- she's not just a journalist, she's a mom who has BTDT.
Cloning Doctor to Open Sex-Selection IVF Counseling Clinic in UK
Mar-2004, LifeSiteNews.com
Dr. Panos Zavos has announced plans to open a London clinic offering "sex-selection counseling". Sex selection will be performed using IVF and PGD. However, since PGD is illegal in the UK for sex selection, the procedure will be performed in the US, with Zavos visiting England just a couple of days each month.

Zavos grabbed headlines in January when called a press conference to announce that he had implanted a cloned embryo into a woman's womb. The pregnancy failed, and many scientists were skeptical that a human cloned embryo had been created. Zavos has been criticized for charging large fees for interviews and speeches, and for self-promotion using publicity stunts. See also:

NHS to fund 'designer baby' bid
Mar-2004, BBC News
An unnamed couple in the UK will be allowed to use PGD in an attempt to create a "designer baby". PGD will be used to screen the couple's embryos to select a genetic match for a donor to cure their child who has a rare, life-threatening form of genetic anemia. One attempt to achieve pregnancy will be funded by the UK's National Health Service, at a cost of £5,000 (about US$9,100), which will include sending cells from the embryos to the US for PGD analysis.

Unfortunately, as those of us familiar with IVF know, one attempt is usually not enough to achieve pregnancy, especially using PGD. Making the odds lower still, the couples' doctor estimates only 3 of 16 embryos will be both free of the genetic disease, and a donor match. This makes it likely that a single cycle won't even yield enough healthy embryos to attempt an IVF transfer. Join me in hoping for many healthy embies for this couple!

Reproductive technology is heavily regulated in the UK by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. In 2002, the HFEA reviewed two similar cases, and permitted PGD for the Hashmi family but refused treatment for the Whitakers.

  • Zain Hashmi: In a landmark decision by the HFEA, the Hashmis were granted a license to use PGD and paid privately for 4 cycles of IVF before becoming pregnant, only to suffer a miscarriage in December 2003. Time may be running out for Zain, time wasted while his desperate mother battled England's High Court to overturn a previous ruling blocking treatment.
  • Charlie Whitaker: The Whitakers, denied the use of PGD to save their 4-year-old son Charlie, came to the US for treatment and returned to England to give birth to their "banned" baby. Baby brother James had a 98% chance of being a suitable donor, and I wish we knew whether Charlie ever received a successful bone marrow transplant; however, the Whitaker's have declined further media inquiries (and after being the object of a media frenzy while trying to care for a seriously ill child, who can blame them).
  • Why did the HFEA prohibit PGD for one couple, but allow it for another? Because Charlie's disease was sporadic, rather than genetic like Zain's. (Explain that to Charlie.)
Senate passes 'historic' bill on reproductive technology
Mar-2004, Globe and Mail
Parliament of Canada: Bill C-6, The Assisted Human Reproduction Act
The Canadian Senate passed the controversial C-6 bill, which permits stem cell research on leftover embryos from IVF treatments, and bans human cloning, sex selection, and payment to sperm and egg donors, and surrogate mothers. The bill also creates the Assisted Human Reproduction Agency to regulate the use of reproductive technology. Opponents argue that the ban on paying sperm/egg donors and surrogate mothers will make it more difficult for infertile couples to have a baby.
Moms and Dads Thank Heaven, And MicroSort, For Little Girls
Aug-2001, Small Times Magazine
A review of MicroSort with more technical detail than the usual article.
Boy or girl? Technology allows you to choose the sex of your baby
Jan-2004, The Doctor's Lounge
Compares PGD, MicroSort, and Ericsson
Eat contaminated fish, give birth to girls?
Apr-2003, NBC Affiliate
Study finds link between PCB consumption and baby's gender.
  
Disclaimer | Copyright © 2009 In-Gender.com. All Rights Reserved.