Brave New World... if you can make it out of the womb.

[William Haskins]

U.S. Births Hint at Bias for Boys in Some Asians

The trend is buried deep in United States census data: seemingly minute deviations in the proportion of boys and girls born to Americans of Chinese, Indian and Korean descent.

In those families, if the first child was a girl, it was more likely that a second child would be a boy, according to recent studies of census data. If the first two children were girls, it was even more likely that a third child would be male.

Demographers say the statistical deviation among Asian-American families is significant, and they believe it reflects not only a preference for male children, but a growing tendency for these families to embrace sex-selection techniques, like in vitro fertilization and sperm sorting, or abortion.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/15/nyregion/15babies.html?_r=1

Boy or Girl? Sex-Selective Abortions and the Next Generation of At-Home Tests

A new at-home test that claims to give prospective parents an early clue in determining the sex of a fetus is raising concerns in New Zealand that its debut there will increase the number of abortions.

The test-makers claim a 90 percent accuracy rate after 10 weeks (though that hasn't been independently verified), which doesn't approach the much greater accuracy of an ultrasound, typically done by a doctor at 18 weeks. The test, made by IntelliGender, is already available in the United States and has not yet been the subject of much controversy here, as the company has not claimed that it's meant to compete with or be used as a medical technology, like the ultrasound.

Still, some in New Zealand are worried that the tests could be viewed as such and used for sex selection. Via LiveScience, Dr. Ted Weaver of the The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists is quoted saying, "The concern we would have is that people would then terminate pregnancies on the grounds of sex selection."

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/0...lective-abortions-and-the-next-generation-of/

 

[Gretad08]

I can't even contemplate the idea that a baby/child/fetus/whatever other word is okay to use would be aborted b/c of gender. It makes me sad sad sad.

 

[Williebee]

I read this and thought of how, on a regular basis, we get a rise in specific names of kids, seemingly at random. One year every third parent of a girl had to name the kid Tiffanie, or some such.

Point is, I don't see this as a tool the American public is going to use wisely.

 

[Gretad08]

I read this and thought of how, on a regular basis, we get a rise in specific names of kids, seemingly at random. One year every third parent of a girl had to name the kid Tiffanie, or some such.

Point is, I don't see this as a tool the American public is going to use wisely.

Good point...I can hear it now: " My friends have a boy so I want a boy too so they can play together." BAAADDD idea.

 

[C.bronco]

I just wanted a healthy child, and I got one! I am very, very lucky.

 

[johnnysannie]

I just wanted a healthy child, and I got one! I am very, very lucky.

So did I and was lucky three times after one miscarriage.

But choosing babies based on gender has been happening in the US for more than twenty years now; I know of several woman who quietly and selectively had a discreet little abortion so that they could have the gender of their choice. In both cases, the women wanted one boy, one girl and they tinkered until that was what they had. Neither was anything but good old white bread American either.

It shocked me then and still does but it happens.

 

[donroc]

Will the govt. provide glass diaphragms for those who want a womb with a view?

 

[icerose]

That's okay, in twenty years we'll have a ratio of 5 boys to every 1 girl, there will be a massive war, most of the boys will be killed then we'll have a ratio of 7 girls to every 1 boy. Won't that be splendid.

 

[Perks]

Well, when Julia Roberts announced her pregnancy some years ago, it was that she was having a set of boy/girl twins. But there's a catch. The announcement was made when she was nine weeks pregnant. You can't tell the sex of the children at that gestational age unless you picked it from the outset.

 

[citymouse]

As a onetime scientist I can attest that it, science, is a wondrous thing. We have learned to control bubonic plague, polio, rubella, certain cancers and flu. We have harnessed electricity to light our houses and torture and execute felons. Science has opened the skies to travel to faraway places in the span of a day. It has also made it possible to kill whole city populations from afar, and we have done so.
Now at last we can predetermine the sex of a child. What's next, the master race?
To paraphrase Winston Churchill, [We] have descended into a new dark age, made even darker and perhaps more protracted by the lights of perverted science.
C

 

[Alpha Echo]

So did I and was lucky three times after one miscarriage.

But choosing babies based on gender has been happening in the US for more than twenty years now; I know of several woman who quietly and selectively had a discreet little abortion so that they could have the gender of their choice. In both cases, the women wanted one boy, one girl and they tinkered until that was what they had. Neither was anything but good old white bread American either.

It shocked me then and still does but it happens.

I'm so glad that you have three healthy children now!

But the rest is just sick. I didn't think people actually did that. There are reasons for abortion - that is not one of them. Wow.

 

[TerzaRima]

Perks, I wonder if Julia Roberts underwent chorionic villus sampling to screen for Down syndrome and other problems, and that's how she knew. The most common time to do it is 10-12 weeks after the last menstrual period, but it can be done a little earlier.

 

[Perks]

I guess that's possible, too. They are now doing selective IVF, separating the females from the males before implantation, but usually only the wealthiest parents opt to add on to the already phenomenal costs, so that's the first thing that came to mind. I forgot about CVS.

 

[TerzaRima]

Okay, class, you thought there was nothing douchier than people who would abort based on sex? You were wrong!

(For those who don't want to click, it's an article about how six NYC area women are suing the manufacturer of a test that predicts the baby's sex based on a blood test the mother submits early in pregnancy. The test predicted wrongly in these six cases.)

 

[Keyan]

That's okay, in twenty years we'll have a ratio of 5 boys to every 1 girl, there will be a massive war, most of the boys will be killed then we'll have a ratio of 7 girls to every 1 boy. Won't that be splendid.

I think it'll be more complicated than that. IIRC, the research shows that Caucasians prefer daughters (easier to raise, stay close when they're adult); Asians prefer boys.

The real issue isn't the US: It's that India and China, which have a third of the world's population between them, both have a strong son-preference.

 

[dgiharris]

Whenever there is a new technology, there is always a rush to condemn it.

The problem is never ever ever the technology. The problem is what people CHOOSE to do with the technology.

Some parents will use this technology to quell their curiosity. I mean, having a child is arguably the most exciting time in a couple's relationship so it is understandable that there will be people who will want to know the absolute earliest that they can.

Then there will be others who could care less about the technology and will not use it.

Then there are those who will use this as a screening method to abort the baby.

Does that mean we should shun the techology? No. These same parents would probably abort the second an ultrasound reported the same data.

In a nutshell, the problem and responsibility lies with us. Put the blame where it belongs and resist the red herring of blaming technology

Mel...

 

[sassandgroove]

So did I and was lucky three times after one miscarriage.

But choosing babies based on gender has been happening in the US for more than twenty years now; I know of several woman who quietly and selectively had a discreet little abortion so that they could have the gender of their choice. In both cases, the women wanted one boy, one girl and they tinkered until that was what they had. Neither was anything but good old white bread American either.

It shocked me then and still does but it happens.

Oh it is a lot older than 20 years. It has been going on since the dawn of time. LEaving babies out to die of exposure things like that.

 

[Fokker Aeroplanbau]

This is a interesting conundrum for Liberals; on one side you have Feminists who likely don't enjoy families who actively choose boys over girls. The other side is pro-abortion people who think it's fine as long as abortion is used. While there's always the hint that if you go to radical one way or another; Democrats may lose (more then they have now) the Asian vote.

Interesting, like I said.

 

[aquacat]

This is a interesting conundrum for Liberals; on one side you have Feminists who likely don't enjoy families who actively choose boys over girls. The other side is pro-abortion people who think it's fine as long as abortion is used. While there's always the hint that if you go to radical one way or another; Democrats may lose (more then they have now) the Asian vote.

Interesting, like I said.

WTF? What makes you think that feminists aren't pro-choice or would in some way be on the opposite side of this so-call "conundrum"? Or that being pro-choice means that you de facto support using it as a method of pregnancy control?

What beautifully meaningless strawmen you've set up there.

As a pro-choice feminist, I'll give you my position on the issue (because contrary to your implication here, not all feminists or pro-choicers necessarily have the same opinion on anything, I can only give you my positon): It's none of my business what people do with their bodies or how or why they choose to procreate. That said, I'm a firm believer in the idea that promoting greater gender equality as well as easier and cheaper access to more traditional reproductive technologies will help create a world in which fewer unwanted pregnancies occur and fewer babies are abandoned or mistreated, full stop. I believe we'll see fewer people in every country valuing boy babies over girl babies if we stop perpetuating cultural patterns that value and privilege men over women. It isn't about hating men or not approving of families that want male babies - it's about challenging misogynistic cultural norms. As dgiharris said, it's not about the technology, it's about the cultures that use it. It really is as simple, and as complex, as that.

 

[sassandgroove]

This is a interesting conundrum for Liberals; on one side you have Feminists who likely don't enjoy families who actively choose boys over girls. The other side is pro-abortion people who think it's fine as long as abortion is used. While there's always the hint that if you go to radical one way or another; Democrats may lose (more then they have now) the Asian vote.

Interesting, like I said.

???

You are making an assumption that every person who believes abortion should be legal takes abortion lightly. As though it is as simple as deciding to get a haircut. I believe this is far from the truth.

Also an assumption that people who believe in equality and respect for both men and women are liberal. also not true.

 

[Millicent M'Lady]

This is a interesting conundrum for Liberals; on one side you have Feminists who likely don't enjoy families who actively choose boys over girls. The other side is pro-abortion people who think it's fine as long as abortion is used. While there's always the hint that if you go to radical one way or another; Democrats may lose (more then they have now) the Asian vote.

Interesting, like I said.

So if I'm liberal, I must be in favour of genetic/gender engineering? How do you come to that conclusion?

I am pro-choice (not pro-abortion) and a Feminist. I don't believe that gender screening is justifiable in any way. Abortion is not a frivolous matter for most women and those who choose to abort a child based on gender trivialise the countless women who may be in dire situations or who struggle to make an unenviably hard decision.

I don't quite understand where the conundrum is in this.

 

[Fokker Aeroplanbau]

So if I'm liberal, I must be in favour of genetic/gender engineering? How do you come to that conclusion?

I am pro-choice (not pro-abortion) and a Feminist. I don't believe that gender screening is justifiable in any way. Abortion is not a frivolous matter for most women and those who choose to abort a child based on gender trivialise the countless women who may be in dire situations or who struggle to make an unenviably hard decision.

I don't quite understand where the conundrum is in this.

I concede the point that I was wrong when I said 'liberal,' indeed how the issues of abortion, sexism and the Democrat Party have anything to do with the word 'liberal' is beyond me. The only connection I could make is if you just sit on your arse all day and neglect to read up on the true liberals of the 19th and 20th centuries. Hey, but there's always ABC and MSNBC! Am I right or am I right? Anyhow, my mistake.

Hey, call it what you want but if there's anyone whose reading it that is not explicitly America; they're going to be so confused when we get in a discussion of pro-choice and anti-choice. Because the question will always remain, "choosing what? When? Where?" Personally I'd as soon lose the American jingoism and break everything down to their scientific roots.

Anyhow, I believe I'm missing the point. You are exactly what I mean; you're rightfully offended that these families are making abortion basically a short jog down to the park for the 'perfect' man-cub. I know if what we hear about China is anything to go by they practically have more abortions then they have fingers if it means they get two sons. If the culture is like that over there, you can bet it hasn't changed dramatically over here? Right?

So on one side, you're like "I would hate to see a woman's right to her self be restricted," while on the other hand that right to privacy is basically (and I am using a typical anti-choice assertation) being used to kill those potential holders of that 'privacy.'

See where I'm coming from?

???

You are making an assumption that every person who believes abortion should be legal takes abortion lightly. As though it is as simple as deciding to get a haircut. I believe this is far from the truth.

Also an assumption that people who believe in equality and respect for both men and women are liberal. also not true.

Hey, I know abortion isn't a "light" choice but by the looks of it - it seems that it is a "heavy" choice that is taken quite a few times. At the very least we can be happy it doesn't go above a couple, hopefully, right?

Anyhow, I don't know about extending the issue into that super-dooper-intellectual term 'equality' unless you're willing to define it for the sake of the discussion.

WTF? What makes you think that feminists aren't pro-choice or would in some way be on the opposite side of this so-call "conundrum"? Or that being pro-choice means that you de facto support using it as a method of pregnancy control?

I do say feminists are pro-choice. I'm also saying that they can also be pro-girl. It's fairly simple, I don't know what this outrage is about. On one side we have the 'sacred' right of abortion, while on the other we're having it used as a tool for sexism; though feel free to correct me.

I believe we'll see fewer people in every country valuing boy babies over girl babies if we stop perpetuating cultural patterns that value and privilege men over women. It isn't about hating men or not approving of families that want male babies - it's about challenging misogynistic cultural norms. As dgiharris said, it's not about the technology, it's about the cultures that use it. It really is as simple, and as complex, as that.

I know this may come as a suprise but I don't care what you think about such grandiose policy making as you're laying out. Go out there and do something about it, until then - we're talking about reality. It's all fine and dandy what you think the future can hold, but until it comes around/you do something; frankly, I'm a little skeptical that your some magical holder of absolute truths or something equally amusing.

 

[aquacat]

Hey, call it what you want but if there's anyone whose reading it that is not explicitly America; they're going to be so confused when we get in a discussion of pro-choice and anti-choice. Because the question will always remain, "choosing what? When? Where?" Personally I'd as soon lose the American jingoism and break everything down to their scientific roots.

Pro-choice and anti-choice aren't terms that are only used in America. That's fairly common parlance in many countries.

I know this may come as a suprise but I don't care what you think about such grandiose policy making as you're laying out. Go out there and do something about it, until then - we're talking about reality. It's all fine and dandy what you think the future can hold, but until it comes around/you do something; frankly, I'm a little skeptical that your some magical holder of absolute truths or something equally amusing.

Well it may come as a surprise to you, but I DO 'do something about it.' All the time. I've been working in reproductive rights issues for nearly two decades. And don't tell me about "reality" - your reality is so clearly different than mine that I doubt we live on the same planet. Abortion used for sexism? In this case we're talking about gender selective technology being used overwhelmingly to produce boy babies, so I have no idea what weird 'feminists don't like baby boys' strand you're picking up on here.


Oh, and PS: I wasn't talking about "policy" changes. I was talking about "cultural" changes. The kind that are brought about by people speaking up about issues, making movies about them or, gosh I don't know, writing books about them.

 

[Williebee]

***LOOKIE ARBITER THINGIE /

How's about we knock off the "you" statements and the one to one jabs before this thread becomes something less useful than it could be?

Thanks.

ARBITER/