IVF gender selection.

[deleted account] ( 14 moms have responded )

An Australian mother of 3 boys, all conceived naturally; is flying to Thailand to undergo gender selection IVF treatment for the daughter she desperately wants. Gender selection is illegal in Australia which is why she is travelling to Thailand to obtain the procedure at an estimated cost of $15 000. She thinks that the law should be changed in Australia to allow women choice.



In the radio interview I heard with the woman (I can't find a link for the interview but it was a lot more involved regarding her personal opinion, I'll keep looking), she outlined her desire for a daughter as being a strong maternal desire and something she believes will complete her family. She found out about the facility in Thailand from talking to fertility treatment staff who had mentioned to her that some families from different ethnic backgrounds who have often placed pressure on them to ascertain the gender of their unborn child at as early a stage as possible were often then never seen at the facility again. They speculated that early gender detection is implicated in a high rate of abortion resulting from gender preferences in some cultures. The staff said that they wondered why these families didn't just go overseas to facilities where IVF gender selection is legal. This planted the idea in her mind to circumvent the Australian laws and obtain the daughter she has always wanted. She is aware that the procedure is controversial but stated that IVF for infertile couples was also controversial 30 years ago.

What to you think? Should the laws be changed? If she is prepared to pay the costs should there be any objection to her travelling overseas to circumvent the law? Is this a reflection of a spoiled, entitled society who wants it all and thinks that medical science should serve their every whim? If you had this option would you use it?


Sharon - posted on 07/09/2010




What to you think?

I think this is fine.

Should the laws be changed?


If she is prepared to pay the costs should there be any objection to her travelling overseas to circumvent the law?


Is this a reflection of a spoiled, entitled society who wants it all and thinks that medical science should serve their every whim?

God gave us cocoa beans and science gave us milk chocolate. I COULD eat the bean raw or I could buy a snickers bar. I buy the snickers bar. MOST people want a boy & a girl. Some people are happy with how mother nature works out. And some get dealt a heavy genetic hand - all boys or all girls. They've done their part by mother nature - now science will help out with their wishes. For this woman its not as if her culture is overloaded with one sex (like china). Which china did to themselves. 1. Only one child rule 2. everyone wants a boy - now they have to many boys.

If you had this option would you use it?

Yes. We were going to. We have 3 boys. My husbands two brothers each have 2 boys. We figured our chances for a girl were very slim. In the end we decided to NOT take on the massive debt gender selection would create and we would be happy with a third child, no matter what the gender was.

This conversation has been closed to further comments


View replies by

Stifler's - posted on 07/26/2010




People who want to choose the gender of their child are obviously immature and I wonder what they think being a parent is.

Coley - posted on 07/25/2010




We have a son but we're thinking about having one more kid, and I would love to have a little girl next time, but that doesn't mean I'm going to pay someone to poke at nature to make a custom baby for me. Using science to find cures and whatnot is one thing- it saves lives and eases pain. Using science to design-a-baby is just scary. Today, its gender. Tomorrow, its going to be super models and super soldiers. What are they going to mess with next?

LaCi - posted on 07/23/2010




I don't think it's a big deal. I wanted a boy, but I wouldn't have cared if mine was a girl. I think most people are alright with either, and in the states there isn't a huge preference for one gender over another, so I don't see any long term issues arising from this here.

Danielle - posted on 07/23/2010




I think IVF for people who are having difficulty conceiving is a miracle and a wonderful thing. But I think "designer babies" are unethical. I can't even really elaborate on why I feel that way. I just do.

Caitlin - posted on 07/11/2010




I want a boy.. I have 2 girls and love themt o pieces, but I'd love to have the chance to raise a boy as well, no real other reason (my dad wants a grandson, but that's not the top of my list - we're big producers of girls in my family it seems). I still have to convince my husband to let me try for a third. I would never really go so far as IVF for it, I'm not that desperate for a boy. On the other hand, i'm not really going to jump down her throat for doing it, I guess it's her choice..

Janessa - posted on 07/11/2010




This women needs therapy period. We should let nature takes it course somethings should not be changed period. If it gender selection becomes legal next we will want to change the eye color the hair textured and the skin color when is enough is enough? I am sickened to my stomach reading these stories that is just unnatural. I think if she ends up having a bad pregenancy she should pay all the medicals bills on her own because she went to a second or third world to do something that illegal in her own country that can actually be dangerouse.

Jessica - posted on 07/11/2010




"If it refers to sorting "x" sperm from "y" sperm (don't know if they do this in people, they do it in cattle) in order to greatly increase the odds of the "right" sex, this cannot be wrong. Sperm gets manipulated in so many ways anyhow. "

I could be entirely wrong, but this was what I was thinking when I read it. Honestly, I don't see a problem with it. If she really wants to go to the trouble, and has that kind of money to spend, then let her have her daughter. I'd never do it, but that's just me. Although I don't know her obviously, I don't necessarily think that alone means she has any "screws loose."

I can sympathize, as I really really want a daughter myself. I'm more worried this will not happen, as DH's family seems to produce only boys (he has 3 brothers, and his one brother who has kids has twin boys, plus our son). It totally does not mean that I don't love my son, or any future sons I may have, any less- I wouldn't trade them for 10 girls! But, if we are done having children sometime way in the future and we don't have a daughter, as long as we're in a position to do it I honestly am not opposed to adopting.

Tracey - posted on 07/11/2010




I think thatwith 3 healthy children she shouldn't even be having IVF, a lot of people can't even have one child.

From a different point of view my son has a disability that affects boys four times as often as girls, if we were to choose gender selection to have a girl and therefore less chance of her inheriting the disability would this be acceptable or selfish? Not that we are thinking of having any more children, just wondered on people's opinions.

[deleted account]

I think it's purely selfish and I don;t care how much money she has to blow. The woman claims she is "desperate" for the girl so does that mean she loves her 3 sons any less? I think she has a few mental screws loose and it's sad that the medical community doesn't see this as a potential danger "IF" the unwanted gender is procduced instead. So flippin' sad she cannot accept what she has when there are so many women and couples out there who would be graciously happy with any baby, any gender.

Julie - posted on 07/09/2010




How does the law define "gender selection"?

If it refers to a woman aborting a fetus because an ultrasound indicates an undesired sex, but no other problems, this is clearly wrong (to me).

If it refers to taking a single cell from the 8-cell stage and sexing it by chromosomes, like for testing for genetic diseases ... is this wrong? This ball of cells has not been implanted yet and could, theoretically, be frozen for later implantation. I don't think this is wrong, though some may argue otherwise.

If it refers to sorting "x" sperm from "y" sperm (don't know if they do this in people, they do it in cattle) in order to greatly increase the odds of the "right" sex, this cannot be wrong. Sperm gets manipulated in so many ways anyhow.

I think it really depends on how things are defined. I never really thought about the issue of third-trimester abortion until my son was born 3 months early. Yeah, he wouldn't have made it on his own outside my body, but he is thriving today. Nowadays, I would be very hard-pressed to come up with more than a very, very few instances where I would consider 3rd trimester abortions an option I would be ok with ...

Becky - posted on 07/09/2010




I have a hard time with this. To me, it just feels too much like messing with nature or something. However, I don't really think that my having a hard time with it is a valid justification for it to be illegal. There might be other valid reasons, but I can't really think of what they might be.
I can understand the desire to have a child of a particular gender. We have 2 boys. I want a daughter so bad I can taste it. But we would not go to this extreme to have one. For one, we just plain can't afford it. For 2, there are no guarantees that you are even going to get pregnant using IVF - the embryos may not implant. And for 3, it just doesn't feel ethically right to me. We plan to try one more time for a girl, and we may try some techniques, like the Shettles method, but nothing we have to spend money on.
I kind of think that if I was one of the other children of a family that did this, I might feel like I wasn't as special or they didn't want me as badly, because they spent so much money and effort to have my brother.
However, if they have the means to do this, without any government subsidy, then I guess there shouldn't be any objection to them doing it.
I just want to clarify that I have no objection to IVF for infertile couples. Some provinces in Canada are starting to publicly fund it, and while I have some concerns about that, I can live with it. But I think if they ever funded IVF for gender selection purposes, I would have to stop paying taxes!

[deleted account]

I think this is a very difficult concept. If it became legal and easily accessible, I think it will have the same effect that the one child/gender identification technology has in China and India: A lot less daughters being born. This certainly was not the intent of either the law nor the technology but an unfortunate side effect. I think it's dangerous when most of the world still considers sons to be preferable to daughters.

That being said, I'm not sure keeping it illegal is a good idea either because I don't like the attempts to stop medical advances.

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms