This is an important moral and ethical question. I read this as the bottom half of a folded over copy of The Mail I saw some woman reading the other day. Once I had manoevred myself into a position such that I could see her top half I was able to determine the full headline which read "Choose your baby's sex for £1400."

My first reaction is that this sort of thing should not be allowed, or at the very least it should be price-fixed to ensure a 50/50 male/female split at all times. So, for example, every hospital offering such a service would be obliged to produce 50/50 numbers every year and would have to adjust their prices accordingly. Thus if there was a marked tendency for people to want (say) male children then the price for males would have to be boosted until the numbers came back into balance.

Or is this a Luddite approach in today's free choice world? Should parents have as much choice as medical advance can possibly give them? If it is possible to know (say) an unborn baby's IQ, likely adult height and weight, predisposition to certain illnesses etc etc, should parents be given all that info and allowed to veto the birth? My own view (and I suspect the view of the majority) is that these things should not be known in advance, and yet having said that, once medical science arrives at the level where such info can be discovered, then it is almost certain to become available to parents one way or another. It would be impossible to put the genie back in the bottle.

Mind, if someone can find out how to clone Peter Beardsley, then my views on ethical questions of this nature may well undergo a radical transformation. :-)

-- Anonymous, July 07, 2001

Answers

Response to "sex for £1400" - (bottom half only).

Jonno - despite the levity of your opening comments (I reckon your topic must rule out oral sex), your main poiint is indeed an ethical dilema.

I am totally against interference for "cosmetic" reasons. Things should be allowed to take their natural course. However, I also feel that if science is able to identify major malformatities or life-threatening diseases, then parents may indeed want (and be allowed to) decide to terminate at an early stage. But it is so fraught with the possibility of misuse, I really don't know where to draw the line.

The thing is, each country has it's own views on this sort of thing, so even if one country banned such practices, people would just go elsewhere (as witnessed by the Irish abortion cases). And where does it stop? Clearly, insurance companies have a major interest in this sort of thing. Soon (if not already) folks will be prevented from taking out medical or life insurance due to the results of such tests. Is that fair? Certainly not in my mind, tho I can see the financial viewpoint. However, I am equally convinced it will happen eventually.

As for your 50/50 point and pricing accordingly - it simply wouldn;t work, agan due to the mobility issue and also the fact that some folks would pay obscene amounts in order to guarantee (say) a male lineage.

And finally, wrt to cloning PtG. Well, I think we have already been investigatoing this at SJP. Sadly, with slightly less success. So far, we've only managed a follow-on from Dolly the Sheep. Many recent acquisitions have been timid and have a very strong tendency to herd together and follow each other down the right side of the park.

-- Anonymous, July 07, 2001

Response to "sex for £1400" - (bottom half only).

"Once I had manoevred myself into a position such that I could see her top half........."

You forgot to illuminate us Jonno - what were they like? ;-{)

Very problematical subject, and very worrying. Like genetic modification of crops, once the genie is out of the bottle you won't be able to put it back.
Controlling the technology for sex-selection as you propose will prove impossible - if it becomes available it will be abused - no question.
My simplistic conclusion is that it cannot/must not be made available - but as Screacher says, how then do you effect controls on an international basis? Very, very difficult.

-- Anonymous, July 08, 2001

Response to "sex for £1400" - (bottom half only).

what were they like?

Clarky, I've always disapproved of this sort of thing. Women who wear low cut dresses should be looked down on.

I agree with you and Screach - in fact that's my point about putting the genie back in the bottle. I don't think you can easily stop scientists researching these techniques, and then once the scientific breakthrough is made, there will always be people wealthy enough who demand the new techniques, and places in the world that offer them. I think we are all initially uneasy about developments in this area - wasn't there quite a furore about test tube babies for example? Now I believe some things are quite commonplace that were morally questionable years ago. So maybe I'm just being Luddite but it still gives me an uneasy feeling to mess about with the miracle of new life.

-- Anonymous, July 08, 2001

Response to "sex for £1400" - (bottom half only).

Women who wear low cut dresses should be looked down on.

Jonno, you're just so stuck up! You should be ashamed of yourself ;-)

-- Anonymous, July 08, 2001

Response to "sex for £1400" - (bottom half only).

The problem with a lot of this stuff is that it takes so long for any unwanted side effects to show up. I recently read that it's starting to look as if even when a cloning procedure goes (apparently) perfectly, there seems to be some process that's triggered in the clone that makes the result eventually less than perfect.

Which is as it should be IMO.

-- Anonymous, July 09, 2001

Response to "sex for £1400" - (bottom half only).

My initial reaction to the half seen headline "Sex for £1400", as a married man was - wow! that's cheap! I expect the single guys took a different viewpoint? :-)

I've told you before about my Uncle's advice to me as a 5-y-o. "Nivva gan courtin' John hinny - a fivepenny pie will cost you tenpence." A timeless aphorism surely? :-)

-- Anonymous, July 09, 2001