|
|
 |
Where am I now? Lawlink > Law Reform Commission > Publications > Chapter 16 - Sex Selection
Discussion Paper 11 (1984) - Artificial Conception: Human Artificial Insemination
Chapter 16 - Sex Selection
I. HISTORY OF SEX SELECTION
16.1 The desire to select or choose the sex of a child before conception is not a recent development. It has deep historical roots. One expert claims that 4,000 years ago the Egyptians believed that women of a “greenish” cast of complexion were “certain to have boys”.1 The possibility of selecting sex prior to conception has exerted a powerful influence on many societies and continues to attract the attention of scientists. A great deal of research has been carried out in the past 20 years, but as yet there has developed no reliable method acceptable for general use, for sex predetermination of humans.2 The same is true of animal breeding, where there are immense financial incentives for the perfection of the technique.3 It has been pointed out to us that if cattle breeders were able to breed males and females as required, fortunes would be made because it would no longer be necessary to raise large numbers of unwanted male animals. It has long been thought (and still is) that simple, effective human sex selection procedures are imminent. In the late 1960’s experts were predicting early success, as shown by the following comment made in 1971:
Etzioni (1968) predicted that predetermination of sex is five years away, while Taylor (1968) forecasted sex choosing sometime before 1975. Kahn and Weiner (1967) stated that one of the hundred technological innovations forecast for the next 33 years is the “capacity to choose the sex of unborn children”.4
None of the predictions has yet been fulfilled.
16.2 The historic persistence of attempts to perfect sex selection techniques has resulted in opinions that success would have dramatic demographic effects and produce social change. Confirmation of the fascination exerted by the subject is given by the following summaries of some of the theories and practices (and the eminence of some of the sources).
- The classical Greeks, including philosophers and medical men, offered detailed advice on the correct means of ensuring the production of a child of chosen sex. Aristotle gave advice on positions for sexual intercourse, and desirable diet for the mother. Anaxagoras believed that each testicle determined one sex, and advocated tying off one testicle before coitus. Hippocrates deduced that male and female children developed in different parts of the uterus.5
- Markle writes that the ancient Hebrews held the same belief as Anaxagoras and that the Talmud said that placing the marriage bed in a north-south direction favoured the conception of boys.6
- French aristocrats of the 18th century are said to have had their left testicles removed so as to be sure of an heir (male).7
- Folklore has dictated remarkable customs. According to an article in the journal of the American Medical Association the French ensured the conception of males by reciting chants or by lying on one particular side while having sexual intercourse, by wearing boots to bed, by waiting for a certain phase of the moon or a rising tide, or by eating certain food.8 Rinehart confirms that a high protein diet was prescribed by the Embryological Institute of Vienna around the turn of the 19th century as a means of conceiving males. He says that the Empress of Russia unsuccessfully followed this advice.9 He also reports such customs as Pacific Island women dressing in men’s clothes in order to conceive sons, and men in the United States hanging their underpants on the right side of the bed for a male and the left for a female.10
16.3 Insistence upon having children of a selected sex has resulted in infanticide in many societies, usually against female infants. This practice persists in China today.11 It has been practised by Eskimos, Maoris, Indians and Japanese.12
II. TECHNIQUES AND RESEARCH
16.4 As far as current research is concerned, it is to be noted that sex determination can now be accurately carried out after conception by chorionic biopsy and by amniocentesis. This involves examining fetal cells in fluid withdrawn by needle from the uterus of a pregnant woman. Research on sex selection prior to conception has tended to follow different paths depending on the particular method of achieving conception that is under consideration. Thus, some research is relevant only to natural or normal coitus. Other research is relevant only to the use of AI. The principal categories of research involve the following:
- Timing sexual intercourse in relation to ovulation. Conflicting claims have been made in relation to timing, and none has been proved to be capable of general application. Some research asserts that a male child is more likely when “natural” insemination takes place early (or late) in the menstrual cycle.13 The same research disclosed that these findings were reversed when conception was caused by AI. An opposite claim is that “a male child is more likely when coitus takes place close to ovulation”.14 Research programs have variously reported more males conceived closer to ovulation,15 more females conceived prior to “the temperature dip preceding the rise in the basal temperature chart”16 (referring to the onset of ovulation), and more females conceived if ovulation has been chemically induced.17
- Altering conditions in the female reproductive tract. Pre-coital douches designed to alter the acidity and alkalinity of the vagina have been recommended, following a 1932 report by Unterberger in Germany.18 Others have followed this approach but it appears not to have been borne out by repeated testing.19 The claim was that alkalinity tended to produce male offspring and acidity female. Some experts have contented themselves with pointing out that changes in the alkalinity level affect the motility of both Y (male) - bearing and X (female) - bearing sperm.20
- Changing the contents of semen prior to conception. Various techniques have been attempted in order to separate Y (male) - bearing sperm from X (female) - bearing sperm. These proceed on hypotheses that one type of sperm (the Y - carrying) is smaller and lighter than the other,21 and that the two types carry opposite electrical charges, thus suggesting that they can be separated by sedimentation centrifugation or electrophoresis. The separated sperm is then available for AI. Experiments have been performed pursuant to these and other hypotheses, for example, assumption about the natural motility of the two types of sperm.22 Dr. R. Ericsson, who has established a company in California called Cametrics Ltd.23 is reported to have patented techniques based on assumptions about the motility or “swimming ability’ of Y - bearing sperm. The technique involves confronting semen with increasingly viscous layers of liquid in glass containers. The faster swimming Y - bearing sperm will it is said, penetrate the liquid more rapidly and give a more concentrated quantity of sperms likely to produce a male.
- Manipulation of the female’s immune system. This approach involves the production of a serum made from human tissues. The serum would have the capacity, to identify Y (male) - bearing sperms and render them inactive by immune rejection. The serum would be put into the body of the female and would have the effect of giving “priority” in conception to X (female) - bearing sperms. According to Rinehart, “Immunological sperm treatment is far from having practical application”.24 Dr. A.O. Trounson of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at Monash University has informed us that in his opinion the theory underlying this research is not proven.25
16.5 None of the research described in the preceding paragraph has led to a generally accepted method for sex predetermination despite claims that have been made for some of them.26 This is apparent from scientific articles,27 and has been confirmed orally to us by Dr. A.O. Trounson.28
III. SEX SELECTION AND SOCIAL CHANGE
16.6 The predictions of major social change as a likely consequence of reliable and simple methods of sex predetermination include the contention that population growth would be reduced. Two reasons are offered. The first is that many couples have a strong preference for a family of a chosen composition. The ability to choose sex would eliminate the practice of couples continuing to have children until they achieve the desired number of the selected sex, and would produce smaller families than at present. The second suggestion is that many couples prefer more male children than female. If this preference is put into effect the likely ultimate result will be a shortage of females and a reduction in the reproductive capacity of the community.29 While such predictions may be borne out, they appear to be no more than conjective. It seems that opposite predictions could be made with a basis of reason. For example, if sex predetermination was feasible and simple, many couples might choose to have bigger families because they would be assured of achieving precisely the balance that they wish between male and female children Again, some communities might exhibit a preference for female children over males.
16.7 Other suggested social and demographic consequences include changes in first-child patterns and the sex ratio of the population.30 The sex ratio in Europe and the United States is said to be 105 males to 100 females.31 That is the same as 51.2 males and 48.8 females per 100 persons. It has also been said that a sex ratio change as small as 7 per cent32 (which would result in 54.75 males to 45.35 females per 100 persons) would bring about later marriage, more prostitution and male homosexuality, an increased number of permanently unmarried mean less cultural-artistic activity, and more crime.33 Others see more extreme social consequences, especially for societies that place great value on sons as opposed to daughters:
All sorts of taboos would be expected and it is probable that a form of purdah (the Hindu practice of secluding women) would become necessary. Women’s right to work, even to travel alone freely, would probably be forgotten transiently. Polyandry might well become accepted in some societies; some might treat women as queen ants, others as rewards for the most outstanding (or most determined) males.34
An historic preference for male children is cited by experts as likely to lead to these changes if selection becomes feasible. The preference is said to have many bases, some economic (cheap family labour; a form of old-age insurance for parents; sons can more easily fend for themselves and not be a financial burden) and some more emotional (security and protection; Freudian considerations; success is easier for males in our society).35
IV. LEGISLATION AND LAW REFORM
16.8 The formation of soundly-based recommendations on law-making or law reform in relation to sex selection is not feasible at present. The reason is that the determinant of recommendations will be the method of sex selection to be used. Thus, if a simple and safe method was available for use in conjunction with normal sexual intercourse, it could well achieve widespread approval and usage, as has happened with contraception. For example, if it was a matter of taking harmless drugs orally or using reliable douches, and if the cost was low, it is possible to visualise a rapid development of the social and demographic changes envisaged earlier. However, if the method was one that involved AI, or was complex, involving much preparation testing of sperm, resort to clinics or other procedures that interfered with normal sexual activity by couples, interest in the procedure may be much less and in turn the social changes less marked. The need for law-making or law reform may not even arise. It should not be forgotten that many pregnancies are not deliberately planned, and sex selection prior to conception will be pre-eminently a matter of planning, no matter how reliable it may be.
16.9 We have discussed sex selection because it was one of the terms of reference to the Advisory Committee on Human Artificial Insemination and because it is a subject which will obviously require careful attention on the part of society and parliaments if it becomes feasible and widely practised. However, our advice and research have led us to the conclusion mentioned in the preceding paragraph and to agree with Rinehart’s comment that “since no effective and generally acceptable sex determination method exists, speculations about demographic and social effects are hypothetical”.36 As important as the subject is, we believe that it is premature to consider the introduction of legal regulations.
V. ISSUES FOR REFORM
16.10 (1) If the sex of a child could be selected or determined at or before conception would social and legal issues of significance arise?
(2) If so would additional issues arise because of the practice of AI?
(3) On the basis that no simple and safe method of sex selection or predetermination is presently available, and on the basis that such a method could become available in the near future, is there a present need for control or regulation of a social or legal kind?
Footnotes
1. D. E. Markle, C. B. Nam, “Sex Predetermination: Its Impact on Fertility (1971) 18(1) Social Biology 73, at p.73
2. W. Rinehart, “Sex Preselection - Not Yet Practical” (1975) 1(2) Population Reports (Periodic Abstinence), 1-21-1-12.
3. Telephone conversation with Dr. A.O. Trounson, 27 July 1984.
4. See note 1 above, pp.73-74.
5. See note 2 above, p.1-22.
6. See note 1 above.
7. See note 2 above, p.1-22.
8. J. Elliott, “AID - Survey reveals Surprising facts” (1979) 241 Journal of the American Medical Association 1219, at p. 1220.
9. See note 5 above.
10. Ibid.
11. Stated by Chinese Government Tour Guide to Australian party including the writer in Peking, China, October 1983.
12. See note 5 above.
13. See note 2 above, p.1-24-1 see also R. Guerrero, “Association of the type and time of Insemination within the menstrual cycle with the human sex ratio at birth” (1978) 300(20) New England Journal of Medicine 1056.
14. See note 2 above, p.1-24.
15. S. Harlap, “Gender of Infants conceived on different days of the menstrual cycle” (1979) 300(26) New England Journal of Medicine 1445.
16. J. Leeton, J. Backwell, “Artificial Donor Insemination” (1976) 16 Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 45.
17. J.H. Sampson et al., “Gender after Artificial Induction of Ovulation and Artificial Insemination” (1983) 40 Fertility and Sterility 481, at p.481.
18. A. Etzioni, “Sex Control, Science and Society” (1968) 161 Science 1107, at p.110.
19. Ibid., see also note 2 above, p.1-25.
20. See note 15 above, p.1448-, see also note 13 above, p.1058.
21. See note 18 above.
22. See note 2, above, pp.1-25, 1-26; See also note 18 above, p.1107; R. Rowland, “Of Woman born-but for how long?” The Age, 13 June 1984, p.11.
23. See note 2 above, pp.1-25, 1-26; R- Rowland, note 22 above, p.11; R. Lyons, “Ordering Your baby’s sex: is it playing God?”, Sydney Morning Herald, 30 May 1984, p.1.
24. See note 2 above, p.1-26.
25. See note 1 above.
26. See note 2 above, pp.1-23-1-27.
27. B.L Gedhill, “Control of mammalian sex ratio by sexing sperm” (1968) 40(5) Fertility and Sterility 572; C.F. Westoff, R.R, Rindfuss, “Sex Preselection in the United States: Some Implications” (1974) 40 Science 613; see also notes 16 and 17 above.
28. See note 3 above.
29. See note 1 above, p.81.
30. See note 2 above, p.1-23.
31. Ibid., see also note 1 above, p.81.
32. See note 1 above, p.82: cites data to Support a ratio of 122 males to 100 females as In initial figure.
33. See note 2 above, p.1-28; see also note 18 above, pp.1108-1109.
34. See note 2 above, p.1-28, quoting M.F. Nimkoff, “Will Parents pick the Sex of Child” (1951) 30(5) Science Digest 65.
35. See note 2 above, pp.1-27 - 1-28: note 18 above, pp.1108-1109; and note 1 above, p.75.
36. See note 2, above, p.1-28.
|
