logo
Choosing the sex of an IVF baby is banned. Should it be?

Choosing the sex of an IVF baby is banned. Should it be?

'I'm here to promote awareness for the availability of gender selection and to hopefully ignite some conversation so that perhaps in the future, people won't have to travel to the United States to have this done,' Potter says.
What are the rules and the concerns behind them?
The National Health and Medical Research Council reviewed their guidelines on assisted reproductive technology in 2017 and upheld its view that sex selection should not be used unless to reduce the risk of a genetic disease. (Duchenne muscular dystrophy, for example, mostly affects males.)
One of the concerns cited by the NHMRC's ethics committee was that nonmedical sex selection could lead to people favouring one sex over the other based on cultural or personal biases.
What the NHMRC considered in its ban on sex selection
Whether sex selection is a justifiable use of medical resources.
Whether there's an ethical difference between people wanting sex-balanced families and people choosing a particular sex due to personal or cultural bias.
The possibility that sex selection my validate or reinforce gender stereotyping and discriminatory attitudes, and create pressure on the person born to conform to their parents' gender expectations.
The possibility that sex selection may open the way for selecting other characteristics such as eye or hair colour.
Concerns that people may be terminating pregnancies as an alternative sex-selection technique.
Concerns Australians seeking sex selection could be travelling to international clinics with a lower standard of care.
Values inherent in Australian society that relate to freedom and autonomy, particularly in relation to reproductive choices.
Read the full reasoning behind the guidelines.
The imbalance of the sex ratio in China is often cited as an example of cultural bias favouring male babies; in 2004 there were 121 males to every 100 females, at least partly because sons were preferred, so female fetuses were more likely to be aborted. China's sex ratio has since evened out, but there's still a male skew.
Choosing the sex of an embryo to 'balance' a family's split between male and female children is one of the most common reasons people seek out sex selection, and it's viewed as more ethically acceptable.
Alex Polyakov, an associate professor at the University of Melbourne and medical director of Melbourne's Genea IVF clinic, believes couples should be able to choose the sex of their third child, as long as their first two children are of the same sex.
'I think the argument that it will skew the sex ratio is really quite nonsensical,' he added, arguing the proportion of people taking part in sex selection would have to be huge to have such an effect. 'I don't really see an ethical or moral issue if safeguards are put in place.'
By the same token, Polyakov has also warned embryo testing and selection strategies can decrease chance of pregnancy or lead to the discarding of healthy embryos, which in some cases has risked parents missing out on biological parenthood altogether.
'I think we often forget that the overriding aim is to increase the pregnancy rate, to get someone pregnant as soon as possible,' he says.
Do people choose more males over females?
Data is mixed on whether people are more likely to choose male or female embryos. An analysis of about 2300 embryo transfers at a US IVF clinic between 2012 and 2021 found 56.5 per cent of people who opted for sex selection chose male embryos. A study on a different hospital found roughly equal rates of sex selection when it was someone's first child, but a 59 per cent preference for females on the second child.
Potter said about 70 per cent of his clients request female embryos, often driven by women who wanted a mother-daughter relationship.
'This process is driven by the female partner in most cases. For a lot of women, they've been imagining having a daughter ever since they were playing with dolls and modelling parenting behaviour as a child,' he says.
Sex v gender
Bioethicist Dr Tamara Browne, a senior lecturer in health ethics at Deakin University, says she's sad this debate has rekindled.
'We really haven't gotten very far when it comes to counteracting gender stereotypes and achieving gender equality,' she says. 'The two are interlinked, and I've become even more convinced that if we're to achieve gender equality, we have to stop parenting children differently according to their sex.'
Assuming daughters will be closer to their mothers, or that boys offer different, more 'macho' experiences such as being into sport, plays into outdated gender beliefs, Browne says.
Loading
'We don't have any good scientific evidence that you can only get these sorts of parenting experiences with a child of a certain sex,' she says.
She makes the point that sex selection allows people to choose the sex chromosomes and genitalia of their child. It can't decide a child's gender – the way they express that sex.
How, Browne argues, do we expect more men to take up nursing or childcare roles, and women to take up STEM subjects like maths and engineering, if we reinforce the idea they're born with different traits and abilities and therefore should be parented differently?
I also ask Potter if he ever discusses with his clients the chance that a child born from a sex-selected embryo could eventually embrace a different gender identity – for example, a baby born from a female embryo who grows up as a trans man. (About 5 per cent of Americans under 30 say their gender is different to the sex they were assigned at birth, according to Pew Research Centre.)
'There would be no reason to discuss that, any more than it would be to discuss with an expecting mum,' Potter says. 'It's a pretty unlikely thing and kind of a grim topic.'
How much should it cost?
Dr Hilary Bowman-Smart, a research fellow at the University of South Australia who has studied prenatal testing, thinks sex selection in embryos isn't a particularly valuable use of medical resources, but the current reasons to keep it illegal were not compelling.
Loading
Bowman-Smart is concerned, though, about companies making money from sex selection services. 'I would be concerned about this becoming an expensive service that is advertised to people during a vulnerable time in their lives who otherwise might not have cared too much either way,' she says.
While Polyakov backs sex selection in some circumstances, he doesn't believe it should be covered by Medicare. If it were legalised in Australia he estimates the practice would cost about $500 to $700 per embryo.
'So if you have 10 embryos, that adds about $5000 to $7000,' on top of the existing costs, he says.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Hope is not a plan: Public patients shouldn't be penalised
Hope is not a plan: Public patients shouldn't be penalised

The Age

timean hour ago

  • The Age

Hope is not a plan: Public patients shouldn't be penalised

All of us hope that a diagnosis of cancer will never become part of our life's story. But we also know that if such a diagnosis does come, early detection and treatment offer a far better chance of survival and recovery. Since 2006, the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program has aimed to give Australians that better chance – initially for those aged 55 and 65 and today for everyone aged between 45 and 74 – with self-testing kits mailed out to those eligible across Australia every two years. In Victoria, statistics show that among those who die of cancer, bowel cancer is behind only lung cancer among men and lung and breast cancer among women. So the kits have the potential to save tens of thousands of lives. But that potential can only be harnessed if a positive test from the kit is followed by a timely examination and diagnosis, beginning with a colonoscopy. On Friday, this masthead's senior health reporter Henrietta Cook revealed that public hospital patients in Victoria are waiting up to nine months to be seen for the vital procedure. Given that the screening program recommends a colonoscopy within 30 days of any positive test result, time is being lost that could be the difference in successfully treating a life-threatening condition. Adjunct Professor Iain Skinner, a colorectal surgeon at Werribee Mercy Hospital, described the increased demand for colonoscopies as 'a challenge faced by many Victorian hospitals'. The Age recently reported that the Victorian Heart Hospital on Monash Health's Clayton campus is having to cut back on operating theatres and recovery beds only two years after it opened. While the hospital insisted the number of procedures performed would not be affected, cardiologists who agreed to speak to us under condition of anonymity said the cuts had already forced them to warn of delayed treatment. 'It's terrible from a patient perspective,' one said. 'The longer they wait, the worse their heart gets.' Victoria's growing population is one of the reasons that the state's government has embarked on a Big Build of transport infrastructure. But the health of those travelling around the state will not wait. Dr Roderick McRae, the state president of doctors' union the Australian Salaried Medical Officers Federation, argues 'there is a massive underinvestment in physical and mental healthcare across Victoria'.

New parliament, same old props for Anthony Albanese in ascendency
New parliament, same old props for Anthony Albanese in ascendency

West Australian

time2 hours ago

  • West Australian

New parliament, same old props for Anthony Albanese in ascendency

Midway through Question Time on Tuesday, Anthony Albanese received a yellow messenger envelope from which he extracted a slip of green plastic. Health Minister Mark Butler had already discreetly handed his own Medicare card to the Prime Minister minutes earlier. When Mr Albanese rose next, sure enough, he brandished the Medicare card that was never far from his hand during the election campaign. He was so wedded to the bit that, on the day he called the election, a staffer had to be dispatched to the Lodge to retrieve the green and gold card that had been forgotten on the early morning drive to visit the Governor-General. The reiteration of the familiar gesture during this first sitting of Parliament spoke to the Government's determination to focus attention on its delivery of election commitments. It wants to keep talking about what it's doing and sees the Opposition as irrelevant. The attitude shows as well in how Mr Albanese is approaching interacting with new Liberal leader Sussan Ley – or, rather, not interacting with her. He ignores her in the chamber and out of it. Even letters sent to his office go unanswered, where previously Peter Dutton's missives would at least be acknowledged. The Coalition meanwhile was determined to focus on the very topics Australians have just comprehensively shown they like Labor's approach to: health and energy. It didn't carry out any sustained test of brand new ministers Sam Rae (whose aged care portfolio has plenty that needs examining) or assistant Treasurer Daniel Mulino, baffling people on both sides of politics. The toughest questions came from the crossbenchers, like Kate Chaney asking why just 5 per cent of the National Reconstruction Fund had been spent, or Helen Haines wondering what was happening for the nearly 90,000 older Australians waiting an extra four months for the home-care packages they urgently need. Ms Ley and her inner circle jettisoned their planned QT strategy on the fly the day Mr Albanese produced the Medicare card to instead hammer the Prime Minister on the cost of seeing a doctor. Despite the boosted bulk-billing incentives promised during the election not kicking in until November, they asked repeated questions about why it wasn't free now to see a doctor. Coalition frontbencher Melissa McIntosh brandished her own Medicare card along with a credit card during Monday's question time, earning her an admonishment from Speaker Milton Dick: 'The member will not use props!' Mr Albanese, too, received a light rap on the knuckles – 'I'm sure the Prime Minister will look after that card carefully and will continue with his answer' – but it didn't prevent his gleeful grandstanding. He delivered a lesson in the old adage of campaigning in poetry and governing in prose – and fine print. How many Australians today were using their credit card to see the GP? 'Too many is the answer, which is why we want 90 per cent by 2030 to just use this little card here, this piece of green and gold plastic,' Mr Albanese said. Energy Minister Chris Bowen could barely contain his enthusiasm at being given multiple opportunities to point out the Coalition's ongoing rift over net zero and climate policy. After the WA Liberals' State council used the weekend between the sitting weeks to call on the party to dump net zero, Mr Bowen linked Andrew Hastie's leadership ambitions with his enthusiastic support for the moves and hit job on local leader Basil Zempilas. 'The West Australian Liberal Party state council voted against net zero, the Leader of the Opposition in WA came out and disassociated himself from that which earned him an attack from the member for Canning,' Mr Bowen told Parliament. 'The member for Canning will undermine any leader of the opposition that he can find. He's taking a practice run in Perth for what he intends to do in Canberra, sometime in the next 12 months as we all know.' Ali France, who won Dickson from Mr Dutton, asked the first and last questions of the fortnight. 'How has the Albanese Labor Government been pursuing its agenda this fortnight? And how does this compare to other approaches in Parliament?' she inquired on Thursday. 'The Opposition have certainly been pursuing their own agenda – or, should I say, agendas, because there's more than one over there: fighting publicly over whether climate change is real and over whether they support net zero,' Mr Albanese said, continuing with a jibe about 'a split screen showing a split party'. The Prime Minister cautioned his caucus colleagues this week against hubris, telling them Labor had to maintain its humility and sense of service and purpose to keep in voters' good books. That hasn't stopped him and his trusty Leader of the House Tony Burke from rubbing their opponents' noses in the new way of doing things. This is compounded by the depth of the Government's frontbench and ranks of rising talent, in contrast to a decimated and divided Coalition. It's like a grand final team running on against an under-14s side, one longtime political observer put it. From slashing staff to slashing questions and committee leadership positions, they're taking advantage of Labor's numbers in both chambers and control of the ways of Parliament to hinder the Opposition's work in ways that will barely register with the public at large. Take the last-minute stunt on Thursday afternoon, where Labor did a switcheroo on the private members' business for Parliament's return at the end of this month, coming good on a threat to allow Nationals renegade Barnaby Joyce all the time in the world to debate his legislation to repeal net zero. Labor also backed the Greens to set up an examination of 'information integrity on climate change and energy', which might have escaped notice had the Greens not belled the cat on it being an inquiry into conservative campaign outfit Advance. The broad sense from Liberals willing to give her a chance is that Ms Ley's first parliamentary test went OK. She didn't make a splash, but she is giving voters a reason to look again at the party. The fights over net zero and soul-searching about the party's membership and women should have happened three years ago, Liberals from both sides of the party's broad church say. It might be leading to some pain now, but better now than on the eve of an election. Same goes for contributions like that of Longman MP Terry Young, who told Parliament the 'ridiculous practice' of quotas caused more problems than they solved. 'Men tend to be more drawn to vocations that involve maths and physical exertion like construction and trades, whereas women in the main tend to be drawn to careers that involve women and care and other people,' he said. The response from most Liberals asked about it was to put their head in their hands. It was a particularly stark contrast after a week of first speeches from Labor's two dozen new MPs, most of them women and many from diverse backgrounds. They told varied and often emotional stories of what had brought them to Parliament. But the one uniting strand throughout the speeches was their genuinely heartfelt thanks to Mr Albanese — far more so than is typical. Again and again the new MPs thanked him for believing in them when no one else did, for campaigning in their seat despite many writing it off, for asking them to run in the first place. 'Advice given to us when preparing our first speech was that it wouldn't be a bad career move to put in a 'thank you' to the Prime Minister,' Rowan Holzberger, who won the Queensland seat of Forde, said. 'Of course, I want to thank him for his performance during the campaign … But I really want to thank him for being like a big brother.' Once the excitement of the new dynamics of Parliament wears off and the Prime Minister falls back into old habits, there is potential for his bulging 123-member caucus to grow restless and unruly. The deep and personal loyalty to a leader on display during these speeches shows Mr Albanese will have as firm a grip on his party room as he does his Medicare card.

1.5 million Aussie kids missing out on free dental care every year
1.5 million Aussie kids missing out on free dental care every year

9 News

time11 hours ago

  • 9 News

1.5 million Aussie kids missing out on free dental care every year

Your web browser is no longer supported. To improve your experience update it here New data has shown that there is a massive underuse of a dental scheme that gives free dental care to Australians from newborn to 17 years old. The Australian Dental Association has found that only one in three families who are eligible for free dental care as part of the government's Child Dental Benefits Schedule actually use it. The survey conducted by the ADA found the scheme is surrounded by a lot of misinformation and confusion, leaving many parents either unaware of the scheme's existence or unsure of their eligibility. New data has shown that there is a massive underuse of a dental scheme that gives free dental care to Australians from newborn to 17 years old. (9News) Of those who believed they're eligible for the scheme, only 56 per cent have used it for their children. This uncertainty can leave many young Australians at risk of poor dental health. President of the ADA, Dr Chris Sanzaro, is now calling on the government to promote the scheme better so that more Australian families are able to access it. "This leaves millions of eligible Australian families either going without dental care or paying more out of pocket than they need to, when it could so well fund a child's first dental visit," he said. "It's a scheme that's shrouded in mystery and confusion," he continued. For eligible families, the scheme  provides up to $1132 over two years for dental services such as examinations, x-rays, cleaning, fissure sealing, fillings, root canals and extractions for children up to the age of 17. "We're keen to work with the government to help clarify the basic elements of the scheme and promote it to patients and parents to ensure millions of kids are getting the dental treatment and care they need to set them up with healthy mouths early in life," Sanzaro said. health children dental Australia national Health Services government CONTACT US

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store