No country is an island: Comment on the House of Commons report Human Reproductive Technologies and the Law

Reproductive BioMedicine Online

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 10-11

  Dahl, Edgar ^a  

^a JUSTUS LIEBIG UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis; Public policy; Sex ratio; Sex selection

Indexed keywords

ASIA; CHILD WELFARE; CHINA; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CONFIDENTIALITY; DONOR; ECONOMIC ASPECT; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; FEMALE; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; GAMETE; GENETIC ENGINEERING; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; HUMAN CLONING; INDIA; INDUCED ABORTION; INFERTILITY THERAPY; LAW; LAW SUIT; MALE; MASS MEDIUM; MEDICAL ETHICS; MORALITY; NOTE; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; PRISON; RELIGION; SEXUAL SELECTION; SOCIAL ASPECT; TECHNOLOGY; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 21844468215     PISSN: 14726483     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1472-6483(10)61288-6     Document Type: Note

References (16)

1. Amanpour C 2003 For the Love of Money. CBS News 5 October 2003.
2. BBC 2005 Parents Could Pick Babies' Sex. BBC, March 24, 2005. Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4376041.stm [accessed 26 April 2005].
3. Carmichael M 2004 No Girls, Please! Newsweek 26 January 2004.
4. CORE 2003 Sex selection: choice and responsibility in human reproduction. A response by J Quintavalle of Comment On Reproductive Ethics (CORE) to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority's (HFEA) Public Consultation on Sex Selection. CORE, London, UK.
5. Dahl E 2003 Procreative liberty: the case for preconception sex selection. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 7, 380-384.
6. Dahl E 2004 The presumption in favour of liberty: a comment on the HFEA's public consultation on sex selection. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 8, 266-267.
7. Dahl E 2005 Preconception gender selection: a threat to the natural sex ratio Reproductive BioMedicine Online 10 (supp. 1), 116-118.
8. Daily Mail 2005 Opinion Split on Baby Gender Report. Daily Mail, March 24, 2005). Source: http://uk.news.yahoo.com/050324/344/fezkj.html [accessed 31 May 2005] or http://icsuttoncoldfield.icnetwork.co.uk/news/natnews/tm_objectid= 15332034&method=full&siteid=52630&headline= opinionsplit-on-baby-gender-report-name_page.html [accessed 31 May 2005].
9. Doyal L and McLean S 2005 Choosing children: intergenerational justice? Reproductive BioMedicine Online 10 (suppl. 1), 119-124.
10. Gentleman A 2005 India still fighting to 'Save the Girl Child'. International Herald Tribune, 15 April 2005. Source: http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/04/14/news/india.html [accessed 31 May 2005].
11. Guardian 2005 Church Criticises Baby Sex Selection Report. Guardian, 24 March 2005. Source: http://society.guardian.co.uk/health/news/0,8363,1444926,00.html [accessed 26 April 2005].
12. House of Commons 2005 Human Reproductive Technologies and the Law. Fifth report of session 2004-05. The Stationery Office, London, UK, 1, 64.
13. Hudson V, Den Boer A 2004 Bare Branches: The Security Implications of Asia's Surplus Male Population. MIT Press, Cambridge, USA.
14. McGivering J 2003 India targets female foeticide. BBC News, 15 February 2003. Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/2765853.stm [accessed 31 May 2005].
15. Schulman JD, Karabinus DS 2005 Scientific aspects of preconception gender selection. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 10 (suppl. 1), 111-115.
16. Sen A 2003 Missing women - revisited. British Medical Journal 327, 1297-1298.