The ethics of sex selection: A comparison of the attitudes and experiences of primary care physicians and physician providers of clinical sex selection services

Fertility and Sterility

Volumn 93, Issue 7, 2010, Pages 2107-2114

  Puri, Sunita ^a   Nachtigall, Robert D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Bioethics; Physician attitudes; Reproductive ethics; Sex selection

Indexed keywords

ABORTION; ARTICLE; BENEFICENCE; CHILD NEGLECT; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DECISION MAKING; DOMESTIC VIOLENCE; EMPOWERMENT; FAMILY PLANNING; GENDER BIAS; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HUMAN; MEDICAL ETHICS; PHYSICIAN ATTITUDE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS; SEMI STRUCTURED INTERVIEW; SEX DETERMINATION; SEX SELECTION; STEREOTYPY; UNWANTED PREGNANCY; ADULT; AGED; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; ETHICS; FEMALE; GENETIC ENGINEERING; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; INFERTILITY THERAPY; INTERVIEW; LEGAL ASPECT; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; PREGNANCY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; QUESTIONNAIRE;

ADULT; AGED; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; HEALTH PERSONNEL; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; PHYSICIAN'S ROLE; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; PHYSICIANS, FAMILY; PREGNANCY; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS; REPRODUCTIVE TECHNIQUES, ASSISTED; SEX PRESELECTION;

EID: 77952563375     PISSN: 00150282     EISSN: 15565653     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.02.053     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Sen A. Missing women. BMJ 1992;304:586-7.
2. Avent ND, Chitty LS. Non-invasive diagnosis of fetal sex; utilisation of free fetal DNA in maternal plasma and ultrasound. Prenat Diagn 2006;26:598-603.
3. MicroSort Website: http://www.microsort.net/results.php. Last accessed December 15, 2008.
4. Ericsson Website: http://www.childselect.com/Literature.html. Last accessed December 15, 2008.
5. Dahl E, Gupta RS, Beutel M, Stoebel-Richter Y, Brosig B, Tinneberg HR. Jain T Preconception sex selection demand and preferences in the United States. Fertil Steril 2006;85:468-73.
6. Jain T, Missmer SA, Gupta RS, Hornstein MD. Preimplantation sex selection demand and preferences in an infertility population. Fertil Steril 2005;83:649-58.
7. Committee on Ethics, American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 360: Sex selection. Obstet Gynecol 2007. 109, 475-8.
8. Ethics Committee of the American Society of Reproductive Medicine. Preconception Gender Selection for Non-Medical Reasons. Fert Steril 2001;75:861-4.
9. Becker G. The elusive embryo: how men and women approach new reproductive technologies. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000.
10. Rapp R. Testing women, testing the fetus: the social impact of amniocen-tesis in America. New York: Routledge, 1999.
11. Shehab D, Duff J, Pasch LA, Mac Dougall K, Scheib JE, Nachtigall RD. How parents whose children have been conceived with donor gametes make their disclosure decision: contexts, influences, and couple dynamics. Fertil Steril 2008;89:179-87.
12. Nachtigall RD, Becker G, Friese C, Butler A, MacDougall K. Parents' conceptualization of their frozen embryos complicates the disposition decision. Fertil Steril 2007;84:431-4.
13. Schensul SL, Schensul JJ, LeCompte MD. Essential ethnographic methods: observations, interviews, and questionnaires. Rowman Altamira, 1999.
14. Beauchamp T, Childress J. Principles of walnut creek biomedical ethics. 5th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
15. Ehrich K, Williams C, Farsides B, Sandall J, Scott R. Choosing embryos: ethical complexity and relational autonomy in staff accounts of PGD. Sociol Health Illn 2007;7:1091-106.
16. Kalfoglou AL, Scott J, Hudson K. PGD patients' and providers' attitudes to the use and regulation of preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Reprod Biomed Online 2005;4:486-96.
17. Robertson J. Extending Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis: Medical and non-medical uses. J Medical Ethics 2003;29:213-6.
18. Gleicher N, Barad DH. The choice of gender: is elective gender selection, indeed, sexist? Hum Reprod 2007;11:3038-41.
19. Dahl E. Procreative liberty: the case for preconception sex selection. Re-prod Biomed Online 2003;4:380-4.
20. Hook EB. Prenatal sex selection and autonomous reproductive decision [letter]. The Lancet 1994;343:55-6.
21. Khatamee MA, Leinberger-Sica A, Matos P, Weseley AC. Sex preselection in New York City: who chooses which sex and why. Intl J Fertil 1989;5:353-4.
22. Liu P, Rose GA. Social aspects of > 800 couples coming forward for gender selection of their children. Hum Reprod 1995;4:968-71.
23. Sauer MV. Gender selection: pressure from patients and industry should not alter our adherence to ethical guidelines. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004;191:1543-5.
24. Dressler R. Cosmetic reproductive services and professional integrity. Am J Bioethics 2001;1:11-2.
25. Dai J. Preconception sex selection: perspective of a person of the unde-sired gender. Am J Bioethics 2001;1:37-8.
26. Kishwar M. When daughters are unwanted: sex determination in india. Manushi 1995;86:15-22.
27. Dickens BM, Serour GI, Cook RJ, Qiu RZ. Sex selection: treating different cases differently. Int J Obst Gyn 2005;90:171-7.
28. Strong C. Can't you control your children? Am J Bioethics 2001;1: 11-3.
29. Dasgupta M. Selective discrimination against female children in rural Punjab, India. Popul Dev Rev 1987;13:77-100.
30. Miller BD. The endangered sex: neglect of female children in rural North India. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
31. American Medical Association. Physician characteristics and distribution in the United States, 2008 edition.