Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Engendering Harm: A Critique of Sex Selection For “Family Balancing”.Arianne Shahvisi - 2018 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 15 (1):123-137.
    The most benign rationale for sex selection is deemed to be “family balancing.” On this view, provided the sex distribution of an existing offspring group is “unbalanced,” one may legitimately use reproductive technologies to select the sex of the next child. I present four novel concerns with granting “family balancing” as a justification for sex selection: families or family subsets should not be subject to medicalization; sex selection for “family balancing” entrenches heteronormativity, inflicting harm in at least three specific ways; (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Filling a Federal Void: Promises and Perils of State Law in Addressing Women’s Health Disparities.Valarie K. Blake & Michelle L. McGowan - 2020 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 48 (3):485-490.
    Federal law often avoids setting minimum standards for women’s health and reproductive rights issues, leaving legislative and regulatory gaps for the states to fill as they see fit. This has mixed results. It can lead to state innovation that improves state-level health outcomes, informs federal health reform, and provides data on best practices for other states. On the other hand, some states may use the absence of a federal floor to impose draconian policies that pose risks to women’s and maternal (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Cross-border sex selection: Ethical challenges posed by a globalizing practice.Rajani Bhatia - 2014 - International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 7 (2):185-218.
    In this article, I examine reproductive travel for sex selection with reference to two distinct technologies—MicroSort and preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Available since the 1990s for sex-linked disease avoidance, I focus here on their imbrication in an emerging global form of nonmedical, lifestyle sex selection that elicits movements of information, biomaterial, patients, providers, and equipment across borders. This web of cross-border, interclinical, and laboratory transactions raises issues highly relevant to a feminist approach to the bioethics of sex selection. International documents, however, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Queering the Odds: The Case Against "Family Balancing".Tereza Hendl - 2017 - International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 10 (2):4-30.
    The concept of sex selection for “family balancing” is based on the notion that a family is “balanced” when it includes children of “both genders.” Clinics that offer IVF for family balancing present it as an option for couples who “want to experience the joy of raising both a male and female child”. Families with at least one child of each gender are claimed to have gender diversity and to provide more enriching experiences to all family members. Some theorists call (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The World’s Not Ready for This: Globalizing Selective Technologies.Lauren Jade Martin - 2014 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 39 (3):432-455.
    The United States has become an ideal marketplace for those seeking selective technologies that are illegal, inaccessible, or unavailable in their own countries. Specifically, technologies such as commercial egg donation, preimplantation genetic diagnosis, and sex selection are prohibited or highly regulated in many nations, but remain legal and largely unregulated in the United States. Based on in-depth interviews with US fertility industry providers, including physicians and egg donor and surrogate brokers, this article analyzes how the ideologies of genetic determinism and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark