On 7/15/06, jdiebremse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We weren't discussing abortion. Yes we are. We are talking about conceiving a number of children, and "eliminating" the children of the undesired sex.
Personally, I think it's ridiculous for someone to go through the pain, expense and hassle of IVF just to ensure the desired sex for their child, particularly when there's a way to at least raise the odds without doing all that. Many fertility centers won't accept patients that have gender selection as their only reason. But I'm curious about your opinion here So your problem here is with IVF in general then? Because the general practice with IVF is to fertilize many eggs (15-20) and then just implant a small number of them (2-6). (The original article link is down, so I don't know if the article goes into the details at all). As I understand it, the sex selection is just another criteria for deciding which ones get implanted - either way, a bunch of embryos are "eliminated". (Though, potentially they can be frozen and used at a later time). What if the abortion factor was eliminated? Right now, they can use sperm spinning to get about an 80% accuracy in selecting for boy or girl sperm which can be used in a more tradtional way that doesn't generate unwanted embryos. Lets say that they find a way to get this to 100% accuracy. Do you stil have the same objections? -bryon _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
