|
|
Post by Lauren on May 31, 2012 0:09:00 GMT -5
what do you think of the upcoming vote in the federal legislature that could ban sex-selective abortions? and the video recently released of a planned parenthood employee supporting sex-selective abortion? that happened in a clinic in Austin right where I live!
|
|
|
|
Post by d murphy on May 31, 2012 23:13:05 GMT -5
wow, i hadn't heard of this in the us. i think it's pretty disgusting that gender could be a dealbreaker in whether to abort or not abort, especially considering the technology exists to predetermine gender with artificial insemination, but i think i've been clear i don't think a woman NEEDS a reason to abort. i'm just disgusted someone would actively declare this as a reason.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lauren on Jun 11, 2012 23:41:25 GMT -5
yeah I think it's pretty terrible, especially considering that any sex-selective abortion is necessarily a late term abortion because it is not even possible to determine the gender until around 5 months. I was under the impression that it was not possible to choose the gender unless you create several embryos and then choose which ones to implant, is that right? that's more in vitro than artificial insemination
|
|
|
|
Post by Lauren on Jun 11, 2012 23:42:54 GMT -5
Also, update on that federal bill, it did not pass. They had fast-tracked it and so it needed at 2/3rds majority which it did not get (it got a majority just not 2/3rds).
|
|
|
|
Post by d murphy on Jun 13, 2012 16:50:36 GMT -5
i saw an article discussing new research saying that the gender of a pregnancy could be determined as early as seven weeks.
meanwhile there are several sex selection methods with the ericsson method of separating sperm by their genders the one i was referring to. unfortunately none of these methods have a one hundred percent accuracy rate (the ericsson method is about 70% for each gender though he claims it's better suited for boys). many of these methods are also unrealistically expensive, but checking for gender at seven weeks is probably also not free. likewise in areas where sex-selective abortion becomes an issue, theorhetically they could outlaw the revelation of gender by sonogram as most laymen wouldn't be able to tell from such an image and i don't actually feel it's information an expectant parent needs to know unlike potential health risks such as spina bifida. knowing the gender is really just a convenience in my view, and if people are going to abuse it, then i think an argument can be made to take the convenience away (it'd just be unfortunate for the people who don't care about gender being forced to double the list of potential baby names and stall other gender related decisions).
|
|
|
|
Post by BLR on Mar 2, 2013 9:19:02 GMT -5
I think that an abortion is still a personal choice and people have sex selective abortions at 7 weeks sure beats the China method of leaving baby girls in gutters to scream and die of starvation.
|
|
