Sex selection: Laissez faire or family balancing?
Sex selection: Laissez faire or family balancing?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s10728-005-2572-6
复制
发表时间：
2005-03-01
影响因子：
1.9
通讯作者：
Dahl, E
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Dahl, E
在最近对HFEAs关于性别选择的公众咨询的评论中，Soren霍尔姆声称家庭平衡的支持者致力于采取自由放任的做法。鉴于支持为家庭平衡而进行性别选择的论点也支持为其他社会原因进行性别选择，他断言，家庭平衡的倡导者在呼吁限制性别选择时根本不一致。在本文中，我认为，家庭平衡的支持者绝不是不一致的。如果他们提倡家庭平衡的目的是为了防止自然性别比例的严重扭曲，他们完全有理由坚持限制性别选择。真实的问题是，对性别比例的关注是否真的要求限制性别选择。基于最近的一项关于性别偏好的调查和几个性别诊所的数据，我认为，限制性别选择家庭平衡是没有道理的。在没有任何证据显示性别比例扭曲的情况下，我们实际上需要对性别选择采取自由放任的态度。
In a recent comment on the HFEAs public consultation on sex selection, Soren Holm claimed that proponents of family balancing are committed to embrace a laissez faire approach. Given that arguments in support of sex selection for family balancing also support sex selection for other social reasons, advocates of family balancing, he asserts, are simply inconsistent when calling for a limit on access to sex selection. In this paper, I argue that proponents of family balancing are in no way inconsistent. Provided their advocacy of family balancing is aimed at preventing a severe distortion of the natural sex ratio, they are entirely justified in insisting on restrictions to sex selection. The real question is whether a concern for the sex ratio does indeed call for a limit on sex selection. Based on a recent survey on gender preferences and data from several Gender Clinics, I argue that a restriction on sex selection to family balancing is unwarranted. In the absence of any evidence for a pending sex ratio distortion, we are actually required to adopt a laissez faire approach to sex selection.