Gender choice in assisted reproductive technologies: opportunities, dangers, prospects
Research Article
Acknowledgments
The study was carried out within the framework of research under the State assignment «Gender aspects of socio-demographic dynamics of modern Russia» (No. 0165–2019–0011).
How to Cite
Rusanova N.E. Gender choice in assisted reproductive technologies: opportunities, dangers, prospects. Population. 2020. Vol. 23. No. 2. P. 125-135. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19181/population.2020.23.2.11 (in Russ.).
Abstract
Today, assisted reproductive technologies (ART) are a birth rate factor, which allows almost every person to give birth to a child, regardless of health. Fully reliable gender selection is only possible through pre-implantation diagnostics (PGD) as part of in vitro fertilization (IVF). Usually preference is given to boys, and the problem turns from individual family into a socio-gender problem, which can only be solved at the state level. While traditional methods of gender regulation involved selective abortions or killing of newborns («infanticide»), modern ART technically solves the issue at the pre-implantation stage, but entails ethical, psychological and financial problems that require special control. By prohibiting sex-selective abortions, the state limits the possibility of gender choice at the stage of conception to the risk of inherited diseases transmission due to fears of seriously disturbing natural gender balance, creating prerequisites for «genomocide». According to the National ART registries, Surveys of the International Federation of Fertility Societies for 2010–2019, Russian and foreign «hospital» statistics and the media, the article shows increase in the popularity of PGD that makes it possible to make a gender choice. In Russia, where the number of children in a family rarely exceeds two, and reproductive clinics perform all IVF programs, the choice of child’s gender is possible only with medically-justified PGD, and almost always performed at the expense of the patient. The only perspective in this situation is inclusion of such a PGD in the Compulsory Health Insurance system, when the gender of an unborn child becomes an additional, and its health — the main result.
Keywords:
assisted reproductive technologies, in vitro fertilization, gender-oriented preimplantation selection
References
1. Gender. Informatsionnyj bulleten VOZ. [Gender. Factsheet. WHO]. No. 403. August 2015. Available at: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs403/ru/ (Accessed: 12 March 2020). (in Russ.)
2. Lipkin S., Luoma J. Vremya genoma. [The Age of Genomes]. Moscow. Alpina non-fixion. 2018. 298 p. (in Russ.)
3. Selektivnye aborty po polovomu priznaku imejut diskiminatsionnyj charakter i dolzhny byt’ zapreshcheny [Human Rights Comment. Sex-selective abortions are discriminatory and should be banned]. Available at: https://www.coe.int/ru/web/commissioner/-/sex-selective-abortions-are-discriminatory-and-should-be-bann-115.01.24 (Accessed: 22 March 2020). (in Russ.)
4. Garibyan R. Nerozhdennyie devochki Yuzhnogo Kavkaza. [Unborn girls of the South Caucasus]. Informacyonnyj centr Dzhavakheti [Information center of Javakheti]. Available at: http://jnews.ge/?p=9157 (Accessed: 12 November 2019). (in Russ.)
5. Prabhat Jha, Kesler M. A., Kumar R. et al. Trends in selective abortions of girls in India: analysis of nationally representative birth histories from 1990 to 2005 and census data from 1991 to 2011. The Lancet-Elsevier. 24 May 2011.
6. Bongaarts J., Guilmoto C. Z. How many more missing women? Excess female mortality and prenatal sex selection, 1970–2050. Population Development Review. 2015. No. 41(2). P. 241–269.
7. International Federation of Fertility Societies Surveillance 2010: preface. Available at: https://www.infertilitynetwork.org/files/IFFS_Surveillance_2010.pdf (Accessed: 22 March 2020).
8. Capelouto S. M., Archer S. R., Morris J. R. et al. Sex selection for non-medical indications: a survey of current pre-implantation genetic screening practices among U.S. ART clinics. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics. 2018. No. 35(3). P. 409–416.
9. Klevtsova A. Otbor dietiej po polovomu priznaku mozhet stat ugrozoj. [Selection of children by gender can become a threat]. Radio Azattyk. 1 April 013. Available at: https://rus.azattyq.org/a/sex-selection-crisis-in-south-caucasus-and-balkans/24942555.html (Accessed: 22 March 2020). (in Russ.)
10. International Federation of Fertility Societies’ Surveillance (IFFS). Global Trends in Reproductive Policy and Practice. Global Reproductive Health. Wolters Kluwer. March 2019. Vol. 4, Is. 1. P. 29. Available at: https://journals.lww.com/ grh/FullText/2019/03000/International_Federation_of_Fertility_Societies_.3.aspx (Accessed: 22 March 2020).
11. Geraedts J., Sermon K. Preimplantation genetic screening 2.0: the theory. Molecular Human Reproduction. 2016. No. 22(8). P. 839–844.
12. IFFS Surveillance 2016. Available at: https://journals.lww.com/grh/FullText/2016/09000.IFFS_Surveillance_2016.1.aspx (Accessed: 22 March 2020)
13. Evans M. I., Andriole S., Britt D. W. Fetal Reduction: 25 Years’ Experience. Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy. 2014. No. 35(2). P. 69–82.
14. King L., Michael M. No country for young girls: market reforms, gender roles and prenatal sex selection in post-Soviet Ukraine. Journal of Political and Economic Research Institute. Working paper series. No. 425. 2016. P. 1–29.
15. Den Boer A., Hudson V. Patrilineality, son preference, and sex selection in South Korea and Vietnam. Population Development Review. 2017. No. 43(1). P. 119–147.
16. Borisova O. PGD: pol r’ebionku vyb’erut rodit’eli! [PGD: parents will choose the child’s gender!]. Medicforum. 29.04.2011. Available at: https://www.medikforum.ru/health/7621-pgd-pol-rebenku-vyberut-roditeli.html (Accessed: 28 March 2020). (in Russ.)
17. Goknar M. D. Achieving Procreation. Childlessness and IVF in Turkey. Fertility, Reproduction and Sexuality. Vol. 29. Oxford. Berghahn Books. 2015. Available at: http://www.medanthro.ru/?page_id=2749 (Accessed: 22 March 2020).
18. Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine. Available at: https://rm.coe.int/168007cf98 (Accessed: 22 March 2020).
19. Preventing gender-based sex selection. An interagency statement OHCHR, UNFPA, UNICEF, UN Women and WHO. Available at: https://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/gender_rights/9789241501460/en/ (Accessed: 22 March 2020).
20. Gadzhieva A. Gendernaja selekcija po-dagestanski. [Gender selection in Dagestan]. Available at: https://daptar.ru/2014/02/07/ (Accessed: 28 March 2020). (in Russ.)
21. Romanovsky G. B. Pravovoje regulirovaniye geneticheskikh issledovanij v Rossii i za rubiezhom [Legal regulation of genetic research in Russia and abroad]. Lex Russica. 2016. No. P. 93–102. (in Russ.)
22. Zakharova Е. Yu. Programmy massovogo skrininga: tekhnicheskie, sotsial’nyye i eticheskie voprosy [Mass screening programs: technical, social and ethical issues]. Meditsinskaja genetika [Medical Genetics]. 2006. No 3. P. 21–23. (in Russ.)
23. Derova A. Amurchane nachali prazdnovat den’ opredelenia pola budushchego rebenka. [The Amur region began to celebrate the day of determining sex of the future child]. 29.09.2018. Available at: https://ampravda.ru/2018/09/20/084398.html (Accessed: 28 March 2020). (in Russ.)
2. Lipkin S., Luoma J. Vremya genoma. [The Age of Genomes]. Moscow. Alpina non-fixion. 2018. 298 p. (in Russ.)
3. Selektivnye aborty po polovomu priznaku imejut diskiminatsionnyj charakter i dolzhny byt’ zapreshcheny [Human Rights Comment. Sex-selective abortions are discriminatory and should be banned]. Available at: https://www.coe.int/ru/web/commissioner/-/sex-selective-abortions-are-discriminatory-and-should-be-bann-115.01.24 (Accessed: 22 March 2020). (in Russ.)
4. Garibyan R. Nerozhdennyie devochki Yuzhnogo Kavkaza. [Unborn girls of the South Caucasus]. Informacyonnyj centr Dzhavakheti [Information center of Javakheti]. Available at: http://jnews.ge/?p=9157 (Accessed: 12 November 2019). (in Russ.)
5. Prabhat Jha, Kesler M. A., Kumar R. et al. Trends in selective abortions of girls in India: analysis of nationally representative birth histories from 1990 to 2005 and census data from 1991 to 2011. The Lancet-Elsevier. 24 May 2011.
6. Bongaarts J., Guilmoto C. Z. How many more missing women? Excess female mortality and prenatal sex selection, 1970–2050. Population Development Review. 2015. No. 41(2). P. 241–269.
7. International Federation of Fertility Societies Surveillance 2010: preface. Available at: https://www.infertilitynetwork.org/files/IFFS_Surveillance_2010.pdf (Accessed: 22 March 2020).
8. Capelouto S. M., Archer S. R., Morris J. R. et al. Sex selection for non-medical indications: a survey of current pre-implantation genetic screening practices among U.S. ART clinics. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics. 2018. No. 35(3). P. 409–416.
9. Klevtsova A. Otbor dietiej po polovomu priznaku mozhet stat ugrozoj. [Selection of children by gender can become a threat]. Radio Azattyk. 1 April 013. Available at: https://rus.azattyq.org/a/sex-selection-crisis-in-south-caucasus-and-balkans/24942555.html (Accessed: 22 March 2020). (in Russ.)
10. International Federation of Fertility Societies’ Surveillance (IFFS). Global Trends in Reproductive Policy and Practice. Global Reproductive Health. Wolters Kluwer. March 2019. Vol. 4, Is. 1. P. 29. Available at: https://journals.lww.com/ grh/FullText/2019/03000/International_Federation_of_Fertility_Societies_.3.aspx (Accessed: 22 March 2020).
11. Geraedts J., Sermon K. Preimplantation genetic screening 2.0: the theory. Molecular Human Reproduction. 2016. No. 22(8). P. 839–844.
12. IFFS Surveillance 2016. Available at: https://journals.lww.com/grh/FullText/2016/09000.IFFS_Surveillance_2016.1.aspx (Accessed: 22 March 2020)
13. Evans M. I., Andriole S., Britt D. W. Fetal Reduction: 25 Years’ Experience. Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy. 2014. No. 35(2). P. 69–82.
14. King L., Michael M. No country for young girls: market reforms, gender roles and prenatal sex selection in post-Soviet Ukraine. Journal of Political and Economic Research Institute. Working paper series. No. 425. 2016. P. 1–29.
15. Den Boer A., Hudson V. Patrilineality, son preference, and sex selection in South Korea and Vietnam. Population Development Review. 2017. No. 43(1). P. 119–147.
16. Borisova O. PGD: pol r’ebionku vyb’erut rodit’eli! [PGD: parents will choose the child’s gender!]. Medicforum. 29.04.2011. Available at: https://www.medikforum.ru/health/7621-pgd-pol-rebenku-vyberut-roditeli.html (Accessed: 28 March 2020). (in Russ.)
17. Goknar M. D. Achieving Procreation. Childlessness and IVF in Turkey. Fertility, Reproduction and Sexuality. Vol. 29. Oxford. Berghahn Books. 2015. Available at: http://www.medanthro.ru/?page_id=2749 (Accessed: 22 March 2020).
18. Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine. Available at: https://rm.coe.int/168007cf98 (Accessed: 22 March 2020).
19. Preventing gender-based sex selection. An interagency statement OHCHR, UNFPA, UNICEF, UN Women and WHO. Available at: https://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/gender_rights/9789241501460/en/ (Accessed: 22 March 2020).
20. Gadzhieva A. Gendernaja selekcija po-dagestanski. [Gender selection in Dagestan]. Available at: https://daptar.ru/2014/02/07/ (Accessed: 28 March 2020). (in Russ.)
21. Romanovsky G. B. Pravovoje regulirovaniye geneticheskikh issledovanij v Rossii i za rubiezhom [Legal regulation of genetic research in Russia and abroad]. Lex Russica. 2016. No. P. 93–102. (in Russ.)
22. Zakharova Е. Yu. Programmy massovogo skrininga: tekhnicheskie, sotsial’nyye i eticheskie voprosy [Mass screening programs: technical, social and ethical issues]. Meditsinskaja genetika [Medical Genetics]. 2006. No 3. P. 21–23. (in Russ.)
23. Derova A. Amurchane nachali prazdnovat den’ opredelenia pola budushchego rebenka. [The Amur region began to celebrate the day of determining sex of the future child]. 29.09.2018. Available at: https://ampravda.ru/2018/09/20/084398.html (Accessed: 28 March 2020). (in Russ.)
Article
Received: 11.03.2020
Accepted: 12.06.2020
Citation Formats
Other cite formats:
APA
Rusanova, N. E. (2020). Gender choice in assisted reproductive technologies: opportunities, dangers, prospects. Population, 23(2), 125-135. https://doi.org/10.19181/population.2020.23.2.11
Section
ESTIMATION OF POVERTY AND WAYS TO ITS REDUCTION
