Shahvisi Arianne
Brighton & Sussex Medical School, University of Sussex, Medical School, Biology Road, Falmer, BN1 9PX, UK.
J Bioeth Inq. 2018 Mar;15(1):123-137. doi: 10.1007/s11673-017-9835-4. Epub 2018 Jan 24.
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: (a) families or family subsets should not be subject to medicalization; (b) sex selection for "family balancing" entrenches heteronormativity, inflicting harm in at least three specific ways; (c) the logic of affirmative action is appropriated; (d) the moral mandate of reproductive autonomy is misused. I conclude that the harms caused by family balancing are sufficiently substantive to override any claim arising from a supposed right to sex selection as an instantiation of procreative autonomy.
性别选择最温和的理由被认为是“家庭平衡”。按照这种观点，倘若现有子女群体的性别分布“不均衡”，那么人们可以合理地使用生殖技术来选择下一胎孩子的性别。我提出了四个与将“家庭平衡”作为性别选择理由相关的新问题：（a）家庭或家庭子群体不应被医学化；（b）为“家庭平衡”进行性别选择强化了异性恋规范，至少在三个具体方面造成伤害；（c）平权行动的逻辑被挪用；（d）生殖自主权的道德要求被滥用。我的结论是，家庭平衡所造成的危害足够严重，足以推翻因所谓的性别选择权利（作为生育自主权的一种体现）而产生的任何主张。
