Jump to content
IGNORED

The War On Baby Girls In America


debrand

Recommended Posts

On preference, there does seem to be a difference between biological and adopted children. I believe the general guess on why is that, with a bio child, it's "continuing the family line" since we are a patrilineal society. But adoption is already outside that paradigm, so people want girls on the theory that they're easier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On preference, there does seem to be a difference between biological and adopted children. I believe the general guess on why is that, with a bio child, it's "continuing the family line" since we are a patrilineal society. But adoption is already outside that paradigm, so people want girls on the theory that they're easier.

People's preference for the sex of their baby is also influenced by the sex of previous babies. That's definitely a factor that needs to be looked at and accounted for in a study.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm 99.99% sure you can't determine the "sex" of a sperm without destroying it (and even then I'm not convinced - sperm are tiny and you need a decent tissue sample to analyse DNA), so I think what you're referring to is people picking and choosing which embryos to insert.

You can have your sperm sorted by sex. It is not 100%, but gives you a better chance than random luck. They go by the size of the sperm's genetic information; x chromosomes have more genes than y.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm 99.99% sure you can't determine the "sex" of a sperm without destroying it (and even then I'm not convinced - sperm are tiny and you need a decent tissue sample to analyse DNA), so I think what you're referring to is people picking and choosing which embryos to insert.

No, actually there is a procedure that can be performed prior to IVF or IUI. It's called Microsort and it can be used either for "family balancing" or for couples with X-linked chromosome disorders. It basically sorts for sperm with X or Y chromosomes. The method was originally developed for livestock breeding! Apparently of couples who sort for a girl baby, 93% get a girl, but it's lower for sorting for a boy baby (82%). Still, it's better than the statistical 50/50 odds if someone really wants one or the other.

I read on the InGender message boards for a while about all of the insane things people will do to try to get the boy or girl who they want. Most seem to want a girl and are under the impression that OF COURSE a daughter would love pink and princesses and ballerinas, and that when she grows up they'll be besties and go get pedicures together. Less commonly, they think that a boy would love sports or hunting and thus make their husbands happy. Frankly, I don't understand that mentality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see, thanks for correcting me. I assume they use a centrifuge?

ETA nope, they make them fluoresce! That's really cool!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have read a few boards that support groups for women with gender disappointment. It seems like the majority are disappointed in sons rather than daughters.

I have both sons and daughters, and I am glad I do! But I think I wanted daughters more. Not for the pink and princesses so much. I just always wanted a girl, or several.

It looks like they sort the sperm using FISH, staining the genetic material with fluorescent stain and then separating them according to amount of stain. I wonder how they get the stain out before using the semen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm 99.99% sure you can't determine the "sex" of a sperm without destroying it (and even then I'm not convinced - sperm are tiny and you need a decent tissue sample to analyse DNA), so I think what you're referring to is people picking and choosing which embryos to insert.

There are 2 separate procedures:

1. Testing the embryo itself, which would be done in situations where there is a need to be as accurate as possible for medical reasons.

2. Techniques to increase the odds of X or Y sperm, which at best alter the odds a bit. It's based on the theory that Y sperm swim faster but X sperm live longer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The irony with the "at least one of each" approach is that IME kids learn from siblings, so a girl after boys is more likely to be a tomboy, and a boy after girls is going to find himself treated as a human doll for a while (yes, this is a massive generalization, I know).

In term of the OP, I see no evidence of actual sex-selective abortions being performed for non-medical reasons in the United States, especially outside of specific ethnic groups. Logically, it's pretty hard for a family to wait until the sex was known and then have a second-trimester abortion - the woman starts to feel the baby move, the pregnancy starts to show, options for termination are more limited and the procedure itself can be harder. It wouldn't be about simply "I want a Jr. to toss around a football". In groups where it does occur, having a daughter instead of a son can mean having no one to care for you when you get older, and having to give a future son-in-law a motor scooter or car.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting article.. and while it is interesting, I don't think you can use that study to state what American's prefer in terms of children. It completely bypassed the idea that 32% of people said it didn't matter. It made it seem as if those people didn't want a girl either... which "doesn't matter" means either and a girl is perfectly acceptable, just as a boy is.

Also the sample size on that study makes me wonder what they were thinking. The sample size is 1020 people in America... America is a nation of 313,641,073 (source: http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html). So this study took the opinion of so few (seriously, not even a percentage my computer calculator is willing to give me an honest number about) and decided that is what American's prefer. IT gives no controls or any other information that is useful to understand a study like this.

All of that said, my research is coming up empty on anything better or more accurate. I also agree with your last statement, but cannot find any information to support that either.. other than "I know a few people, read a few blogs.. and they all wanted a girl!" which is not evidence! lol.

(I want to point out I'm not attacking you or angry or anything. Merely pointing out I don't like that article with it's claims, all while not being able to provide something better :). Please don't take anything I've said as an attack on you.)

From the livescience article:

Americans younger than 30 are the most likely to say they'd prefer a boy, with 54 percent making that choice, and 27 percent preferring a baby girl. The gap then declines steadily with age. Education also plays a role: People with a postgraduate education break even in their preferences, while 44 percent of those with a high-school education or less prefer boys, compared with 25 percent who prefer girls.

I find this interesting and don't doubt its veracity. We truly had no preference whatsoever, but I know to many people, it's still a big thing, especially if the question is framed as what people would prefer if they could only have one child.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has been nearly 20 years since we concieved our twins in a clinical setting and were told then that those conditions are more likely to produce boys (and multiples, of course). We just happened to have both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The irony with the "at least one of each" approach is that IME kids learn from siblings, so a girl after boys is more likely to be a tomboy, and a boy after girls is going to find himself treated as a human doll for a while (yes, this is a massive generalization, I know).

In term of the OP, I see no evidence of actual sex-selective abortions being performed for non-medical reasons in the United States, especially outside of specific ethnic groups. Logically, it's pretty hard for a family to wait until the sex was known and then have a second-trimester abortion - the woman starts to feel the baby move, the pregnancy starts to show, options for termination are more limited and the procedure itself can be harder. It wouldn't be about simply "I want a Jr. to toss around a football". In groups where it does occur, having a daughter instead of a son can mean having no one to care for you when you get older, and having to give a future son-in-law a motor scooter or car.

Considering the extremes you need to go to to have a late second trimester abortion in the states, it seems pretty far-fetched to assume they're much of a thing at all. You'd have to be pretty desperate.

Now that I know about Microsort, it almost seems silly that people see low female birth rates in certain ethnic communities and automatically think "abortion! Dun dun dun..." Especially in the US where you'd have to pay for both out of pocket.

I'm really curious what the general population's reaction to Microsort is. On a scale of one to sex selective abortion, how sinister do they find it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I admit to wanting 6 sons but not because I thought boys are better than girls. I am the 5th daughter and by the time I was 4 I was sick to death of sisters. We did nothing to cause the outcome of having sons over daughters, it just turned out that way. I am a better "boy" mom than I would be a "girl" mom as I and my sisters were various degrees of tomboys even though we only had one brother. As a girl mom I think I would have drove them crazy with trying to form them into my idea of girlhood. I do regret not having a daughter but it just meant to be as I can't carry female fetuses and my husband makes almost only male sperm and the ones that are female are deformed.

There are valid reasons why parents would choose to terminate a pregnancy due to sex of the fetus but those reasons are genetic and would be tested way before 16 weeks. A genetic reason IMO is a valid reason to have an abortion due to sex of the fetus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering the extremes you need to go to to have a late second trimester abortion in the states, it seems pretty far-fetched to assume they're much of a thing at all. You'd have to be pretty desperate.

Now that I know about Microsort, it almost seems silly that people see low female birth rates in certain ethnic communities and automatically think "abortion! Dun dun dun..." Especially in the US where you'd have to pay for both out of pocket.

I'm really curious what the general population's reaction to Microsort is. On a scale of one to sex selective abortion, how sinister do they find it?

Well I know on another message board i posted on a long time ago. One of the members had a son who had a disease that was non existent in girls. She said they'd be doing the Microsort or something like it to make sure they didn't have anymore boys. She was eaten alive and made out to be a murderer. And most of the people on the board were of the pro-choice variety.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the livescience article:

I find this interesting and don't doubt its veracity. We truly had no preference whatsoever, but I know to many people, it's still a big thing, especially if the question is framed as what people would prefer if they could only have one child.

I also seem to remember reading somewhere that younger fathers tend to produce more boys while older fathers tend to have more daughters.

I'm happy to be having a girl (assuming the ultrasound was accurate). I really wanted at least one of each just so I could get a chance to parent a boy and a girl. However if we did have another boy I would be just as happy. In fact I was convinced pre-ultrasound that it would be another boy since the pregnancy has been identical to the one with my son.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I had any major medical issue affecting only girls or only boys, I would absolutely do pre-implantation genetic screening. I don't think it's even take a risk with Microsort - I'd rather have 100% certainty and I don't consider an embryo in a tube to be equivalent to a baby or even to a fetus.

I would only have an issue with Microsort if the parents were under the mistaken impression that it provided 100% certainty, and weren't prepared to have a child of the "wrong" gender.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember a newspaper article on gender selection in the US from, oh, five or six years ago? The clinic that was highlighted in the article would only do it for the purpose of "balancing" families.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sex selection abortion is NOT common in the US because you can't determine the sex of the baby till 20 weeks. The mass majority of abortions in this country take place way earlier than that. If a woman has an abortion after the twenty week mark, it is mostly due to the fact that testing that is also done around the 20 week mark has determined the baby will be severly disabled. Not because the baby is the wrong sex.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm 99.99% sure you can't determine the "sex" of a sperm without destroying it (and even then I'm not convinced - sperm are tiny and you need a decent tissue sample to analyse DNA), so I think what you're referring to is people picking and choosing which embryos to insert.

I believe there is a technology where you can separate sperm by weight. XX sperm weigh more than XY sperm (different amounts of DNA). I don't believe it's 100%, but it will give you different fractions of sperm and you can choose to use the heavier fraction (biased towards a girl) or the lighter fraction (biased towards boys).

When I was in grad school years and years ago one of the ecology students was working in our lab doing something similar with bird blood to sex birds where it was difficult to tell the sexes apart visually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.