Article Text
Abstract
This paper argues that the HFEA’s recent report on sex selection abdicates its responsibility to give its own authentic advice on the matters within its remit, that it accepts arguments and conclusions that are implausible on the face of it and where they depend on empirical claims, produces no empirical evidence whatsoever, but relies on reckless speculation as to what the “facts” are likely to be. Finally, having committed itself to what I call the “democratic presumption”, that human freedom will not be constrained unless very good and powerful reasons can be produced to justify such infringement of liberty, the HFEA simply reformulates the democratic presumption as saying the opposite—namely that freedom may only be exercised if powerful justifications are produced for any exercise of liberty.
- sex selection
- HFEA
- reproductive liberty
- Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- No sex selection please, we’re British
- Reproductive liberty and elitist contempt: reply to John Harris
- Sex selection for social purposes in Israel: quest for the “perfect child” of a particular gender or centuries old prejudice against women?
- Acting parentally: an argument against sex selection
- Ethics briefings
- Parenthood should be regarded as a right
- Ethical issues in respect of children born after assisted reproduction technologies
- Lesbian motherhood and mitochondrial replacement techniques: reproductive freedom and genetic kinship
- Why sex selection should be legal
- Britain’s new preimplantation tissue typing policy: an ethical defence