Fertility Law Canada™ at D2Law LLP - Sara R. Cohen, LLB.



                                               


                                                      
  • Fertility Law Canada - surrogacy agreements, egg donor agreements, sperm donor agreements, legal parentage
  • Sara R. Cohen
  • Anatoly Dvorkin
  • Fertility Law in Canada
  • Surrogacy Law in Canada
  • Legal Parentage - Declaration of Parentage in Ontario and Second Parent Adoption
  • Egg Donor Law in Canada
  • Sperm Donor Law in Canada
  • Embryo Donation Law in Canada
  • Multi-parent Agreements
  • LGBT Family Building
  • Fertility Law Canada Blog
  • Media, Papers and Selected Speaking Engagements
  • Testimonials
  • Contact
  • Helpful Links - fertility resources
  • Francais
  • Terms of Use

The Absurdity of Criminalizing the Use of PGD for Sex Selection, and The Current Debate about Sex Selective Abortions

1/25/2012

2 Comments

 
Last week, the issue of some Canadians aborting female fetuses as a means of sex selection and how to prevent this returned to the forefront of fertility law headlines.  Dr. Rajendra Kale, the then-interiim editor of the Canadian Medical Association Journal, reignited this hot topic by publishing his editorial entitled, "It's a girl!" - could be a death sentence.  In his opinion, gender based abortions are an evil propagated by some Asian communities, and is unacceptable in Canada.  His solution to stopping this practice is to deny all Canadian parents access to information about the gender of a fetus until about 30 weeks, at which time it is extremely difficult to get an abortion.
 
Dr. Kale's editorial set off a media storm about the practice of female feticide in Canada, and the merit of Dr. Kale's proposed solution.  See these related articles from the National Post, the Toronto Sun and The Globe and Mail and perhaps as interesting, see the readers' comments.  As would be expected, there were and continue to be many vocal opinions shared across Canada on this subject. 

Andre Picard responded to Dr. Kale's piece with an editorial of his own in his column in The Globe and Mail.  His editorial, Sex Selection is a Complex Issue with Many Nuances is bang on in that, with respect, Dr. Kale's proposed solution is overly simplistic and fails to address the root of the problem.  While it may seem that the issue of sex selective abortions is black and white, it is actually quite nuanced and brings up other important issues relating to multiculturalism, tolerance, reproductive freedoms and feminism that Dr. Kale's solution disregards.  Despite many readers comments to the contrary, just as being a pro-choice advocate is not equivalent to being a pro-abortion advocate, disagreeing with Dr. Kale's proposal does not make one pro-sex selective abortions. 

Now putting on my fertility lawyer hat, what I find truly absurd is that sex selective abortions are legal in Canada, but engaging in PGD (pre-implantation genetic diagnosis) or embryo selection in order to implant embryos of a particular gender (except for the purpose of preventing, diagnosing or treating a sex-linked disease) is a criminal act carrying with it the penalty of up to ten years in jail and/or a $500,000 fine (see sections 5 and 60 of the Assisted Human Reproduction Act).  To my mind, if people are going to select the gender of their child, is it not ethically more acceptable that they do so at the embryonic stage, prior to the existence of a fetus, instead of aborting a fetus?

If we think like Dr. Kale, the simple solution, then, would be to criminalize sex-selective abortions in a similar manner as we criminalize engaging in procedures to determine the gender of an embryo.  But just like Dr. Kale's proposed solution was overly simplistic, so too is this solution.  We can only imagine the repercussions of criminalizing sex-selective abortion, and regardless, it would be all but impossible to develop a system to determine which abortions were only performed for the purpose of sex selection, and no other purpose that is legal (such as not wanting a baby at all).  Instead, to rid the law of this absurdity, we should allow the lesser evil (if it is an evil at all), which is selecting embryos of a certain gender to implant instead of forcing those who will engage in sex selection to abort fetuses.


2 Comments
VANESSA.69
2/1/2012 09:12:21 am

Well done a voice of reason at last! I like you am exasperated by our law makers who believe it is wrong for adults to decide whether or not they should have a boy or a girl. Yes there are social implications to this if checks and balances are not put into place (China being an obvious example) however I can see no reason why a couple should be denied the right to chose the sex of their child for family balancing purposes. As stated surely sex selection is far more moral (if morality comes into it) than the common practice of fetal abortion if the fetus is of the unwanted sex. The sooner common sense prevails and sex selection..at least for family balancing...is allowed the better. I live in London. Sex selection is illegal in the UK yet I can have as many abortions as I like!!

Reply
L Malik
7/16/2015 02:46:45 am

I think you have a very valid point. There should be a limitation per family to have the option of choosing the gender for example it may be allowed once per family or couple in their life time. This will help out in reducing the abuse.

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    Picture

    Author

    Sara R. Cohen practices fertility law at Fertility Law Canada™ in Toronto, Canada with clients across the country and beyond.  She loves what she does, and it shows!

    Archives

    February 2020
    October 2016
    May 2016
    December 2015
    June 2015
    March 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    September 2014
    June 2014
    January 2014
    November 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011

    Categories

    All
    2011
    2012
    Abortion
    Age
    Ahra
    Ahrc
    Andre Picard
    Anonymous Donation
    Asrm
    Assisted Human Reproduction Act
    Assisted Human Reproduction Canada
    Blair Commission
    Blessings
    Building Family
    Canadian Medical Association Journal
    Cbc
    Cmaj
    Declaration Of Parentage
    Discrimination
    Donor Insemination
    Donor Sperm
    Egg Bank
    Egg Donation
    Egg Donor
    Embryo Donor
    Embryo Selection
    Ethics
    Federal Budget
    Feminism
    Fertility Law
    Fertility Law Canada
    Frozen Eggs
    Frozen Sperm
    Gamete
    Gender
    Grateful
    Handmaids Tale
    Hope
    Infertility
    Intended Parents
    Isis Regional Fertility Centre
    Ivf
    J.C.M. V. A.N.A.
    Legal Parentage
    Legal Status At The Federal Level Of Assisted Human Reproduction In Canada
    Lgbt
    Margaret Atwood
    Ova
    Parliament Background Paper
    Pgd
    Pratten
    Pride
    Professor Karen Busby
    Property Law
    Repromed
    Semen Regulations
    Sex Selective Abortions
    Shana Tova
    Sperm
    Sperm Bank
    Sperm Donation
    Sperm Donor
    Supreme Court Of Canada
    Supreme Court Of Canada Reference Re Assisted Human Reproduction Act
    Surrogacy
    Surrogacy In Canada
    The World Egg Bank
    Three-person Ivf
    Warawa
    What Is Fertility Law

    RSS Feed

Contact us by email at sara@fertilitylawcanada.com  or phone at 416.907.2189
Photos used under Creative Commons from Sharon & Nikki McCutcheon, juni xu, LGBTQ Portraits Project, jodyfrost, Zdenko Zivkovic, gemmerich, Jon Ovington, Thirteen Of Clubs, nerdcoregirl, Klovovi, aresauburn™, Daquella manera, vchili, gezelle, spoilt.exile, Racchio, Nina Matthews Photography