HopeToBeGreen Posted January 17, 2012 Report Share Posted January 17, 2012 Saw this interesting article today: http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1116291--delay-disclosure-of-fetal-sex-until-30-weeks-pregnancy-canadian-journal-urges Apparently, an editorial in the Canadian Medical Association Journal is advocating not telling women the sex of their babies until 30 weeks, unless there is a good medical reason to do so. Now women can usually find out at 20 weeks. The goal is to prevent women from getting an abortion if they prefer a baby of another sex. Usually this leads to female babies being aborted. Its a case of the woman's right to access her own medical information versus society's right to prevent sex based abortion. Anyone have any thought? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprinkles Posted January 17, 2012 Report Share Posted January 17, 2012 I didn't actually read the article so I dont know if they address this but I have done past research on this in China. In China, with the one baby rule, most couples want a son to carry on the family name and for other cultural reasons etc etc There it is ILLEGAL for the doctor to inform the mother of the sex of the child until it comes to a point where termination of pregnancy would be of a very high risk However, in Canada, I dont think this would be a big deal, and thus I feel like the woman should have the right to know. I mean our culture (hopefully) isnt skewed towards one gender - at least not enough to justify abortions? The AVERAGE person would not abort in Canada based SOLELY on sex. If you want a son and have a daughter you will be momentarily disappointed but then you will have the baby and love it. Then you can try again for a son. I think its wrong that some Chinese abort because they have a daughter but at least in some twisted way I can 'understand'....they only get ONE chance to get this 'right' so they WANT a son. But in Canada you can have 1 kid or 10...so if someone is going to abort their child just because of gender...then they probably shouldn't be a parent....just sayinnnn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astrogirl Posted January 17, 2012 Report Share Posted January 17, 2012 Here's an interesting thing related to this idea. In Nova Scotia they already don't routinely tell you the sex of your baby when you have an ultrasound (http://older.kingsjournalism.com/nnn/nova_news_3588_14071.html), so people who really want to know just go to the 3-D ultrasound picture place in the mall and find out. So if the medical associations adopted a policy of not telling people, there would still be ways around it (unless the government actually passed a law against it). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RN-MD Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 Some couples would be interested in sex based termination of pregnancies others may want to know for reasons of sex linked genetic diseases- or for completely innocent reasons such as that natural nesting and bonding process that the mother goes through in a pregnancy. I think that if we deny couples the right to find out their child's sex that we are not only sending people to the private sector of health (paying for 3D ultrasounds/private ultrasound technicians) but we also in a way are communicating that we think the worst of them. One step in answering this question would be considering our own personal feelings about sex based termination, and like one of the poster's above trying to see the situation from all sides including a couple who desperately want to have a child of a specific sex and what background factors would lead to this decision for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
future_doc Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 I believe they should be told, we don't live in China or India. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Medward Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 Abortion is legal in Canada for any reason at all. A abortion can be had because a baby is inconvenient, because the parents dont feel like having a baby anymore, because mom is mad at dad for whatever reason and wants to get back at him by having an abortion, because the baby has downs syndrome. Why is the sex of a baby any worse of reason than the above. Are the above reasons not barbaric? What about discrimination against the disabled in the case of aborting a downs baby? IMO, the CMAJ editorial is rediculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmorelan Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 When would there ever be a good medical reason to tell someone the sex? On some level our medical system only provides for free medically relevant tests/procedures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
future_doc Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 Yes, this information is a byproduct of ultrasound done for other reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmorelan Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 Yes, this information is a byproduct of ultrasound done for other reasons. Sure it is a by product often (sometimes it isn't clear and people request another viewing). Still is it medically relevant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
future_doc Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/003778.htm Why the Test is Performed Some doctors order an ultrasound when they think there may be a problem with the pregnancy or if there is a question about how far along the pregnancy is. Others advocate screening ultrasounds. You should consult your health care provider to determine the most appropriate scanning schedule for you. A pregnancy ultrasound may be done in the first trimester to: •Confirm a normal pregnancy •Determine the baby's age •Look for problems, such as ectopic pregnancies or the chances for a miscarriage •Determine the baby's heart rate •Look for multiple pregnancies (twins, triplets, etc.) •Identify problems of the placenta, uterus, cervix, and ovaries A pregnancy ultrasound may also be done in the second and third trimesters to: •Determine the baby's age, growth, position, and sometimes gender •Identify any developmental problems •Look for multiple pregnancies (twins, triplets, etc.) •Look at the placenta, amniotic fluid, and pelvis Some centers are now performing a pregnancy ultrasound around 9 - 13 weeks of pregnancy to look for signs of Down syndrome or other developmental problems in the developing baby. This test is often combined with blood tests to improve the accuracy of results. The total number of scans will depend on whether a previous scan or blood test has detected problems that require follow-up testing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmorelan Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/003778.htm Why the Test is Performed Some doctors order an ultrasound when they think there may be a problem with the pregnancy or if there is a question about how far along the pregnancy is. Others advocate screening ultrasounds. You should consult your health care provider to determine the most appropriate scanning schedule for you. A pregnancy ultrasound may be done in the first trimester to: •Confirm a normal pregnancy •Determine the baby's age •Look for problems, such as ectopic pregnancies or the chances for a miscarriage •Determine the baby's heart rate •Look for multiple pregnancies (twins, triplets, etc.) •Identify problems of the placenta, uterus, cervix, and ovaries A pregnancy ultrasound may also be done in the second and third trimesters to: •Determine the baby's age, growth, position, and sometimes gender •Identify any developmental problems •Look for multiple pregnancies (twins, triplets, etc.) •Look at the placenta, amniotic fluid, and pelvis Some centers are now performing a pregnancy ultrasound around 9 - 13 weeks of pregnancy to look for signs of Down syndrome or other developmental problems in the developing baby. This test is often combined with blood tests to improve the accuracy of results. The total number of scans will depend on whether a previous scan or blood test has detected problems that require follow-up testing. hehehehe of course we cover all that but it doesn't answer the question - what medical reason is there for determining the sex? I am not saying don't do ultrasounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kylamonkey Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 OK- my family member just got an ultrasound done today. We weren't going crazy trying to figure out the sex or anything, but now we know, and we'll be able to plan a little better for the eventuality of who will share which bedroom with who and things like that. So to answer your question rmorelan- no medical reason but definitely practical ones for planning our lives. Aborting this child was never an option. I'm really honestly not sure how I feel about this issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
future_doc Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 hehehehe of course we cover all that but it doesn't answer the question - what medical reason is there for determining the sex? I am not saying don't do ultrasounds. There isn't any. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
titles Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 I believe they should be told, we don't live in China or India. Unfortunately some discriminatory practices like femicide have been imported into Canada. I think that's the purpose of the proposal. Limit its prevalence and also make a statement that it is incompatible with Canadian values. I'm skeptical whether it will be effective in tackling the problem and it will likely really annoy people. It's a big net to cast for a handful of minority groups that have been identified as a concern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
future_doc Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 Thank you for shedding light with this perspective I had not considered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Second Daniel Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 I believe there isn't anything wrong with knowing the sex of the child, but using that to justify an abortion is clearly wrong. Although we Canadians respect and welcome foreign cultures/traditions, the more heinous acts do not afford the same immunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tooty Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 Why is the sex of a baby any worse of reason than the above. Are the above reasons not barbaric? What about discrimination against the disabled in the case of aborting a downs baby? IMO, the CMAJ editorial is rediculous. you're comparing aborting a healthy female fetus to aborting a downs baby............................................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostintime Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 I don't think it's any worse to abort a healthy female fetus than a Down's baby to be honest. Why is it any better to want to abort a child with a genetic syndrome? What does this imply for people living with mental/physical disabilities? This kind of stuff makes me feel that society is kind of a hypocrite. There are many people with Down's syndrome who are not living a "normal life" but can perhaps still lead one to the best of their own personal capability with the right resources and support. Yet right now the laws/current practice makes it acceptable to abort a baby based on the fact they may have Down's syndrome. So why is that any better than aborting a baby because of gender? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
future_doc Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 When does human life begin:confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostintime Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 The other side of the argument is that if they don't want a baby with Down's syndrome, why don't they have it and then put it up for adoption? That's the typical argument that people against femicide often put out. In no way do I support femicide, but I just don't understand why it's so acceptable in society to abort babies with genetic disorders (that do REDUCE life expectancy but in no ways means it's a terminal illness etc.) yet make so many judgments about people who abort for other reasons (gender, family circumstances etc). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Hood Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 When does human life begin:confused: Abrahamic religions: after 120 days I think (when the soul in put in you). Atheists: When you get born (they don't believe in a soul). Others: I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellorie Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 Personally I'm agnostic, but generally speaking I believe that life begins at conception. HOWEVER, I also believe that forcing a woman to carry an unwanted child is no less wrong than having an abortion. Therefore every woman should decide for herself based on her personal situation what the lesser evil is. As to this situation, I think people are going to figure it out on their own if they want to know that badly. I don't think the proposed solution would really put much of a dent in the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmorelan Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 Abrahamic religions: after 120 days I think (when the soul in put in you).Atheists: When you get born (they don't believe in a soul). Others: I don't know. Even atheists argue that point - not all people that do not support abortion do so for religious reasons. Some say life begins when it can live independent of the mother (which in theory is before birth), others when significant neural development has occurred, others even at conception. Atheists are no less complex than people of religion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
future_doc Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 From http://www.actionlife.org/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=44 Criminal Code of Canada - Root of discrimination. It is incredible that as we enter the 21st century, the child in the womb still does not have the status of human being and is denied personhood. In spite of all the technological and scientific advances such as ultrasound and intrauterine photography giving a clear picture of life before birth, our legal system holds fast to the absurdity that the baby in the womb is not a human being. Section 223 of the Criminal code of Canada entitled 'When child becomes a human being" states: (1) A child becomes a human being within the meaning of this Act when it has completely proceeded, in a living state from the body of its mother whether or not (a) it has breathed ( it has an independent circulation © the navel string is severed. According to the criminal code, the baby becomes human only when it has fully emerged from its mother's body. Therefore, two months, two weeks, two seconds before birth, the preborn child is considered a non-human and receives no protection whatsoever under criminal law. While some abortion advocates do not deny the scientific evidence proving the humanity of the baby in the womb, they still cling to this piece of legal fiction to defend the right to abortion and maintain that abortion destroys the "products of conception" or a "potential person". Consequently, no one can be charged with homicide for committing an abortion when the victim is not considered human. In order to decriminalize abortion, it was necessary to have in place a state of legal affairs whereby abortion would be presented as not being a killing act or that there is no human being to be killed by the abortion procedure. This is where section 223 provided the convenient definition as to the moment when a child is recognized under the law as a human being. However, the reality still remains that abortion is indeed the killing of a human being. Canada needs a new definition of human being which will restore personhood to the unborn child for it is now this personhood upon which legal rights depend. The crux of the matter is that the child in the womb is not considered a separate legal entity because "person" in the legal sense means a human being with recognized legal rights. Some claim granting rights to the unborn child diminishes the rights of women. True equality however consists in giving the same right to life to all members of society. Canada is guilty of discrimination when it refuses to accord personhood and protection to the child in the womb. ................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprinkles Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 I believe there isn't anything wrong with knowing the sex of the child, but using that to justify an abortion is clearly wrong. Although we Canadians respect and welcome foreign cultures/traditions, the more heinous acts do not afford the same immunity. Obviously its wrong. But at same time, as another poster mentioned, isnt it 'wrong' to allow abortions because you want to get back at husband or something stupid. Many argue that abortion cause you aren't 'ready' for a child is 'wrong' - the whole debate for pro life pro choice! I think once we agree that abortions can happen in Canada then we can't justify whats 'right' or 'wrong' because everyone has their own definition of that I guess :/ So I really dont think 'not offering immunity' to something just because of a cultural background is stupid...racist even. Someone born and raised "Canadian" who chooses to have unprotected sex and then decides to have an abortion because they don't want a baby is somehow different and 'better' than someone who is from a different background and has an abortion because they are not happy with the gender of the child?!?!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.