|
OwlFancier posted:Assuming it has no side effects, that decision would be entirely non-moral, as in the choice would not require a moral decision, both male and female children are valid so the only deciding factor would be personal preference. Hm http://www.cmaj.ca/content/183/12/1374.short-ref= quote:A consistent pattern in all three countries is the marked trend related to birth order and the influence of the sex of the preceding child. If the first child is a girl, couples will often use sex-selective abortion to ensure a boy in the second pregnancy, especially in areas where low fertility is the norm. A large study in India showed that for second births with one preceding girl the SRB is 132, and for third births with two previous girls it is 139, whereas sex ratios are normal where the previous child was a boy.6 In China this effect is even more dramatic, especially in areas where the rural population are allowed a second child only after the birth of a girl, as is the case in some central provinces. The SRB across the country for first-order births is 108, for second-order births it is 143 and for the (albeit rare) third-order births it is 157.5 SRB being the sex ratio at birth, in this case the number of boys per 100 girls. Point being when you say "personal preference" you mean "societal preference" which starts being a well maybe it's not so ok to gently caress with this sort of thing just because you feel like it, at the very least because of the possibility of unforeseen consequences, especially if there's no direct benefit.
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2014 02:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 03:54 |
|