Letter: Gender selection may be inhuman
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Today's leading article arguing against state regulation of gender selection clinics pulls an old trick - but none the less unconvincing for that. To argue that having gender selection clinics is better than having foetuses aborted abroad, or infanticide, and so should be allowed is to bypass the main question, which is the propriety of gender selection itself.
What our society is saying, if it allows gender selection for non-theraputic reasons, is that babies are a commodity, to be purchased at will like any other consumer durable, and to be rejected if they do not give satisfaction. Given that this attitude is, simply, inhuman, our society should not sanction it. The question of what further unacceptable behaviour will be indulged in by people who want to get round this ban is irrelevant.
Yours faithfully,
T. CHAPPELL
Merton College
Oxford
16 March
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments