+ Reply to Thread
Page 30 of 34 FirstFirst ... 202829303132 ... LastLast
Results 291 to 300 of 339
  1. #291
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    782
    Thanks
    219
    Thanked
    534
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Little Boys Blue View Post
    I'm not a very regular poster but just wanted to reply to this particular point with my experience.

    I have 3 sons and have considered high tech GS. As part of my research I joined a forum dedicated to GS for women all around the world. 99% of the women on that forum are only considering or actually doing high tech GS after already having at least one of the other sex. I would say that on average most of the women had about 3 of one sex. I know it's only anecdotal evidence at best, but I would be very surprised if we ended up with a big imbalance in the future.
    EXACTLY. 99.9% of the time gender selection is for family balancing purposes. So these families already have 2,3,4,5+ of the same gender. What on earth is wrong with letting these people have one of the opposite sex?? I just don't get it.

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GingerKat For This Useful Post:

    kylie764  (24-05-2016),Little Boys Blue  (24-05-2016)

  3. #292
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    1,351
    Thanks
    558
    Thanked
    728
    Reviews
    5
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Sally1981 View Post
    None of the three examples you used are good examples. When I said it 'sounds like a real disorder', I was referring to Ginger Kat's post where she described what it was like living with GD. Before I read that I didn't think it was a real problem to be honest. That changed my view.

    From memory, @VicPark's comment came soon after that too.

    This was an ongoing discussion that you weren't a part of at the time. You've cherry picked posts to prove your point, and left out the post that your chosen posts were based on.

    As you admitted, no one actually said what you think they said, particularly the three people you targeted.
    Apparently I'm not the only one with someone targeted - jeez louise.

    I'm not "admitting" to anything - there was a post which implied this early on. I wasn't the only person who inferred this from the posts; a few people said they were offended as well. If I cared to continue this debate I'd go back and find it. But I don't.

    If there was an emoticon with a white flag I'd insert it here.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to ilex For This Useful Post:

    kylie764  (24-05-2016)

  5. #293
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Neverland
    Posts
    793
    Thanks
    270
    Thanked
    106
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by GingerKat View Post
    EXACTLY. 99.9% of the time gender selection is for family balancing purposes. So these families already have 2,3,4,5+ of the same gender. What on earth is wrong with letting these people have one of the opposite sex?? I just don't get it.
    Wish I could like this more than once!

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Little Boys Blue For This Useful Post:

    ilex  (24-05-2016),kylie764  (24-05-2016)

  7. #294
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    208
    Thanks
    361
    Thanked
    134
    Reviews
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by DT75 View Post
    I find this really insulting.

    My mother and I are extremely close. My aunts and I are like sisters (them being aged 8-16 when I was born).

    I have only ever wanted a little boy (once I accepted the notion of having kids).

    I have a baby girl I adore and do not regret, but I still want a boy.
    Why would you be insulted by that? I was concerned about people who don't want daughters and only want sons. I want a boy too. But like you, I adore my daughter and would be happy with another daughter?

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Ashling For This Useful Post:

    yadot  (24-05-2016)

  9. #295
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,521
    Thanks
    1,318
    Thanked
    1,574
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by GingerKat View Post
    Is binning an embryo because of gender any different (or worse) than a woman who bins a healthy foetus through abortion? We are now getting into the territory of "when is life life?" and in my opinion they are cells in a petrie dish. Yes they have the potential to be a baby, but not until they are inside my body. I can understand why people don't agree with gender selection, but if it's because of discarding embryo's then essentially you must find normal ivf confronting too - because regardless of the reason they are still being binned.
    Plenty of poor quality embryos get discarded. Shock horror, and I know people will probably think I'm awful (which I totally understand if they struggle to get any embies), but I 'turfed' over a dozen embryos due to poor quality and a fresh cycle costing less than freezing and FET.

    **Eta-I would much rather an embryo be discarded due to gender than a 20w fetus. Assuming one hasn't used PGD or NIPT due to financial constraints. But, then, how are they to afford GS to prevent termination of a healthy baby........?**

    I think most people are against it when it is on the basis of gender alone because it seems so superficial.
    Last edited by Ngaiz; 24-05-2016 at 19:41.

  10. #296
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    935
    Thanks
    303
    Thanked
    210
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    I think you get what you're given and tough luck, appreciate it. I think PGD should be left alone unless for medical reasons. My DD's might need to use it oneday as a medical reason arises, if I'd have known I'd have needed to use it I would have also. I don't like it being rubbished sort of thing and feel quite strongly it should and only be used for medical reasons, it's there for that purpose and that purpose only in my opinion.

  11. #297
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    1,697
    Thanks
    3,522
    Thanked
    977
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by J37 View Post
    That is exactly what you would be doing. CHOOSING which healthy child will potentially have a life, based on their sex organs.

    Sent from my SM-N910G using The Bub Hub mobile app
    We IVFers already do that - pick the strongest, best grade embryo to put back...

    Allowing GS just adds one more criteria to base that choice on.
    Last edited by KitiK; 24-05-2016 at 21:09.

  12. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to KitiK For This Useful Post:

    BettyW  (25-05-2016),ilex  (24-05-2016),kylie764  (24-05-2016),Ngaiz  (24-05-2016)

  13. #298
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    419
    Thanks
    471
    Thanked
    293
    Reviews
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by VicPark View Post
    Please tell me people don't really do that ...
    I know someone who was planning on having a termination if her third child wasn't the gender she wanted according to the harmony test (first two the same gender). Turned out she got the result she wanted and kept the baby... I honestly don't understand how anyone could think that way, yep I am pro-choice but to terminate a baby based solely on their gender who you would otherwise welcome into your family, be s sibling for your first two etc I can't get my head around.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Adoralicious For This Useful Post:

    cheeeeesecake  (24-05-2016)

  15. #299
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    2,907
    Thanks
    1,875
    Thanked
    1,469
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by Ashling View Post
    Why would you be insulted by that? I was concerned about people who don't want daughters and only want sons. I want a boy too. But like you, I adore my daughter and would be happy with another daughter?
    You don't think it's an insult to say that women who only want sons have not had healthy female relationships.

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to DT75 For This Useful Post:

    KitiK  (24-05-2016)

  17. #300
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,452
    Thanks
    819
    Thanked
    1,891
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by GingerKat View Post
    EXACTLY. 99.9% of the time gender selection is for family balancing purposes. So these families already have 2,3,4,5+ of the same gender. What on earth is wrong with letting these people have one of the opposite sex?? I just don't get it.
    Where did you get that statistic from? It seems like you are just making an assumption about '99.9%" of the families who would choose to select their child's gender. Either way, it still changes the balance of male-female that nature makes sure is equal.
    I am thinking more long-term. Technology that is not used now, will become used in a limited way. Then it will become more main******. Pretty soon, it is more likely than not that people are utilising the technology to design the family they choose. There is a gender imbalance in China simply due to the one child policy, and people aborting girl babies, or killing them after they have been born. Our generation should understand better than anyone how quickly new technologies go from being used by the minority to the majority. And who will be excluded from using this technology? You say someone with 2 boys should be allowed to select to have a girl. But what about someone who only wants one child - and wants that child to be a girl? Why should that person be excluded from selecting gender just because they want fewer children? It's easy to say 'oh we will take away the right to use the technology once things start going bad' - but once something is out there, it's really difficult to then take it away. Take smoking, for example. We KNOW it is bad. We've known for a long time. But once we are given the right to smoke, it is very difficult to take that right away. I think it is a very slippery slope, and we need to be so careful. It is so much bigger than 'I want a girl/boy baby'. The potential effects are huge.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to cheeeeesecake For This Useful Post:

    Wiccan  (30-05-2016)


 

Similar Threads

  1. Gender selection in US
    By RoosterD in forum Conception & Fertility General Chat
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: 21-05-2016, 13:58
  2. PGD Gender Selection
    By Liana2B in forum Conception issues & ttc
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 13-12-2015, 17:53
  3. Questions re gender selection via IVF
    By BettyW in forum IVF
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 22-11-2015, 22:32

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
free weekly newsletters | sign up now!
who are these people who write great posts? meet our hubbub authors!
Learn how you can contribute to the hubbub!

reviews
learn how you can become a reviewer!

competitions

forum - chatting now
sales & new stuffsee all
Be In Blossom
Keen to up the intensity of your exercise after having your baby but unsure how? New physio-led Bootcamp Workshops aim to bridge the gap between low and high intensity training, teaching ways to reduce pelvic floor load in gym and bootcamp settings.
featured supporter
Life Fertility
Life Fertility Clinic is a boutique fertility clinic located in Spring Hill, Brisbane. Our dedicated fertility and IVF specialists offer professional, holistic, personalised options for the treatment of each patient’s specific needs.
gotcha
X

Pregnant for the first-time?

Not sure where to start? We can help!

Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!