Sex-selective abortion
Sex-selective abortion is the practice of terminating a pregnancy based upon the predicted sex of the infant. The selective abortion of female fetuses is most common where male children are valued over female children, especially in parts of East Asia and South Asia (particularly in countries such as People's Republic of China, India and Pakistan), as well as in the Caucasus, Western Balkans, and to a lesser extent North America.[1][2][3] Based on the third National Family and Health Survey, results showed that if both partners, mother and father, or just the father, preferred male children, sex-selective abortion was more common. In cases where only the mother prefers sons, this is likely to result in sex-selective neglect in which the child is not likely to survive past infancy.[4]
Sex-selective abortion was first documented in 1975,[5] and became commonplace by the late 1980s in South Korea and China and around the same time or slightly later in India.
Sex-selective abortion affects the human sex ratio—the relative number of males to females in a given age group,[6][7] with China and India, the two most populous countries of the world, having unbalanced gender ratios. Studies and reports focusing on sex-selective abortion are predominantly statistical; they assume that birth-sex ratio—the overall ratio of boys and girls at birth—for a regional population is an indicator of sex-selective abortion. This assumption has been questioned by some scholars.[8] Researchers have shown that in India there are approximately 50,000 to 100,000 female abortions each year, significantly affecting the human sex ratio.[9]
Recent studies have expanded the understanding of this issue by quantifying trends in conditional sex ratios (CSRs) among Asian diaspora populations in Australia, Canada, the UK, and the US, showing that sex selection practices have persisted among diaspora communities from 1999 to 2019.[10] Research into the past four decades of sex-selective abortions in China highlights the significant role these practices have played in shaping the country's demographic profile, despite challenges in estimating exact numbers due to underreporting and the controversial level of sex ratio at birth (SRB).[11]
According to demographic scholarship, the expected birth-sex ratio range is 103 to 107 males to 100 females at birth.[12][13][14]
Africa and the Middle East[edit]
Sex selective abortion based on son preference is significant in North Africa and the Middle East.[60][61][39]
Americas[edit]
United States[edit]
As in other countries, sex-selective abortion is difficult to track in the United States because of lack of data.
While the vast majority of parents in the United States do not practice sex-selective abortion, there is certainly a trend toward male preference. According to a 2011 Gallup poll, if they were only allowed to have one child, 40% of respondents said they would prefer a boy, while only 28% preferred a girl.[118] When told about prenatal-sex selection techniques such as sperm sorting and in-vitro-fertilization embryo selection, 40% of Americans surveyed thought that picking embryos by sex was an acceptable manifestation of reproductive rights.[119] These selection techniques are available at about half of American fertility clinics, as of 2006.[120] However, other studies show a larger preference for females. According to the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, 80% of American couples who wanted to get gender selection wanted girls over boys.[121]
However, it is notable that minority groups that immigrate into the United States bring their cultural views and mindsets into the country with them. A study carried out at a Massachusetts infertility clinic shows that the majority of couples using these techniques, such as Preimplantation genetic diagnosis came from a Chinese or Asian background. This is thought to branch from the social importance of giving birth to male children in China and other Asian countries.[122]
A study of the 2000 United States Census suggests possible male bias in families of Chinese, Korean and Indian immigrants, which was getting increasingly stronger in families where the first one or two children were female. In those families where the first two children were girls, the birth-sex ratio of the third child was 1.51:1.[123]
Because of this movement toward sex preference and selection, many bans on sex-selective abortion have been proposed at the state and federal level. In 2010 and 2011, sex-selective abortions were banned in Oklahoma and Arizona, respectively. Legislators in Georgia, West Virginia, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, and New York have also tried to pass acts banning the procedure.[119]
Other countries[edit]
A 2013 study[114] by John Bongaarts based on surveys in 61 major countries calculates the sex ratios that would result if parents had the number of sons and daughters they want. In 35 countries, claims Bongaarts, the desired birth sex ratio in respective countries would be more than 110 boys for every 100 girls if parents in these countries had a child matching their preferred gender (higher than India's, which The Economist claims is 108).[52]
Disparate gendered access to resources[edit]
Although there is significant evidence of the prevalence of sex-selective abortions in many nations (especially India and China), there is also evidence to suggest that some of the variation in global sex ratios is due to disparate access to resources. As MacPherson (2007) notes, there can be significant differences in gender violence and access to food, healthcare, immunizations between male and female children. This leads to high infant and childhood mortality among girls, which causes changes in sex ratio.[99]
Disparate, gendered access to resources appears to be strongly linked to socioeconomic status. Specifically, poorer families are sometimes forced to ration food, with daughters typically receiving less priority than sons.[18] However, Klasen's 2001 study revealed that this practice is less common in the poorest families, but rises dramatically in the slightly less poor families.[18] Klasen and Wink's 2003 study suggests that this is "related to greater female economic independence and fewer cultural strictures among the poorest sections of the population". In other words, the poorest families are typically less bound by cultural expectations and norms, and women tend to have more freedom to become family breadwinners out of necessity.[18]
Increased sex ratios can be caused by disparities in aspects of life other than vital resources. According to Sen (1990), differences in wages and job advancement also have a dramatic effect on sex ratios. This is why high sex ratios are sometimes seen in nations with little sex-selective abortion.[19] Additionally, high female education rates are correlated with lower sex ratios (World Bank 2011).[126]
Lopez and Ruzikah (1983) found that, when given the same resources, women tend to outlive men at all stages of life after infancy. However, globally, resources are not always allocated equitably. Thus, some scholars argue that disparities in access to resources such as healthcare, education, and nutrition play at least a small role in the high sex ratios seen in some parts of the world.[18] For example, Alderman and Gerter (1997) found that unequal access to healthcare is a primary cause of female death in developing nations, especially in Southeast Asia. Moreover, in India, lack of equal access to healthcare has led to increased disease and higher rates of female mortality in every age group until the late thirties (Sen 1990). This is particularly noteworthy because, in regions of the world where women receive equal resources, women tend to outlive men (Sen 1990). Women outlive men in all but 2 countries.[127]
Economic disadvantage alone may not always lead to increased sex ratio, claimed Sen in 1990. For example, in sub-Saharan Africa, one of the most economically disadvantaged regions of the world, there is an excess of women. So, if economic disadvantage is uncorrelated with sex ratio in Africa, some other factor(s) may be at play.[19] More detailed analysis of African demographics, in 2002, suggests that Africa too has wide variation in birth sex ratios (from 1.01 in Bantu populations of East Africa to 1.08 in Nigeria and Ethiopia).[36] Thus economic disadvantage remains a possible unresolved hypothesis for Africa as well.
Sex-selective abortion in the context of abortion[edit]
MacPherson estimates that 100,000 sex-selective abortions every year continue to be performed in India.[99] For a contrasting perspective, in the United States with a population 1⁄4th of India, over 1.2 million abortions every year were performed between 1990 and 2007.[165] In England and Wales with a population 1⁄20th of India, over 189,000 abortions were performed in 2011, or a yearly rate of 17.5 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–44.[166] The average for the European Union was 30 abortions per year per 1,000 women.[167]
Many scholars have noted the difficulty in reconciling the discriminatory nature of sex-selective abortion with the right of women to have control over their own bodies. This conflict manifests itself primarily when discussing laws about sex-selective abortion. Weiss (1995:205) writes: "The most obvious challenge sex-selective abortion represents for pro-choice feminists is the difficulty of reconciling a pro-choice position with moral objections one might have to sex selective abortion (especially since it has been used primarily on female fetuses), much less the advocacy of a law banning sex-selective abortion."[168]
As a result, arguments both for and against sex-selective abortion are typically highly reflective of one's own personal beliefs about abortion in general. Warren (1985:104) argues that there is a difference between acting within one's rights and acting upon the most morally sound choice, implying that sex-selective abortion might be within rights but not morally sound. Warren also notes that, if we are to ever reverse the trend of sex-selective abortion and high sex ratios, we must work to change the patriarchy-based society which breeds the strong son preference.[169]
Laws against sex-selective abortion, especially those that exist in some U.S. states, are controversial, because it is not clear how they can be enforced, and pro-choice activists argue that such laws are brought by anti-abortion movement forces who are using this as a pretext to restrict women's access to safe and legal abortion and to harass doctors who perform abortions: NARAL states that "For many years, anti-choice lawmakers have tried to ban abortion using every possible reason and excuse –including, now, on the grounds of purported concern about race or sex selection."[170] There is concern that such bans may put women who seek sex-selective abortions in danger because they may seek unsafe abortions, and that these bans do not address the root cause of sex-selective abortion, including the pregnant women's fear that they or their future daughters will suffer abuse, violence and stigmatization.[159]