Analysis Of Savulescu's Questions On Sex Selection

Question 1: What is Savulescu’s conclusion? Question 2: What are Savulescu’s premises?

Savulescu’s first premise- Sex Selection does not harm the child or the family.

Savulescu’s second premise- Sex Selection impacts society in a beneficial way.

Savulescu’s conclusion- Parents benefit from sex selection.

Question 3: What are the reasons that Savulescu gives for believing each of his premises?

One argument supporting premise 1 is built around Kant’s Dictum “never to use a person as a means, but to treat him or her as end”1. Many parents do in fact have desires related to their children that with sex selection could come to fruition, however using a child solely as an end seems unreasonable . Savulescu argues that if parents “love their child

Many parents do in fact have desires related to their children that with sex selection could come to fruition, however using a child solely as an end seems unreasonable . Savulescu argues that if parents “love their child as an end itself” that any other desires, such as a father wanting a male child because he loves boys that play sports, that sex selection could facilitate would do no harm since it is ok for some of the “means” of having a child to be fulfilled.

Savulescu also bring up the potential physiological risks associated with sex selection. Some evidence shows that sex selection can be damaging to the embryo however there is not sufficient research to support this claim1. Savulescu involves this claim in premise 1 stating that the risks associated with procedure should be scientifically investigated, as they do not interfere with the morality of sex selection as an end. If the procedure itself needs to be investigated it should according to Savulescu but the morality of having the procedure should not change because of

In other words, the existence of a social bias does not automatically hinder every choice pertaining to every single one of parties involved in the social bias1. Savulescu adds to that by claiming that allowing sex selection implies that one sex is superior to the other is in fact sexist. This is because by simplying choosing one thing over the other (in this case, sex) reflects preference, while by claiming the choice is discriminatory only reflects prior judgement brought into the decision. This therefore supports premise 2 because it separates sex selection’s benefit to society- which is the added benefit of being able to have a choice rather than chance concerning the sex of a new child, from the biases concerned with sex in society today. Savulescu adds that artificially disturbed sex ratios as seen in Asia have not been all that bad and some good has come from it such as “increase in influence from the rarer sex, reduced population growth, and interbreeding of different populations.”1.

Question 4: Is Savulescu’s argument sound? (Hint: There is more than one way of reconstructing Savulescu’s argument. Any charitable reconstruction will be