Preimplantation Sex Selection Demand and Preferences Among Infertility Patients in Midwestern United States

Overview

Journal J Assist Reprod Genet

Publisher Springer

Specialties Genetics
Reproductive Medicine

Date 2007 Aug 25

PMID 17717738

Citations 8

Authors

Stacey A Missmer

Tarun Jain

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: To determine the demand and preferences of infertility patients for sex selection for nonmedical reasons, and to investigate the relation between these choices and their demographic and socioeconomic characteristics.

Methods: A cross-sectional, self-administered survey by mail was conducted at a University hospital-based fertility center of 1,350 consecutive women who presented for infertility care, to assess patient demand and preferences for sex selection.

Results: Of respondents, 49% wanted to select the sex of their next child for no added cost. Of these patients, 56% had no living children and 37% had children all of one sex. After adjustment for observed predictors of gender preference, we found a significant preference for a female child among women who had only sons, had more living children, or were single. Nulliparous women did not significantly prefer one sex over the other. Among parous women, those with only daughters significantly desired to select a male child, whereas those with sons significantly desired to select a female child.

Conclusion: There is significant demand among infertility patients for preimplantation sex selection, with a significant portion of this demand coming from patients who do not have any children or have children all of one sex.

Citing Articles

Son Preference among Infertile Couples at the Fertility Clinic of Two Tertiary Hospitals in Enugu, Nigeria.

Nnagbo J, Ugwu G, Eze M, Agu P, Nnagbo C, Ezugworie J Ann Afr Med. 2024; 23(3):474-481.

PMID: 39034575 PMC: 11364343. DOI: 10.4103/aam.aam_173_23.

Best quality vs. sex selection - an analysis of embryo selection preferences for patients undergoing preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy over a 10-year period.

Gill P, Whitehead C, Werner M, Seli E J Assist Reprod Genet. 2024; 41(8):2211-2216.

PMID: 38914899 PMC: 11339188. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-024-03162-1.

Mapping ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT).

Alon I, Bussod I, Ravitsky V J Assist Reprod Genet. 2024; 41(5):1153-1171.

PMID: 38512655 PMC: 11143109. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-024-03076-y.

Perceptions towards sex selection among Jordanian population: A survey study.

Banihani S, Alzoubi K, Shawaqfeh M, Vasudevan S Andrologia. 2022; 54(9):e14501.

PMID: 35725245 PMC: 9444869. DOI: 10.1111/and.14501.

Disparities among infertility patients regarding genetic carrier screening, sex selection, and gene editing.

McQueen D, Warren C, Xiao A, Shulman L, Jain T J Assist Reprod Genet. 2021; 38(9):2319-2325.

PMID: 34169402 PMC: 8490579. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-021-02261-7.

References

Benagiano G, Bianchi P . Sex preselection: an aid to couples or a threat to humanity?. Hum Reprod. 1999; 14(4):868-70. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/14.4.868. View

Fugger E, BLACK S, Keyvanfar K, Schulman J . Births of normal daughters after MicroSort sperm separation and intrauterine insemination, in-vitro fertilization, or intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod. 1998; 13(9):2367-70. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/13.9.2367. View

Schenker J . Assisted reproductive practice: religious perspectives. Reprod Biomed Online. 2005; 10(3):310-9. DOI: 10.1016/s1472-6483(10)61789-0. View

Dahl E, Gupta R, Beutel M, Stoebel-Richter Y, Brosig B, Tinneberg H . Preconception sex selection demand and preferences in the United States. Fertil Steril. 2006; 85(2):468-73. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.07.1320. View

. Preconception gender selection for nonmedical reasons. Fertil Steril. 2001; 75(5):861-4. DOI: 10.1016/s0015-0282(01)01756-3. View

. ESHRE Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis Consortium: data collection III (May 2001). Hum Reprod. 2002; 17(1):233-46. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/17.1.233. View

Plafker T . Sex selection in China sees 117 boys born for every 100 girls. BMJ. 2002; 324(7348):1233. PMC: 1123206. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.324.7348.1233/a. View

Robertson J . Sex selection for gender variety by preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Fertil Steril. 2002; 78(3):463. DOI: 10.1016/s0015-0282(02)03277-6. View

Schenker J . Gender selection: cultural and religious perspectives. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2002; 19(9):400-10. PMC: 3455544. DOI: 10.1023/a:1016807605886. View

10.

Allahbadia G . The 50 million missing women. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2002; 19(9):411-6. PMC: 3455548. DOI: 10.1023/a:1016859622724. View

11.

Wade N . Bush's advisers on biotechnology express concern on its use. N Y Times Web. 2003; :A18. View

12.

Sen A . Missing women--revisited. BMJ. 2003; 327(7427):1297-8. PMC: 286281. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.327.7427.1297. View

13.

Kalb C . Brave new babies. Newsweek. 2004; 143(4):44-52. View

14.

Handyside A, Pattinson J, Penketh R, Delhanty J, Winston R, Tuddenham E . Biopsy of human preimplantation embryos and sexing by DNA amplification. Lancet. 1989; 1(8634):347-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(89)91723-6. View

15.

Greenland S . Modeling and variable selection in epidemiologic analysis. Am J Public Health. 1989; 79(3):340-9. PMC: 1349563. DOI: 10.2105/ajph.79.3.340. View

16.

Handyside A, Kontogianni E, Hardy K, Winston R . Pregnancies from biopsied human preimplantation embryos sexed by Y-specific DNA amplification. Nature. 1990; 344(6268):768-70. DOI: 10.1038/344768a0. View

17.

Johnson L, Welch G, Keyvanfar K, Dorfmann A, Fugger E, Schulman J . Gender preselection in humans? Flow cytometric separation of X and Y spermatozoa for the prevention of X-linked diseases. Hum Reprod. 1993; 8(10):1733-9. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a137925. View

18.

Soussis I, Harper J, Handyside A, Winston R . Obstetric outcome of pregnancies resulting from embryos biopsied for pre-implantation diagnosis of inherited disease. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1996; 103(8):784-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1996.tb09874.x. View

19.

Vidal F, Fugger E, Blanco J, Keyvanfar K, Catala V, Norton M . Efficiency of MicroSort flow cytometry for producing sperm populations enriched in X- or Y-chromosome haplotypes: a blind trial assessed by double and triple colour fluorescent in-situ hybridization. Hum Reprod. 1998; 13(2):308-12. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/13.2.308. View

20.

Jain T, Missmer S, Gupta R, D Hornstein M . Preimplantation sex selection demand and preferences in an infertility population. Fertil Steril. 2005; 83(3):649-58. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.11.023. View