Non-medical sex selection: why reproductive autonomy matters. Perspectives and models from ethics and law.

Recent advances in biomedical technologies have made it possible to implement reproductive choices that were largely unavailable in the past. Many of these technologies, such as preimplantation genetic diagnosis, in vitro fertilization and non-invasive prenatal tests, have been successfully integrated into healthcare systems and play an essential role in preventing or treating numerous diseases. Widespread use of these technologies, nevertheless, has led to various ethical, social and legal issues, among which stands the non-medical sex selection. This work focuses on discussing issues related to non-medical sex selection from the reproductive autonomy rationale. It seeks to illustrate how the concept of autonomy functions in bioethical and legal discourses. The thesis encompasses normative ethical analysis of main bioethics theories in an attempt to argue against a common perception that reproductive autonomy rationale supports women’s choice to select the sex of her children. Additionally, the work provides a comparative study of the three main regulatory models of sex selection. Results of the analysis underscore the existence of regulatory gaps in some models and lack of regulatory clarity in others. The findings of the thesis suggest a ‘right’ policy regulation on non-medical sex selection that also includes considerations of outcomes of ethical debates on reproductive autonomy and the harm principle.