Print
See related documents
Committee Opinion | Doc. 12727 | 27 September 2011
Prenatal sex selection
(Former) Social, Health and Family Affairs Committee
A. Conclusions of the committee
(open)The committee welcomes the very comprehensive report by Ms Doris Stump on behalf of the Committee on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men, which deals with the sensitive issue of prenatal sex selection in a balanced way.
The committee fully supports the draft resolution and the draft recommendation. It would, however, like to propose some amendments with a view to ensuring that the harmful consequences of prenatal sex selection – rooted in persisting inequality between women and men in our societies – are made clear to all.
B. Proposed amendments to the draft resolution
(open)Amendment A (to the draft resolution)
In the draft resolution, replace paragraph 8.6 with the following sub-paragraph:
“recommend that all relevant public authorities issue guidelines to all medical staff who work in this field so that when information is provided on the sex of the foetus – in line with existing legal regulations – such information is presented positively, irrespective of the sex of the foetus;".
Amendment B (to the draft resolution)
In the draft resolution, paragraph 9.4, before the word “consequences”, insert the word “harmful”.
Amendment C (to the draft resolution)
In the draft resolution, paragraph 9.5, replace the words “on prenatal sex selection for medical staff”, with the following words:
“for medical staff on prenatal sex selection and its harmful consequences”.
Amendment D (to the draft resolution)
In the draft resolution, paragraph 10, before the words “prenatal sex selection”, insert the word “combating”.
C. Explanatory memorandum by Mr Xuclà i Costa, rapporteur for opinion
(open)1. The issue of prenatal sex selection is a very sensitive
one, at the crossroads of technology, ethics and rights. The rapporteur
of the Committee on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men, Ms Doris
Stump, has managed to deal with this issue in a balanced way, focusing
on the facts, which are harrowing: globally, hundreds of millions
of women and girls are “missing” – victims of prenatal sex selection,
neglect, lack of equal access to healthcare or food, abandonment,
or even “feminicide” (the killing of women and girls because of their
sex). The rapporteur has shown that prenatal sex selection seems
to be taking place even in some Council of Europe member states,
in particular in the case of higher birth order children.
2. Can prenatal sex selection ever be justified? In accordance
with the Council of Europe Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine
(“Oviedo Convention”, CETS No. 164), to which a majority of member
states are party, “the use of techniques of medically assisted procreation
shall not be allowed for the purpose of choosing a future child’s
sex except where serious hereditary sex-related disease is to be
avoided” (Article 14). The logical extension of this provision,
in my view, is that all techniques of prenatal sex selection (be
they techniques of medically assisted procreation, abortion, or
other techniques – including those still to be developed) must not
be allowed except where serious hereditary sex-related disease is
to be avoided.
3. With this – narrow – exception, there is thus no justification
for prenatal sex selection, be it as natural as a desire for “family
balancing” or as odious as son preference rooted in gender inequality.
The question is thus how best to combat prenatal sex selection,
which is taking place on an ever-increasing scale in certain parts of
the world, and is finding its way into some Council of Europe member
and observer states.
4. While, in theory, prenatal sex selection can also be used
to prevent boys from being born (as is sometimes the case with serious
hereditary diseases transmitted on the Y-chromosome), in reality,
the overwhelming use of prenatal sex selection is to prevent girls
from being born. As in the case of domestic violence (where, again,
men can also be victims, but the overwhelming majority of victims
are women), it is thus necessary to focus on the primary reason
for prenatal sex selection, which is gender inequality – as Ms Stump has
clearly pointed out in her report.
5. All Council of Europe member and observer states who have
not yet done so should be encouraged to sign and ratify the Convention
on Human Rights and Biomedicine, and those that have done so should
be encouraged to ensure that its provisions on prenatal sex selection
are fully implemented. Piecemeal measures – such as withholding
information about the sex of the foetus during scans in public hospitals
and medical structures – are unlikely to succeed, as a private scan
is all too easily arranged. It may, however, be useful to recommend
that relevant public authorities issue guidelines to medical staff
so that when information is provided on the sex of the foetus –
in line with existing legal regulations – such information is presented positively,
irrespective of the sex of the foetus.
6. In any case, the main focus of the recommendations must be
on combating gender inequality, and raising respect for women and
girls in society. This is a cultural paradigm shift which the Council
of Europe has been fighting for decades, with impressive results
in Europe despite the global backlash against women’s rights. The
Council of Europe and its Parliamentary Assembly must continue this
fight as a priority, even in times of budgetary restrictions.
7. In more concrete terms, women must be empowered to withstand
cultural and societal pressures to “produce a son”. The more educated
women are, the more they have access to their rights (including
full inheritance rights, the possibility of transmitting their name
and nationality to their children, and keeping their name and nationality
also after marriage), the more archaic cultural practices which
violate women’s rights (such as the dowry system, forced and child
marriage, etc.) are eliminated, the higher the chances are that women
will be able to withstand the pressures and equally proudly bear
girls or boys. And that is in the interest of all.