Queering the Odds: The Case Against “Family Balancing”

Abstract

In this paper, I investigate the ethical aspects of sex selection for “family balancing.” Advocates of the practice make two claims: first, that it is ethically permissible because it creates gender diversity and entails no harm from sexism; and, second, that it benefits families, as gender diversity offers richer experiences. I test these claims through an empirical study with Australian sex selectors. I argue that the claims are flawed because they are grounded in a narrow understanding of sexism that disregards gender essentialism. As family balancing is based on the selection of children to fit preconceived binary gender roles, it denies diversity and reinforces sexism.