See RebouchéR., “Non-Invasive Testing, Non-Invasive Counseling,”Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics43, no. 2 (2015): 228–240.
2.
Id.
3.
Id.
4.
Id.
5.
Id.
6.
Id.
7.
Id.
8.
See AschA., “Disability Equality and Prenatal Testing: Contradictory or Compatible?”Florida State University Law Review30, no. 2 (2003): 315–342, at 339.
Id., at 249–50 (cited in Rebouché, supra note 1). Ironically, an article in Slate reports that U.S.-based parents making gender choices in conjunction with in vitro fertilization (IVF) and preimplantation genetic testing (PGD) overwhelming prefer females over males. SidhuJ., “How to Buy a Daughter: Choosing the Sex of Your Baby Has Become a Multimillion-Dollar Industry,”Slate, Sept, 14, 2012, available at <http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2012/09/sex_selection_in_babies_through_pgd_americans_are_paying_to_have_daughters_rather_than_sons_.html> (last visited April 21, 2015) (“Data from Google show that ‘how to have a girl’ is searched three times as often in the United States as ‘how to have a boy.’ Many fertility doctors say that girls are the goal for 80 percent of gender selection patients. A study published in 2009 by the online journal Reproductive Biomedicine Online found Caucasian-Americans preferentially select females through PGD 70 percent of the time.”).
11.
See, e.g., President's Council on Bioethics, Beyond Therapy: Biotechnology and the Pursuit of Human Improvement (2003).
12.
A genetic test is available that identifies one variant of the ACTN3 gene in humans, called R577X, which codes for a protein called -actinin-3 (http://www.atlasgene.com/) (last visited April 21, 2015). Individuals with this genetic variation tend to have an abundance of slow-twitch muscles, which are associated with activities such as long-distance running that require endurance, while individuals who do not have this variant of the ACTN3 gene have more fast-twitch muscles, which are associated with activities requiring shorter bursts of energy such as sprinting and weightlifting. 23andMe, an online, direct-to-consumer genetic testing company, offered tests for non-disease characteristics such as intelligence and longevity, but the validity of the tests was not established and the FDA ordered the company to cease sales. FDA Warning Letter to 23andMe, November 22, 2013, available at <http://www.fda.gov/iceci/enforcementactions/warningletters/2013/ucm376296.htm> (last visited April 21, 2015).
13.
“No person shall knowingly … (e) for the purpose of creating a human being, perform any procedure or provide, prescribe or administer anything that would ensure or increase the probability that an embryo will be of a particular sex, or that would identify the sex of an in vitro embryo, except to prevent, diagnose or treat a sex-linked disorder or disease.” S.C. 2004, c. 2, § (5)(1)(e)(2012) (cited in Rebouché draft).
14.
See Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, under Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act of 2008, available at <www.hfea.gov.uk> (last visited April 21, 2015).
15.
One company purports to use DNA testing to select dates based on the smell associated with their immune systems. See SingerN., “Better Loving through Chemistry,”New York Times, February 6, 2010, available at <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/07/business/07stream.html?_r=09accessed> (last visited April 21, 2015).
16.
See MehlmanM. J., Transhumanist Dreams and Dystopian Nightmares: Genetic Engineering and the Future of Human Evolution (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2012): At 155–208.
17.
State courts have upheld laws that criminalize drug use during pregnancy, but the U.S. Supreme Court has struck down blanket drug testing of obstetric patients. See FoxD., “Interest Creep,”George Washington Law Review82, no. 2 (2014): 273–357, at 322 (discussing the government's interest in protecting children from pre-birth or pre-conception harm). See also CohenI. G., “Beyond Best Interests,”Minnesota Law Review96, no. 4 (2012): 1187–1274. As Cohen and others have pointed out, Parfitt's Non-Identity Problem makes it difficult to justify government regulation of reproductive decisions that would prevent the birth of specific children.
18.
See note supra 10.
19.
MillerD.SummersJ.SilberS., “Environmental Versus Genetic Sex Determination: A Possible Factor in Dinosaur Extinction?”Fertility and Sterility81, no. 4 (2004): 954–964, at 962.
