Sex-Selection Abortion Used in US, Already Skewing Gender Ratio

National   Steven Ertelt   Apr 6, 2012   |   10:53AM    Washington, DC

Most people have read with concern about people using ultrasound in China and India to selectively abort females, but more evidence is cropping up to show the practice of sex-selection abortion is now coming to the United States.

The website AuntMinnie.com reports on research by G. Sharat Lin, PhD about the association between birth-gender ratios (BGR) and access to 4D “keepsake” ultrasound facilities. Lin found that Asian ethnic groups in Santa Clara County, California who were known to have a traditional gender preference for boys had clearly lower female-to-male birth ratios than those Asian ethnic groups who did not have a preference.

“Mothers born in China, India, and Vietnam [have female-to-male birth ratios] that are well below normal, and those from Pakistan are much closer to normal,” Lin toldAuntMinnie.com. “Breaking it down by ethnic group is showing us that this is not simply noise or some kind of a random fluctuation. These are showing up where we expect them, in the ethnic groups where there is a cultural preference for boys.”

Elsewhere in California, however, counties that have continuing proliferation of keepsake ultrasound centers experienced alarmingly low birth-gender ratios among Asians in 2010, Lin said.

Low birth-gender ratios among Asians in urban counties in 2010 were as follows:

    • Sacramento: 888
    • Los Angeles: 889
    • San Francisco: 919
    • Riverside: 919
    • San Joaquin: 927

“While we still don’t have a direct proof of cause and effect, we see a correlation that in counties like San Joaquin County and Sacramento County, [there’s] a downward trend in BGRs, and at the same time, continued proliferation of these keepsake ultrasound centers,” he said.

A few years ago, a national study showed the possibility that the practice of sex-selection abortions has made its way from Asia to the United States. Researchers Douglas Almond and Lena Edlund of the National Academy of Sciences say their analysis of the 2000 Census shows the odds prematurely increasing for Asian-American families from China, Korea and India to have a boy if they already have a girl child.

The data “suggest that in a sub-population with a traditional son preference, the technologies are being used to generate male births when preceding births are female,” they wrote in the paper.

In February, a U.S. House committee approved legislation that would ban sex-selection or race-based abortions. Congressman Trent Franks, an Arizona Republican who is a member of the House Judiciary Committee, has brought back the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act.

Franks praised passage of H.R. 3541, the Prenatal Non-Discrimination Act (or PRENDA) through the House Judiciary Committee by a 20-13 vote. The legislation prohibits  abortions performed on the basis of the child’s sex or race. It also outlaws the coercion of any woman to abort a child based on the child’s sex- or race.

CLICK LIKE IF YOU’RE PRO-LIFE!

 

Franks said, “In 1847, Frederick Douglass said, ‘Right is of no sex; truth is of no color, God is the Father of us all–and all are brethren. The very bedrock foundational principle that gave birth to America was the conviction that all human beings are children of God and created equal in His sight.”

“As Americans, all of us know in our hearts that aborting a little baby because he or she happens to be the ‘wrong color’ or because or she is a little girl instead of a little boy is fundamentally wrong, and represents a betrayal of the precious truth that all human beings are created equal, with the Imago Dei stamped on their souls,” Franks continued.

He added, “I know when the subject is related in any way to abortion, the doors of reason and human compassion in our minds and hearts often close, and the humanity of the unborn and the inhumanity of what is being done to them can sometimes no longer be seen. But this is the civil rights battle that will define our generation. At the very least, we should be able to agree that allowing the lives of unborn children to be torn from them simply because they happen to be the ‘wrong color’ or the ‘wrong sex’ is not who we are as Americans.”

The measure would prohibit knowingly performing or financing sex-selection or race-based abortions. Franks has said the bill is needed because abortions on black babies are done at much higher rates than abortions on babies of other races.

Meanwhile, a 2006 poll showed a majority of Americans would likely support the bill. A 2006 Zogby International poll shows that 86% of the American public desires a law to ban sex selection abortion. The poll surveyed a whopping 30,117 respondents in 48 states.

Father Shenan J. Boquet, president of Human Life International, said his group supports the bill.

“While we should strive to end abortion in all circumstances, this legislation is an important and welcome step,” he said. “Every human life is sacred, but to specifically target the unborn based on race or gender for destruction magnifies the inherit evil of abortion, and fosters an even greater prejudice toward life itself.”

The Alliance Defense Fund, a pro-life law firm, worked with Franks’ staff on a previous version of the measure.

“No one should be allowed to decide that an innocent life is worthless, least of all because a child isn’t of the preferred sex or race,” ADF Senior Legal Counsel Steven Aden told LifeNews.com. “There is nothing constitutionally protected or medically necessary about an abortion that takes place because a child is not the preferred sex or race. And there is nothing in the law or the Constitution that prohibits America from joining other civilized nations in prohibiting such barbaric procedures,” he said.

“ADF commends Rep. Franks for his leadership in affirming the rule of law’s protection for every American, regardless of race or gender, beginning in the womb,” said Aden in 2009 when it was previously introduced.