Sex selection is becoming normalised in the US, claims Slate columnist William Saletan. He was commenting on a feature in the Los Angeles Times about parents whose mail-order sex selection tests erred. If the test had produced the "wrong" result, abortion had clearly been an option. "The very idea of elective prenatal sex-testing used to be controversial, especially in light of rampant sex-selective abortion in Asia," writes Saletan. "Now these tests are being bought, used, and reported just like any other prenatal test. The couples who use them are described just as sympathetically. The problem [in the eyes of the journalist] isn't that they're screening their offspring for sex. The problem is that in doing so they're being thwarted by flawed technology and exaggerated marketing."

A number of companies have been marketing home sex-determination kits. The expecting mother sends a blood sample to the company and the results are mailed back to her, at a cost of about US$300. Critics say that the tests are often wrong, but that the parents are too delighted with their bundle of joy to demand a refund. However, more than 100 women have joined a class action suit against one company, Acu-Gen.

One woman, Anissa Iverson, an office manager for Disney Studios, told the LA Times how much she had mourned after she delivered a boy instead of a girl. She had already purchased, washed and folded more than $500 worth of clothing for a daughter, to be named Sydney. Her second child was a girl, but she didn’t have the heart to use the name. "I felt like Sydney had died," she said. "It was a tainted name."

As Saletan points out, sex selection is fast becoming socially acceptable. "Eventually, we'll establish rules to ensure the safety and efficacy of fetal sex tests. At that point, we'll declare them adequately regulated. That's how a taboo begins to die." ~ Slate, Feb 25; Los Angeles Times, Feb 24