EPPC fellow Christine Rosen appeared on The O'Reilly Factor on the Fox News Channel to discuss sex-selection technology. This technology is unprecedented and "will have long-term consequences" for cultures and populations, she said.

Back of the Book Segment
Gender selection in babies?
Some parents are turning to new procedures that allow them to select the gender of their unborn child. Bill speaks to Matt and Beth Mandolesi, parents who opted to use the procedure, and to Christine Rosen, a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

*  *  *  *

O'REILLY: "Back of the Book" segment tonight, 67-year-old Eddie Mandolesi has nine granddaughters and no grandsons and he wanted one to carry the family name. So his son and his wife made it happen by gender selection that involves doctors altering the reproductive process which they can now do with a 70 to 90 percent success rate. Four years ago, Beth Mandolesi gave birth to twin boys. And she and her husband, Matt, join us now from Cleveland. Also with us from Washington is Christine Rosen, a fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

Now Christine, you have a little problem with this gender selection, what is it?

CHRISTINE ROSEN: I do. I think that there's a broader question we need to be asking about this practice because there are long-term demographic impacts to sex selection. Look at China, 117 boys are born for every 100 girls. In Cuba, 118 boys are born for every 100 girls. I think even though these are individual choices people are exercising, we have to have a public discussion about whether just because we have the technical power to do this, we should be doing this.

O'REILLY: But in China and Cuba they are not using technology to have that happen. It is just the luck of the draw. Is it not?

ROSEN: No, actually, they are using abortion largely as a means of getting rid of female fetuses.

O'REILLY: Yes, you said born, so if it is -- the ultrasound says it female, a lot of these are aborted in Cuba and China, that's what you're talking about.

ROSEN: That's right. And so they are going to have generations where there are not enough women for the men in China because these choices have been made.

O'REILLY: All right, now that is an interesting point, Matt and Beth. Did you have any moral compunctions about going through this selective process? We will start with you, Beth.

BETH MANDOLESI: Absolutely not. We were kind of a last minute thought of doing this. We were going the in vitro route and we asked is there any way to increase the odds for a boy. We were told there were and we jumped right on it. We said, well, we would like to try to have a boy. We would be happy with a girl but we would like to try to have a boy.

O'REILLY: And Matt, how about you, did you have any thoughts about it at all?

MATT MANDOLESI: No, I wanted a boy more than a girl. But I mean I would have been happy either way. But I figured if we could give it just a little bit of boost or a little bit of hope, I would try it.

O'REILLY: All right, and obviously your father, with nine granddaughters, wanted to carry on the family name. Now Beth, when you went through this, it is a fairly complicated procedure, correct, can you describe it to us?

B. MANDOLESI: We went the in vitro route and we were told we could increase the odds, probably about a 70 percent chance. We went with that lesser amount, not the 90 percent chance. And it actually worked before the embryos were even created. It worked through my husband. They worked with his sperm and picked more of the males to be mixed with my eggs and then took those ones and put them into me with the in vitro. We did not know...

O'REILLY: It's amazing -- you know, the technology is stunning, I mean, just 30 years ago this would have been unheard of. But it does disturb me a little bit that we're tampering with nature. And we are tampering with nature, there's no question about it, right, Christine?

ROSEN: That's exactly right. And in fact, the United Kingdom bans this practice, for non-medical use, sex selection is not allowed. And while I sympathize with the desire of the couple to have a son rather than a daughter, this is unprecedented and it will have long-term consequences. We have the capability to detonate nuclear weapons as well, but we've decided that it is not a good idea. And I think we need to have more of a discussion about whether in the long term this is really the direction we want to be heading. There's a slippery slope here.

O'REILLY: Real quick, why did Great Britain -- why did they ban the procedure?

ROSEN: Well, they were worried about the same sorts of issues we are discussing this evening, namely, the slippery slope. Once you start choosing the sex of the child, then by what moral argument can you deny a parent the right to choose the height or to select out a gene, for example, for Alzheimer's or for obesity. These are all the questions that we're facing. And this is just the tip of that iceberg.

O'REILLY: Human engineering. And that is what it is. And it's here. Folks, we appreciate it very much. Good luck with the twins, and Christine, thank you very much.

ROSEN: Thank you.

O'REILLY: And very interesting topic, I think, and I'll be interested to see the mail about it.

Next we will wrap things up with the "Most Ridiculous Item" and some of your mail.