Well sure, conceivably, some will use an ultrasound to determine the gender of the embryo and then abort the less desired gender (I leave you to read in the link which gender that might be).
The background of the linked news article is Canada. You know, as someone's sig line says -- Where a pack of smokes is 10 bucks and a heart transplant is free.
Canada has universal health care. You can walk in and have an abortion at no cost ( Wiki ). Walk, not waddle, as an " unquestioned abortion is all but impossible after 30 weeks ". Abortions are typically available in larger cities but not in large towns. Canada's abortion law was struck down by the Supreme Court in 1988 ( Morgentaler Ruling ) and has yet to be replaced by ... well anything.
Just a mention of where I am coming from. I'm a guy and as such don't really have an opinion on abortion, on account of my not having a uterus. Now if I had a uterus I would darn sure have an opinion on abortion, and that opinion would be that what happens in my uterus is my own damn business.
The linked article strikes me as a poorly edited mashup of two outcomes from ultrasounds done on pregnant women.
One outcome is women, couples, people from some cultures, determining the gender of an embryo so as to abort a female fetus.
The other outcome is "three- and four- dimensional ultrasound pictures and videos of babies in the womb, cellphone ringtones of a baby's fetal heartbeat and live broadcasting to family and friends". As to this outcome: geeez, come on - the embryo, fetus, future baby is not a plaything to be subjected to unnecessary medical procedures.
The article is based on a joint policy statement from the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada and the Canadian Association of Radiologists.
Canada’s leading medical journal has urged medical licensing bodies across the country to rule that doctors should not reveal the sex of the fetus to any woman before about 30 weeks of pregnancy
That would, in theory, address the gender selection side of the issue. It would not have the force of law and I'm sure there are ultrasound technologists that would ignore the recommendation.
I would not be at all surprised to see the current Canadian government, the fundie never-met-an-oil-dollar-I-didn't-like HarperCons, get geared up to legislate something. There is back-bencher, Mark Warawa, that introduced a private members bill in September 2012 that would have made ultrasounds for gender selection illegal. It went nowhere. The Conservatives, Warawa's own party, didn't want it to see the light of day as it could open up a wider abortion debate. Don't get me wrong, large parts of the Conservatives base are pro-life, and would love to restrict and/or ban abortions. However, the Conservative Party knows that the Canadian public at large is fine with the laws as they are and the Conservative Party would lose votes with any stand other than their current ignore and wait position.
The current lack of abortion laws have it that a woman and her doctor decide what to do. That goes to 30 weeks, end of the mid trimester. That has worked since 1988. Works excellent in my opinion.
Canada’s leading medical journal has urged medical licensing bodies across the country to rule that doctors should not reveal the sex of the fetus to any woman before about 30 weeks of pregnancy ...
That also works well.
In Canada, abortions are rarely performed after 24 weeks of pregnancy.
I don't have any sources that say how many gender selection abortions occur in Canada. The article quotes one for-profit clinic operator that they offer " gender determination, starting at 20 weeks’ gestation only ".
Doing the math says that makes a 4 week window.
Fairly big window.
I'm not in any way saying that a woman should have any restriction on her right to choose. However, a woman, or the people influencing / pressuring her, might not need to know one particular nugget of information that drives that choice.
What do you think ?