Science Vs. Nature: Choosing the sex of a child

The idea of a couple choosing the sex of a child can seem to some people to be a 'space-agey', 'modern-science-gone-mad' idea.  However, it is not a new concept.

'Natural gender selection' is a method that couples have used to influence the sex of their children for years.  It involves the careful timing of intercourse to raise the chance of either a 'girl' sperm or a 'boy' sperm reaching the egg first.  'Girl' sperm are slower, but live longer, whilst 'boy' sperm are faster but don't live as long.  Therefore, a couple wishing to conceive a girl would try in the days before ovulation, and those wanting a boy would try during/after ovulation. The medical-scientific version of this is a far more invasive process, selecting which sperm will be used and eliminating the chance for the others.

The moral implications of this choice are the possibility of preventing a life based on the sex of the person that would be born.  Religions such as Catholicism forbid the use of contraception for this very reason - they believe that every life is sacred and that no potential life should be denied.

However, sex-specific medical issues are a reality - be that hereditary conditions only affecting girls/boys, or conditions which prevent a mother from being able to carry a child of a particular sex.  Should these parents be subjected to years of heartbreak, failed pregnancies or infertility?  Should they be told that the survival of their child will depend on their sex?  Or should they be given the chance to be parents to healthy children, by way of selecting their gender?

The 'selfish' reasons for sex selection can influence many people's opinions of this topic - parents who have multiple boys and want a girl, for example.  People see this as placing a higher value on one sex over another, and this can be damaging - not only for the existing children, who may feel inferior or disappointing as a result of their sex, but to the future, pre-selected child, who may feel that they must live up to their parents' expectations.

With conditions such as Gender Identity Disorder randomly affecting people, regardless of whether their parents selected their sex, this can make a tough situation even worse.  After all, you can choose your child's sex, but you can't choose which gender they associate with.

Whilst the idea of sex selection is not a new one, it is still a highly controversial topic, with many factors to consider.  There are medical conditions which may justify the procedure, but does this open the door to 'designer babies'?  Will people see this as an opportunity, not only to get the sex of child they always wanted, but to select the hair colour, eye colour, body type, intelligence of their child also?

Without medical guidelines for who would be eligible for this procedure, for what justifies sex selection, the potential moral consequences would outweigh the benefits.

- 30 minute timed essay
- A response to the following prompt:

'For parents to choose the sex of their unborn child is neither natural nor desirable'

Growing old does not mean that your life is over.

Society seems to view all old people as vulnerable, senile or of no further use.  When did the value of a person become solely based on their current contributions?  Why does society seem to forget that all old people were once young?  This essay aims to convey my opinion of the value of older people, and the value of growing old as a part of life, rather than as the end of life.

Many older people have told me that they still feel 18 years old.  My favourite example of this is my grandma.  My grandma recently celebrated her 75th birthday by riding the longest, fastest zip-wire in the UK.  She enjoys adrenaline, fun and adventure and she always has.  There has never been a time where she has said 'I'm old now, I should stop having fun!', and I believe that this is something that younger generations should try to remember.

It can be difficult to view the elderly as they once were, and to imagine them when they were young, but I think that a conscious effort to do so would greatly help in changing society's view of old age from being 'an inevitable decline' to 'a privilege that not everybody gets'.  With so many people losing their lives at an earlier age than expected, the elderly should be cherished just as much as any other age group would be.  Their opinions should be respected, and their contributions they have made throughout their lives to date should be acknowledged and valued.

We would not be here today if not for them, and we should be grateful that they were still around, offering us their wisdom and advice.

Personally, I plan to live my life every day until I die - and I don't plan on letting old age slow me down, or ruin my fun.

- 30 minute timed essay written in a classroom setting under exam conditions
- A response to the following prompt:

'Life is a process of growth into adulthood and maturity, and then there is an inevitable decline into old age.'

Finding a balance between Censorship and Free Speech

We are born with basic human rights - the right to education, to food, to be safe - and the right to speak freely and express ourselves.  However, is this a right that should be taken as black and white as it seems?The contrasts across the globe in terms of where free speech ends and censorship begins are staggering, and this essay aims to discuss and analyse whether a happy balance can ever be found.

In the UK today, people have access to more information, materials and content than ever before.  The internet has become a place where anybody can express their views, to whichever degree of anonymity they please, and seemingly with little consequence.

In contrast, countries across the world are fighting for this chance, and citizens are having laws and restrictions imposed upon them.  An example of this is the recent crisis in Egypt - a complete media blackout shielded Egypt from the eyes of the world, and nobody was aware of the state of affairs in the country - until people started to find a way around the restrictions and sent cried for help on social media sites - alerting the world to the horrors that were unfolding.  Only after people bravely exercised their right to free speech could other countries intervene and try to calm the situation.

The Egypt Crisis is an extreme example, but completely relevant to the issue of censorship in the modern day.  And whilst censorship can be a way to hide horror, or stop people talking about the terrible situations they find themselves in, it can be necessary on a smaller scale.

An example of this is with the content that is available to view online  The internet does not come with age restrictions.  At the click of a button, a child can find themselves on an adult website, be that pornography or images of graphic violence.  And whilst children can accidentally stumble upon theses web pages, so can adults easily place a search and find content that many would deem inappropriate.

One such viewing material is Hentai - a popular Japanese form of cartoon which depicts young girls in compromising situations.  Hentai has recently been made illegal under the Cartoons Act / Dangerous Images Act, with the reasoning that a child should not be shown in these situations, regardless of whether it is a photograph or a drawing.

The consequences of this ruling have been minimal - a few online petitions to make the content legal again.  But, in the eyes of the law, viewing the images is now illegal, and people have been imprisoned for doing so.  Is it right to imprison someone for viewing materials deemed inappropriate by others?  It is a necessary safety precaution well worth taking to stop 'harmless' viewing becoming harmful physical acts.

The question of whether censorship works to prevent crimes is a difficult one - and history shows that censorship to extreme levels does not change people's beliefs if they feel strongly.  Judaism survived the Holocaust, literature survived the book burnings, and women overcame oppression through the actions of Suffragettes.

In conclusion, censorship with regards to the protection of others, especially the vulnerable, is completely necessary, and should be used alongside laws passed through a democratic system.  Censorship should not be used to stop people from asking for help when needed.

A happy balance between freedom and censorship would be one where people can express themselves without putting themselves or others in danger.


- 30 minute timed essay written in a classroom setting, under exam conditions.
- Written as a response to the following prompt:

'It is a basic human right that people should be able to choose what they want to read, view and think, and censorship infringes that basic human right.'

Introduction

In preparation for my university entrance exam, I am writing timed essays in 30 minutes or less.  As I am hand-writing these essays, and I am the least organised person I know, I thought it would be a good idea to keep a digital copy online.