Τhe methods of medically assisted reproduction (MAR) are being widely applied all over the world ever since the birth of Louise Brown, the first child conceived after in vitro fertilization (IVF) of a human oocyte and subsequent transfer into the uterus of the ensuing embryo. The possible risks associated with the application of the different MAR methods have given rise to a debate concerning the necessity of a regulatory framework regarding the application of these methods especially in view of the crucial and ambiguous legal and ethical issues attached.

To document the varying methods of sex selection, both primitive (traditional) as well as advanced forms available around the world.
With the increasing desire of couples to choose the gender of their offspring, scientific sex-selection methods and techniques have evolved over time; unfortunately, the medical and social consequences have remained poorly emphasised.
We searched electronic search engines and grey literature that included research articles from journals, books, websites and news articles in English until August 2016. We comprehensively compiled the findings such as underlying principles, time of use in relation to conception and others.
We classified the techniques into natural methods that rely on physiological conditions and artificial methods, including manipulation of seminal fluid for sex selection. Natural methods include Shettles technique, Whelan Method, Billings Ovulation Method, pre-conception diet, and gender selection kits such as GenSelect and Smart Stork, which rely on timing of intercourse, the vaginal environment, a selective diet and nutraceuticals. More advanced and artificial methods include sperm sorting or Ericsson\'s method, Microsort, Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis and Urobiologics PreGender test. The markets for these techniques are prevalent in India where the birth of a son is desired. There is also widespread use of indigenous medicines for sex selection. The review reports side effects such as vaginal infections, hyperstimulation syndrome, multiple pregnancies, birth defects and stillbirths.
We conclude that sex-selection practices need urgent intervention in view of the social harm, unwarranted gender bias, and diversion of resources from genuine medical need.

The national ethical guidelines relevant to assisted reproductive technology (ART) have recently been reviewed by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). The review process paid particular attention to the issue of non-medical sex selection, although ultimately, the updated ethical guidelines maintain the pre-consultation position of a prohibition on non-medical sex selection. Whilst this recent review process provided a public forum for debate and discussion of this ethically contentious issue, the Victorian case of JS and LS v Patient Review Panel (Health and Privacy) [2011] VCAT 856 provides a rare instance where the prohibition on non-medical sex selection has been explored by a court or tribunal in Australia. This paper analyses the reasoning in that decision, focusing specifically on how the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal applied the statutory framework relevant to ART and its comparison to other uses of embryo selection technologies. The Tribunal relied heavily upon the welfare-of-the-child principle under the Assisted Reproductive Treatment Act 2008 (Vic). The Tribunal also compared non-medical sex selection with saviour sibling selection (that is, where a child is purposely conceived as a matched tissue donor for an existing child of the family). Our analysis leads us to conclude that the Tribunal\'s reasoning fails to adequately justify the denial of the applicants\' request to utilize ART services to select the sex of their prospective child.