The technique called MicroSort, which entails separating male and female sperm prior to conception, is not as reliable as Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) which involves determining the gender of embryos and only implanting those of the preferred gender. Ethicists have trouble with this one since it involves rejecting embryos that happen to be the "wrong" sex.
I had difficulty figuring out whether PGD is permitted in New Zealand. A National Ethics Committee on Assisted Human Reproduction 2005 document said the use of PGD was prohibited "for social reasons, including sex selection." But the 2008 "Who gets Born?" report said: "There is insufficient cultural, ethical and spiritual reasons to prohibit the use of PGD for sex selection for social reasons such as 'family balancing'."
Last week the Ministry of Health clarified the legal situation: "The HART [Human Assisted Reproductive Technology] Act says you're not allowed to choose an embryo based on gender, but the Act also says a defence would be if the selection was made to prevent or treat a genetic disorder."
However the American Society for Reproductive Medicine has no problem with the procedure. Clinics in Los Angeles and New York are attracting so called "fertility tourists" - well-heeled couples determined to conceive the baby of their choice who travel overseas for a procedure not permitted in their home country.
It's clearly a bioethical minefield. The prospect of eugenics and "designer babies" created to order is a chilling one. If we start with gender, or so the "slippery slope" argument goes, it won't be long before we're also stipulating eye colour, hair colour and height. Where will it end?
It's easy to tut-tut about the commodification of babies and frown upon the idea of people callously specifying gender but beyond all the righteous indignation I suspect it could be an appealing option for a lot of people.