Dani Garavelli: Right to choose?

THE Beckhams must have been cock-a-hoop. The celebrity couple last month revealed that, after having three boys, they were "trying" for a girl. Then, last week came the answer to their prayers – new research that claimed they could boost their chances of choosing their baby's sex, simply by altering Victoria's diet.

For hundreds of years, old wives' tales about influencing the gender of your baby have flourished. Everything from the weather, to lovemaking positions to the consumption of shellfish has been mooted as playing a role in whether couples produce a boy or a girl. But the latest study of 740 first-time mums suggests the sex of a baby really is affected by what their mothers eat.

Boys, it seems, are associated with high-calorie diets, rich in potassium and vitamins C, E and B12, while girls are more likely to be born to mothers who skip breakfast. Women who consume more than 2,200 calories, or eat a bowl of cereal a day, are significantly more likely to end up with sons.

Ah. Not such good news for Posh and Becks, then. It is difficult to believe Victoria consumes 2,200 calories a week, never mind a day – and it would surely be impossible for her to cut her intake any further. Still, the study by researchers at Exeter University brings fresh hope to other couples who would desperately like to have either a son or a daughter.

Guaranteed sex selection is already possible with Pre-implantation Gender Diagnosis (PGD) and, to a lesser extent, sperm-sorting techniques. But at present it is only legal for UK clinics to carry out these treatments where there is a genetic predisposition to a disease or condition which affects only one sex or the other, such as Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), which only occurs in boys.

Until now, the majority of those wanting to conceive a boy or a girl for social reasons have relied on a method devised in the 1960s, with mixed results. Dr Landrum Shettles' theory suggests that – since male (Y-chromosome) sperm swim faster, but die more quickly than female (X-chromosome) sperm – couples should have sex as close as possible to ovulation to conceive a boy and two or three days before ovulation to conceive a girl. It also recommends different sexual positions for different genders, such as the missionary position for a girl. Shettles claimed a 75-90% success rate for his method, but studies carried out to test the theory place it considerably lower.

It certainly didn't work for Jacqueline McIntosh, 42, from Glasgow, who kept producing sons (five of them) despite following the rules as closely as possible. "I adore my boys, of course, but I was desperate for a girl," she says. "When I was little I had close cropped hair and was dressed in trousers, even though I preferred frocks. I set my heart on having daughters because I wanted to give them all the pretty things I never had.

"I had also seen my husband's sisters and the way they interacted with their mum – going off on girly shopping trips and to the cinemas and I was keen to have some of that myself. When it became clear I wasn't going to have daughters, I transferred all that yearning to my friends' babies, and when they had girls, I showered them with little dresses and ribbons. If there had been anything else I could have eaten or not eaten to boost my chances I would have done it, but I reckon I was probably just destined to have boys."

It's the first rule of etiquette for pregnant women. Asked whether they want a boy or a girl, expectant mums are supposed to answer: "I don't care so long as it's healthy." To admit to a craving for one sex or the other is seen as greedy and ungrateful, or even as putting a jinx on the birth. Yet this pat response masks a world of more complicated emotions; couples who yearn to have a baby of a particular sex and are haunted by the vision of a son or daughter they fear will never be born.

Most people may claim they will be content whatever they are blessed with. But there is plenty of evidence to suggest that, behind closed doors, they have very definite preferences. In the past, US surveys have suggested a third of parents would use IVF technology to choose their baby's gender if they could. And, judging by the frenzied tip-swapping on the popular parenting website mumsnet.com, there seems to be plenty of couples trying to stack the odds in favour of one sex or the other.

Although in many countries women are under pressure to deliver boys, in western societies daughters are often seen as less of a handful. One American report showed couples who adopt show a marked preference for girls – and not just when they are applying to countries such as China where they know there will be a glut of female babies.

Some social commentators have attributed this phenomenon to the fact that women tend to be the driving force behind adoptions and the perception that girls will be easier to raise. But some studies have shown having daughters increases the chances of a couple divorcing – and the greater the number of daughters, the higher the risk of divorce. Some attribute this to men feeling marginalised in a female-dominated environment.

Most people who try for a boy or a girl, however, do so because they already have several children of the opposite sex. As a mother of three boys, I do occasionally yearn for a girl: like most women, I would have liked to go on girly shopping trips and read Anne Of Green Gables. These pangs are not eased by the number of people who say: "I bet you're going to keep trying for a girl." Or worse still: "The thing about boys is, they go off and get married and you never see them again."

When I was told my second baby was a boy, I experienced a few brief seconds of disappointment, which evaporated the second I held him. But over the years I've come to realise I'm genetically unsuited to bringing up girls – all that faffing about with hair clips and sparkly pink mules just isn't me. By the time son number three came along, I was so at ease with my identity as a mother of boys, I forgot to even ask what variety of baby I had delivered.

Not everyone comes to terms with it in this way, however. For Alan and Louise Masterton in Dundee the desire for a daughter was so overpowering, they tried for 15 years, producing four sons before they got their daughter Nicole. When Nicole tragically died in a bonfire in 1999 at the age of three, they fought unsuccessfully to overturn the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority's (HFEA) ban on sex selection, before borrowing the money for private treatment at an Italian clinic. But even then the only embryo they produced was male and they gave it away to a childless couple.

"We miss the female dimension in the family," Louise Masterton said at the time. "After four boys and a girl, our family was complete and, although it will never be complete again, we feel that another little girl will help to heal the empty space that she has left."

Jacqueline, from Glasgow, only came to terms with not having a girl when she had a miscarriage. "When I had my fourth son, my bump was so small you could hardly see I was pregnant," she said.

"Everyone kept saying to me: 'It must a girl this time', and I convinced myself it was, to the point where I had picked a name and bought clothes. When the midwife said it was a another boy I told her she must be mistaken – I was so shocked."

She tried again. But this time she lost the baby in the early stages. "I began to wonder if maybe this one had been a girl and I just wasn't able to carry them. It brought me to my senses so when I had my last boy, I was just so grateful. Although I'm still holding for granddaughters, of course."

The logic behind the UK's ban on using PGD and sperm-sorting techniques for social reasons is that sex selection might have a negative impact on women. "There seems to be an assumption that if couples were allowed to choose more of them would have boys – and there are certainly countries where this would be the case," says medical ethics expert, Professor Sheila McLean.

"There are also those who are concerned it would lead to the commodification of children or who see it as the thin end of the wedge. But I'm not sure this argument has much strength in this country. Here, there is little evidence to suggest many people would use the techniques even if they were available and I think it's likely even those who did would be using it for family-balancing purposes. Personally, I don't feel there is much difference ethically between choosing to do this and choosing to avoid a disability."

When the HFEA released its last report on sex selection a few years ago, it claimed 80% of the UK population was still opposed to gender selection on social grounds and intimated it was unlikely the rules would be changed in the near future. With such techniques ruled out in the short-term, the new research on diet is of even greater significance to couples desperate to conceive a child of a particular sex. Some sceptics have nevertheless cautioned against placing too much faith in the findings, pointing out that consuming 2,200 calories instead of 1,850 a day only led to one additional boy in 20 births amongst those who took part.

The report has come too late for Jacqueline. However, she, too, has her doubts. "I expect the information will be useful to some people," she says. "But I snacked on chocolate and frequently skipped meals – and look what it did for me."

Crazy concepts worthy of the wooden spoon?

Girls are more likely to be conceived in the afternoon and on an even day of the month, while boys are more likely at night and on odd days.


• Eat sweet things for a girl, sour for a boy.

• Women should douche themselves with baking soda before sex for a boy and vinegar for a girl.

• Men should wear socks and stand up during sex for a boy.

• For a girl, sleep with a wooden spoon under your bed and a pink ribbon under your pillow.

• Men should drink coffee before sex for a boy.

• For a boy, only eat the ends of loaves of bread; for a girl, eat only the middle.

• In France in the 18th century it was thought the left testicle contained girl sperm and the right boy sperm, so men who wanted a boy were encouraged to tie off their left testicle during intercourse – or even to remove it.