Every human attribute could be redefined as "cultural" or individualistic and therefore under the scope of individual or group choice. But to claim that the st

Every human attribute could be redefined as "cultural" or individualistic and therefore under the scope of individual or group choice. But to claim that the state gives up all responsibility for these choices is absurd since there is there are very real costs for those choices and their consequences. For example, increasingly and controversially European state welfare systems are bearing the cost of IVF treatments, even for the oldest of couples and unusual parent systems (e.g. 3-parents). But there are clear trends in those societies for decreasing birth rates which cannot be entirely filled by immigration. The state has to act if it wants to continue to exist and thrive (as Japan will probably discover in 50 years time!). In the extreme, at one end there is Gattaca. At the other end, all members of society and their children are being required to support choices that would otherwise never naturally exist, or only exist from enormous harm, but provide no objective benefit. In both cases, the long run damage to the human race or individual societies is unknown. Perhaps the only solution is the minimum one. When it comes to procreation, allow only choices that permit any viable life and absolutely no more? Perhaps one day, in combination with AI, there will be an internationally ratified and strongly enforced Minimum Viable Person Treaty - a sort of NPT for Sentient Life?