organ transplant discussion on lbc right now

Note the line in that tweet about motherhood being defined by gestation - that’s what this is about. Appropriation of another uniquely female activity.

Cross-post from a different thread. I do think certain trans activist's goals are womb transplants for biological males.
Here is a frank Twitter thread from the Trans Pregnancy Project which talks about uterine transplants for trans women.

twitter.com/transpregnancy/status/1009386366575226881

transpregnancy.leeds.ac.uk/

Like I previous poster - I removed myself when the conversation switched from opting in to opting out - I simply was not comfortable with the whole move toward presumed consent in terms of literally my body. If the rhetoric is now moving toward not only presumed consent, but presuming I'm OK with becoming a pick and mix selection pack for the TRA agenda... I'm definitely out. Plus the oven timer on my uterus is broken and it tries to go ping prematurely.

There have been half a dozen or so live births now due to uterine transplants, all the recipients had their own ovaries afaik and had to menstruate for 6 months before getting pregnant.
A Male will never be able to have a functional Female reproductive system implanted and sustain a pregnancy - 1. because it’s not possible and 2. Medical ethics are immensely strict on embryology.

Post mortems would become a market of body parts and genetic material. Much needed income for the NHS?
Scary indeed.

Fitness? Finesse.

Yes, I think I'll fitness my "you can gave whatever you want" to more specific instructions, now I know. Kidneys, heart, non reproductive organs fine. Reproductive stuff goes with me, into the inferno.

I have a feeling that this is related to the Human Tissue Act, prior to which there were some people with dubious motives to store human tissue or body parts for an unspecified time, without consent.

If organ donation becomes an opt out arrangement, aside from the benefits of the usual transplants that have become familiar and beneficial to many, are we likely to see financial gains from harvesting human tissues?
This sidesteps the sensible constraints brought in by the HTA but will be under the guise of 'No consent required'.

This is the problem sociopath

It shifts organ donation from an altruistic act that saves lives to a demand based commercial/sexual transaction.

And that is the stuff of nightmares.

FWIW I remain on the organ donor register but I will be instructing my family of my wishes as well.

Under the Welsh set up, which I assume is what England would use, you can either opt out completely, or opt in for specified organs only (eg heart/kidneys/corneas). So you wouldn’t have to opt out of the whole thing if you had qualms about specific possible uses of your organs.

Its absolutely ever individuals right to choose for themselves. I am biased. I have a cousin who is alive only because he received a transplanted organ in his late teens. I have a friend currently on the waiting list (difficult term, considering she's waiting for someone to die) for a kidney transplant. Its personal, for me, but I would hate anyone else to feel bullied into doing it.

Its strange to think that I spent my teens and twenties being aware that I was being leered at by men as a slab of sexual meat. The next generation may find themselves being leered at, as literal slabs of meat. Take the breasts from her, I'll have her hair, mmmmm she's got a nice face, peel it off, I'll have it, now I need a womb.....hers I'll have hers.

Now that's a shopping list from nightmares, isn't it? Or dreams, depending on perspective.

.... It sounds like my body, my choice. Women are not a bag of potential organ transplants any more than they are potential wanksocks or incubators. I also never liked this shift to 'presumed consent'.

I also can't see the NHS being able to fund it. This is where the problems of a communal system being asked to satisfy every narcissistic whim of over-entitled individuals comes into sharp relief.

You know how that sound to a lay person don’t you?

You know that I don't give a fuck? If you didn't before, you do now.

So, just so I’m clear in my mind about this. You want to opt out of organ transplants, which could give long term benefits to many people, purely because you don’t want your uterus to end up in a trans woman?

You know how that sound to a lay person don’t you?

Having been on the organ donor register for many years, I removed myself when discussion began around presumed consent, and spoke to the transplant services about why I had done this.
If opt in is retained, I will opt back in.
For as long as opt out is on the table, I am out.

I do however remain a potential organ donor, and my family would convey my wishes. I just believe that consent must be explicitly obtained and never presumed, in this and in every other circumstance.

But the only thing I could do to dissuade the adoption of presumed consent was to show that the principle would have the opposite effect to that intended, of increasing numbers by presuming consent where none exists.

Presumed consent is an oxymoron.
If you have to presume consent, you simply do not have it.

“ yes this happens “
This happened once in a female to female, familial transplant.

The response to people opting out because of TRA posturing needs to be providing the facts then. Uterus transplants to females is still a very rare thing. A uterus is generally not transplanted with ovaries and fallopian tubes intact, so a woman who did not have functioning ovaries herself would still be unable to conceive naturally. All of that aside, despite hormones, there are structural differences between male and female bodies that mean implanting a uterus into a trans woman is not something that is imminently possible or desirable. It would require a lot of reconstructive surgery simply to make space and to connect it to the neovagina. It would also require the patient to be on anti rejection drugs for the rest of their lives. If it was possible for the new uterus owner to carry a child, the pregnacy would be high risk due to the transplanted organ and the child would have to be delivered by cesarean because a male body is not equipped with a birth canal. I don't see the NHS funding it in a hurry, do you?

I've never heard of a uterus transplant, woman to woman. Is it possible?

According to this, it has been done, but it is a new procedure, with the first live birth in 2014.

think I'm more concerned at the attitude of a teeny tiny segment of the population looking at us in the same way a dog looks at a butcher's shop.

This is the issue for me. At the moment Female to Male is not happening and people are desperate for donated organs. Please don’t come off the transplant register for this.

However, DO point out that it shows a gross disrespect for women’s physical, medical and sexual boundaries

Female to female has been done and resulted in live birth. There was a case in Sweden a year or so back.

I think (and I could be wrong) that the women were related and this may have helped with rejection issues? I also seem to remember the uterus being removed afterwards.

I've never heard of a uterus transplant, woman to woman. Is it possible? It might be, in the future, but at the moment I think I'm more concerned at the attitude of a teeny tiny segment of the population looking at us in the same way a dog looks at a butcher's shop. I'm still on the organ donor register, and will stay there. I'm not letting the brave and stunning people frighten me into or away from anything. Its not possible, its science fiction, its fantasy, its not real life.

Clairetree1
Would they object to their uterus being transplanted into a woman who was born without one, or whose uterus was non-functioning? Because that is the only way it would be used at the moment.