Turkey: world's first uterus recipient gives birth

So might pregnancy with a transplanted uterus negate the need for anti rejection drugs?

I suspect it wouldn’t be enough of an impact but no idea.

People really have no idea how complicated it is.

And I really hope we don't waste NHS money trying to find out. Along with miscarriage and infertility, women still die from pregnancy/birth. Let's spend some money trying to stop that from happening first!

Even men who receive blood transfusions where the blood came from a woman are at higher risk. Why anyone thinks this is even worth exploring is beyond me.

I blame god complex doctors who have no sense of ethical/moral limits and not a great understanding of nature.

If this were true we would be about 18 months away from curing all miscarriage and all infertility, but that is not the case.

This. People really have no idea how complicated it is.

So might pregnancy with a transplanted uterus negate the need for anti rejection drugs?

I don't understand how the foetus is protected from the anti-rejection drugs, or what short or long term effects there might be on the child?

The issues around anti-rejection drugs would be the same for kidney transplants, etc.

It is also interesting to consider that one of the female body’s many ‘whole system’ responses to pregnancy is to reduce the immune system. A baby and placenta etc is ‘foreign’ to our bodies and might otherwise be rejected. It is noteworthy that the people who are suggesting a uterine transplant to males may be possibly are plastic surgeons not obstetricians. They see it merely as a matter of plumbing in the right bit and using anti-rejection drugs to keep it there. They ignore the fact that the uterus is only one tiny part of the system that is the whole female body.

My spouse is waiting for a life saving transplant. I don't know how I feel about resources being diverted to non life saving transplants.

I am happy the child was born healthy, and am glad the issues around surrogacy don't apply here.

I don't understand how the foetus is protected from the anti-rejection drugs, or what short or long term effects there might be on the child?

I really think GC women need to let go of this fixation about whether or not men (however they identify) can carry a pregnancy. It is highly likely that, within the next 10 years, it will happen. People who say it's impossible seriously underestimate the sophistication of transplant medicine. The hormones of pregnancy can be given artificially.

If this were true we would be about 18 months away from curing all miscarriage and all infertility, but that is not the case.

The minute that a TW carries a pregnancy, that will be thrown back in our faces as 'proof' that TWAW.

I'm not trying to win a war against TW. The ability of a TW to carry a pregnancy after womb transplant that would be prohibitively expensive for all but a tiny minority does not negate my need for sex based rights.

An ethics paper on whether uterus transplants should be paid for by the NHS...

"Thus, publicly funded healthcare systems such as the UK's National Health Service (NHS) will eventually have to decide whether UTx should be funded. With this in mind, we seek to provide an answer to the question of whether there exist any compelling reasons for the state not to fund UTx."

jme.bmj.com/content/42/9/559

I think it's lovely that a woman can help another woman like that. My infertility isn't caused by womb issues, but I empathise with women who have that problem.

I DON'T think it's morally acceptable to try to transplant a uterus into a male, that's not putting the rights of the child first, but please don't do a knee-jerk reaction to this and campaign against uterus transplants.

Infertility is the most awful thing I've ever experienced, I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy.

Yeah I agree mrs Noah. It misses the point.

For this case personally I think it’s a wonderful success. I don’t have any of the worries surrogacy brings me as even if trans women can do the same it makes no difference.

I know this is a controversial viewpoint- but I disagree. Nobody has the right to be a parent, and at what cost is science pursuing the final result of these desperately wanted babies ?

I’m not saying it’s ok to pursue it, only that as this dubious process has happened with or without my approval, that this particular mother and this particular baby have made it through safely is good thing.

I’m not entirely sure how I feel about uterus transplants for women with working ovaries - better than surrogacy (but I’d like surrogacy to be illegal so that’s not saying much).

I really think GC women need to let go of this fixation about whether or not men (however they identify) can carry a pregnancy. It is highly likely that, within the next 10 years, it will happen. People who say it's impossible seriously underestimate the sophistication of transplant medicine. The hormones of pregnancy can be given artificially.

I am not saying it is good, I am not saying it is ethical, I am saying it (probably) will happen. By trying to argue that it won't, and that this proves that women are different from TW, we are setting ourselves a trap. The minute that a TW carries a pregnancy, that will be thrown back in our faces as 'proof' that TWAW.

The truth is that artificially maintaining a pregnancy in a male body proves nothing. Scientists have grown human ears on the back of mice: that doesn't mean that mice have human ears. If a few highly privileged men carry pregnancies, that will change fuck all about the biological status of women, but it could seriously undermine GC feminism, if we are not careful, as well as all sex-based maternity rights. We need to argue not that it is impossible for a male body to carry a pregnancy, but that it is unethical from the child's point of view and irrelevant as regards women's rights.

at what cost is science pursuing the final result of these desperately wanted babies?

Are they desperately wanted? They babies themselves hardly seem to be considered.

Regardless of how any of us feel re: the moral questions around reproductive technology, the birth of a healthy and desperately wanted baby is still a happy occasion

I know this is a controversial viewpoint- but I disagree. Nobody has the right to be a parent, and at what cost is science pursuing the final result of these desperately wanted babies ?

If we push the narrative that it’s ok to keep pushing the boundaries of science and ethics in the name of giving people babies - where does it end ?

Reproductive rights should never ever compromise women’s health or mental health, but I don’t think we should be encouraging keep trying at all costs. There has to be a line.

Most transplants have a finite ‘life’. Apparently it is generally quoted as a half-life (how long until half fail). For kidneys from a dead donor it is 9 years, 12 or so for a heart, lungs 7 years.

You will also be immunocompromised by the anti-rejection drugs which can themselves cause cancer and kidney failure. This means any infection could be very serious. This patient presumably won’t be the first pregnant patient to take these drugs as others might have taken them for other transplants (eg kidney) and become pregnant.

Phew!

Yes, congratulations are definitely in order for Derya on the birth of her baby boy.

Regardless of how any of us feel re: the moral questions around reproductive technology, the birth of a healthy and desperately wanted baby is still a happy occasion.

Derya was 21 in August 2011 when she received her uterus from a donor. She was born without a uterus, although she did have ovaries.

I believe she was the first successful uterus transplant but not the first successful pregnancy.

There was attempted an IVF pregnancy in 2013, but unfortunately it had to be terminated after there was no heartbeat.

It is lovely to hear that she finally give birth to a child though.

Here is some more articles I have found about her story.

abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2013/04/15/woman-pregnant-after-uterus-transplant

www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2324950/Woman-22-underwent-worlds-successful-womb-transplant-loses-IVF-baby.html

www.trtworld.com/life/the-world-s-first-successful-uterus-implant-recipient-gives-birth-37735

The filter by OP is apparently a new feature, there's a pinned post in active convos. Can't see it on the app though.

If she were the first to have a transplanted uterus, in 2011, age 14, then I am horrified!

How can a 14 year old child be deemed to be adequately competent to agree to an experimental procedure, especially one that is not in anyway, shape or form, life saving?

I hope there are inaccuracies in this article!

Why would they do this? Just because they can doesn’t mean the should.

It didn’t save her life - but as I typed this I realised : £££££££££.

The article says "woman", not "man". Clear enough.

If only we could trust reports to mean woman when they say woman.