Womb Transplants

'I know that Sweden are looking to move ahead right now in researching/looking to implant.'

Is this in women who have been born without a womb. Had it removed?
Or about physiologically normal males?

No, not at all. From female-to-female it would definitely be a transplant. From female-to-male it would be an implant.

Ah - I was distinguishing them but wholly accept that it's not possible to be as clear as I would like.

Yes - in that case, every instance that I'm currently aware of is a transplant.

I know that Sweden are looking to move ahead right now in researching/looking to implant.

The further unhelpful point I was making was that in some healthcare systems, like the 4 in the UK, given a GRC (say) it's feasible that even if a transplant/implant distinction were to be made in other healthcare systems - they would both be counted as transplants in the UK.

Oddly enough, the only group who would logically be categorised as needing an implant, but otherwise meeting the criteria for what would be a transplant might be transmen who had started to transition early and had developed atrophy of the uterus/ovaries.

A recent WHRC had a Swedish author who reported that she had been contacted by a Swedish infertility clinician who claimed to be seeing increasing numbers of women in their 20s who (after testing) have atrophy of their reproductive organs. These are women who had been treated with puberty blockers and cross hormones at a young age and gone on to have difficulty with conception. (It seems that they had detransitioned but this wasn't entirely clear.)

Why is the implant / transplant point so important and DSD being raised?

We're talking about bog standard male bodies here.

My apologies if I haven't been clear or have sounded scolding!

Its an implant in a man as men dont naturally have wombs. Its a transplant in women who have had their womb removed.

From a medical point of view it would be an implant as it is not taking an organ like a kidney or cornea and transplanting in another person who had the same organ but needed to have it removed. It would be the insertion of a foreign body.

I think we're in agreement (I may be wrong). In Sweden, and in Pennsylvania, the women with DSD had a uterus, and it was removed, and they received a donor one (time-limited).

Are you saying that women with DSD who receive one are having an implant not a transplant? (I need to think this through which is interesting because I may well just have assimilated the language in those settings without considering the nuance.)

I just tried searching uterus implant and was offered uterus transplant

You'd have to implant an embryo in a fully functional blood rich etc uterus.

Where are the eggs coming from?. More donors? Donating eggs is a difficult and risky procedure in itself.

No breastfeeding I assume.

These things always always focus on the man and never on the consequences impact on the child.

The male body is in no way set up to carry a baby.

It's misogyny to think all you need is the gro-bag.

There's massive changes through the body. Where would the placenta come from? How would it be attached to feed the baby? How would it be supplied with blood containing the right mix of nutrients and oxygen? Women get calcium leached from to teeth for the baby. Not great for the woman! But how would that mechanism be triggered? Their bodies are a different shape, would they be a bit topply?! Is there room for the growing baby, does their skin stretch as well are their organs so shiftable? What about the different hormone profile? If on any kind it hormone treatment what's the impact on the baby?

How does their body react if there's a problem? Women can get bleeding as a sign, for example.

These would all have to be fairly early sections I'd think as there is no trigger for labour etc so when is the baby ready? Not an exact science obv.

True, and I'm not a medical person but I still don't see how it would work. It's not like having a new hip or something is it?

I don't think it would work, to be honest.

So far, it's been a transplant for women with DSDs and UFD.

For others, it would be an implant - yes (interesting point).

From a medical point of view it would be an implant as it is not taking an organ like a kidney or cornea and transplanting in another person who had the same organ but needed to have it removed. It would be the insertion of a foreign body.

And apologies if I sound like I'm scolding anyone! That's certainly not my intention but his is an important point to me - so much language is being mangled by identity politics that I feel the need to fight for the last vestiges of accuracy.

The mere thought of this is abhorrent. Whoever is experimenting on rats for such a pointless and disgusting endeavour should be locked up.

Whom does this serve? Who would benefit from men having surgery to implant a womb? It's autogynephilia taken to its extreme logical conclusions.

For others, it would be an implant - yes (interesting point).

However, given the retrospective nature of new identities in some countries, I'm unsure whether it would be counted as a transplant for reproductive justice reasons even if it were an implant as a matter of natural history (so to speak).

Apologies for writing in such an unclear manner.

I have opted out of organ donation because I couldn't see a way to specify that I don't want reproductive organs donated. Instead I have informed my next of kin of my wishes for organ donation.

Fair point.

So like breast implants then. Instead.

It wouldn't be a transplant but an implant.

'Other kinds of transplants are to save people’s lives. A womb transplant is clearly not.'

Ah. It's a different sort of much more trivial thing though. Like hair transplants.

However, in other countries, it seems there is no shortage of women who are willing to donate a uterus whether as a live or dead donor.

It would be interesting to know if we can specify the donations to which we do/not consent in the event of our deaths.

The idea that women's bodies might be doing stuff that is subtle and complicated and important is pretty much discarded.

Because the world still tends to think of men’s bodies as the default human body, and women’s bodies as an aberration.

Other kinds of transplants are to save people’s lives. A womb transplant is clearly not. And it requires the death of a woman. It just seems one more way that men think female bodies are for their use (surrogacy is another).

If I were of childbearing age, I would be opting out of organ donation for this reason.

A vessel/ incubator. Jar?

As with breastfeeding. The idea that women's bodies might be doing stuff that is subtle and complicated and important is pretty much discarded.

Anything we can do science can do just as well/ better.

The concept of the woman not being important is very visible in anti abortion messaging. The pictures always have the foetus floating in nothing. The woman is invisibilised.

The constant fixation with writing out the woman and trying to grow babies without them I think stems from:

The total paranoia men have always had about paternity
The resentment that we can do something really important that they can't.

So much fiction and films etc over the years which come down to men being able to create life. It's all over the place when you start looking!

I don't understand what its going to be attached to. Do they think its like putting in a battery or something, i just don't get it.

It would be absolutly brutal on the man, like being blown up from the inside.

:The paper donor card I carry lets you select which part of your body you want to donate. You can choose any part of my body, or select only the bits you feel comfortable with. It's the same with the online register isn't it? Can't remember because, at the time, I selected any part of me.

I hope people don't completely opt out, just because of this.'

IIRC it doesn't include reproductive organs on the list.

There is s background thing saying yeah they're not taken.

But. Things change. And you've got no option to say no to those organs at an individual level.

I can see why some women are wary.

Esp given the cavalier and often callous approach to anything to do with our reproductive systems all over the place and through history, and still to a greater or lesser extent it's still pervasive.

Transplants ARE plants

(sorry couldn't resist it)

It's never going to happen. No human male is ever going to get pregnant.