Womb Transplants

As someone who had many uterine issues (pre and post pregnancy) IMO an artificial womb is more likely than successful transplant into a man.

Physiology of the pelvic cavity, transformation of ligaments, blood supply, clots and pressure, heart, kidney, lungs, immunity surpression. A women's body is significantly more robust because of the need to gestate. It is the feat of ultimate human physical endurance. And even more risky for recipients of organ donation.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-48527798

Just a vanity pipe dream.

And...

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act and Uterus Implants in males www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4186810-the-human-fertilisation-and-embryology-act-and-uterus-implants-in-males

Just to link threads

Imperial College Womb Transplant Survey Redux www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3605548-Imperial-College-Womb-Transplant-Survey-Redux

They're already trying this.

The bit that's missed again is the fact that pregnancy is not just about a womb. The interactions with the mother are again ignored. The foetus grows hearing her heartbeat, hearing her voice etc

The removal of the human aspect, the woman, no one knows what result that would have.

It wouldn't surprise me at all to hear it's probably easier, cheaper and more viable to gestate a child in a synthetic uterus in a lab than by transplanting a uterus into a male. And that would be horrific.

The thing that worries me is that will these types of things take interest and money away from the much needed medical research into women's issues?

I had a look around for info - quite a useful article here.

www.livescience.com/60873-men-pregnant-uterus-transplant.html

For a start, they would need to do experiments in animals. What's the justification here? I'm not an anti-vivisectionist but I don't see the justification for making the animal suffer like this. Plus we have no idea of the effects on the human child of having a pregnancy maintained by artificial hormones.

And surely there are about one billion more worthwhile causes for medical research funds to be spent on?

There's no way they'd ever be able to do this, it's just not physically possible. A woman's entire body is designed to carry and birth a child it's not just down to a womb. The reason for these discussions is to blur the lines between trans women and women in peoples minds. It's suggested that this is a near possibility to solidify the idea there's not much difference between men and women's bodies. It's all smoke and mirrors, don't worry it'll never happen.

Ethically, where to even start? Practically, there's more to successfully gestating a child than having a uterus. A woman's endocrine and reproductive system is complex. I don't see how the huge amount of medication required to maintain the transplant and to maintain a pregnancy could be compatible with growing a healthy child. But, going back to the ethics, if it happens, it won't be happening here.

No way will it be done soon!

Pregnancy is an extremely complicated process involving all sorts of interactions through the body.

How will the appropriate hormones be produced at the right times?

Will the male body react in the same way as a female one to give the foetus what it needs eg calcium from your teeth?

I'm sure there's loads more.

It's a very male perspective that it's just the womb that matters and to not worry about anything else on the assumption that if women's bodies can do it, male science can do it better. For a recent-ish example see formula. They still don't understand really what's in human milk, or how the woman's body automatically changes composition depending on environment.

In all honesty I can't imagine this happening for trans women soon. As I feel the hormones etc needed to support a pregnancy are not present. how would the placenta grow for example? Can the uterus do that on its own?

I'm also not sure on the financial regarding developing this treatment. It seems very expensive.

Anyone who thinks that a womb is all it t takes to make a baby grow is a misogynist.

It's the same thinking that has anti abortion types show the foetus as just sort of floating in space.

The woman the womb is in is just a vessel.

Just because you can do something it may not be right to do it. I presume there is a chance of rejection, potentially with a baby still dependant on it. I guess they have to perform surgery to implant a foetus after they've put the womb in then all children would need to be born through a c-section.

I guess even if it's not possible now it will be one day and probably fairly soon.

I can't see how it would be given ethical approval in the first place. The effects on a child would be completely unknown and how are they consenting to it?

Not going to happen in our lifetimes. A TW's physiology is male as is their bone structure. This means their pelvis is too narrow. Pregnancy requires a whole system to maintain it and transplanting a womb isn't like replacing a battery.

It took decades to successfully transplant a womb into an actual woman, so the chance of being successful in a male are tiny.

Also, where will the wombs come from? A lot of women don't want their wombs to go to men, and would rather opt out of organ donation than allow that to happen.