Baby born from dead donor womb transplant in UK first

A trope. Yes.

Anyone who has experienced infertility, been adopted or been remotely educated on either of those experiences knows that suggesting adoption as a cure for infertility doesn't serve the parents or the child.

Also, wrong poster with the womb transplant and other organs transplant comparisons, I haven't done that. Though I do agree with them.

Not necessarily. When I signed up to be an organ donor I was able to select which organs I would want to be donated and which wouldn't. If there was no option for uterus as they're not common, then there may not be direct consent from the deceased.

Has anyone mentioned the possible risk to the fetus of the drugs given when the woman receives a donated uterus, to avoid the body rejecting the foreign object? As with all infertility 'workarounds', the would-be parents' needs are prioritised over the needs of the child.

With surrogacy, the baby is ripped away from its birth mother, with whom it has 'communed', physically, for nine months. This new idea is, I continue to believe, grotesque, with not only potential harm to the fetus from the drugs but also of the organ dying or being infected or rejected by the body. There is also potential future psychological harm from the knowledge of gestation by a dead woman's uterus.

Still banging the life limiting illness drum eh?

It's standard for IVF embryos to be subjected to genetic screening in the UK when the parents have a genetic illness. No one is deliberately making infertile babies FFS.

Would you be happy for someone to use your womb to bring a healthy baby into the world btw? I can't tell if it's people with genetic illnesses or just womb transplants in general you have a problem with but honestly it seems like both.

Do you think the loved ones of a woman who has never discussed organ donation with them or has expressed reservations/doubts/limits are likely to say yeah OK use her uterus for an experimental donation or is it more likely that the family of someone who has expressed a desire to be a donor, has talked about being happy to donate any body part after death, may have seen news about the living uterus donation and talked about wanting to do something like that one day that would agree? My family know where I stand and opt in or opt out the family always get the final say so it's very likely that are aware that this is something the donor would be happy to do. If you had any doubt in your mind that a loved one would be unhappy with a donation why would you give consent?

I think this is important. I'm a pretty rational and often common sense thinker (and trained to be a rational debater) but I find the thought of a uterine transplant to be a bit unsettling. Maybe because it's so intimately connected with conception & gestation, nurture and giving life?

I'm childless (socially infertile - I don't even know if I ever was fertile because I never had the chance to find out) and I came to terms with that painful as it was, and I believe deeply that having a child is not a right. Maybe that informs my feeling that this is a bit unsettling.

But we are emotional as well as rational beings, and humans are ultimately social beings. We need to be able to ponder and debate these sorts of things.

I wonder if it's because human reproduction is so intimate and fundamental (obvs!) - it is qualitatively different to a corneal or kidney transplant because of the way we understand ourselves as human? That mother-child dyad is central to the way we're organised as a species.

The situations in which you can be a beating heart donor (required for many/most organ donation) are few and far between and basically are always unforeseen. Big car accident, brain haemorrhage, fall from height etc. (I have known of very sad cases where people planning to take their own life also make their wishes to be donors known and if they die in some ways that can happen.)

Terminal illnesses that would give you time to discuss and prepare to be a donor nearly always rule out your eligibility to donate.

So the final say and decision making will always be from your close family in discussion with the medical team. Not you. Because you will be in a situation where there is no hope of improvement or recovery. And where your survival is only temporary and dependent on life support.

I also don't want my womb to be used to bring a baby into the world who might have the same genetic issues as it's parents (and need the same donor surgery as them or have the burden of considering it) if they haven't had IVF screening. We have enough children with life limiting issues, genetic problems and traumatic circumstances without deliberately bringing more into the world to make their parents feel better.

Most of the children available for adoption in the 21st century aren't best served by inexperienced parents seeking a 'next best thing' to being able to conceive. They are rarely babies and often have complex needs the most suitable families for them aren't green as the grass first time parents.

I concur

So what I understand from this, is that the dead woman did not know ahead of her death that her uterus might be harvested, and didn't even know that was an organ that could potentially be taken? So she couldn't consent to that, specifically.

What a terrifying thought. If the child didn’t work out would they simply compost the leftovers like an uneaten ready meal? This really goes to the heart of being human and brain development. Messing with this is likely to reduce IQ at an even faster rate than it’s currently declining.

Being pregnant physically changes the mother’s brain to run the “operating system” which grows the baby. It creates a semi permanent change in the neural connections which sets the scene for bonding. It’s part of the reason why mums are less likely to abandon a child than dads. Then theres the ear development in the baby with the sensory input which programmes the baby’s brain.

If you’re made in a “lab bag” where’s the connection? Won’t lab babies turn out like those poor Romanian orphans from the 1980-90s? Humans need contact to learn how to function and that starts from conception.

(I know it’s not everyone’s experience but I found childbirth to be hard work but ok/good. Im not negating anyone’s negative experiences but women do need to hear some positive stories to know it can be a good thing)

They are brain stem dead yes. But their heart is beating. That's how donation of major organs works. They are not legally dead.

They are alive in ITU prior to going to theatre. Their heart is beating, their skin is warm, they have colour.

They die in theatre when their organs are removed and placed in ice to be couriered to the waiting recipients.

It is an enormously complicated procedure and process. The number of possible donors will always be small because the way in which you die is unusual- it will often be from an accident or sometimes a spontaneous brain haemorrhage.

Post death donation is limited to some tissues, and bone I think. But major organs require a blood supply and very minimal time without circulation. For this reason the donor cannot be dead before the recipient is already in theatre and the cavity is ready to receive the new organ.

Describing anyone who has reticence or unease about any of this as selfish is unbelievably wrong.

Families of donors go through huge amounts to enable donation. They should be praised. But those who can't should not be in anyway criticised.

What's so confusing about my response?

Lol, seriously, a trope?? You made the argument that a womb transplant is akin to a lung or kidney transplant. But no one "needs" a womb transplant in order to start a family. Hell no one is going to die if they don't start a family. I feel for women who have fertility issues but a womb transplant is not a need it is a voluntary procedure. Alternatives are not just adoption literally you can go without having children, many people do. You can throw yourself into programs working with kids. You can forge relationships with neices/nephews. There are any, many alternatives if you can't have a child of your own. But no one will die w/o a womb transplant and comparing it to real life saving procedures is just, a false comparison.

There are many good arguments against, I'm sure. One being that some women wouldn't want their organs to go to trans identified men for gender reassignment purposes, others not wanting their uterus used again, and others that, given the number of sexual abusers etc undiscovered in society, they'd rather not risk donating a kidney to a paedophile.

What you have written is in fact what Shulamith Firestone an early radical feminist thought would / should be the future to allow women to not be tied to their reproductive function.

And Aldous Huxley's Brave New World showed the other dystopian side of that ...

Yes @IwantToRetire I felt uneasy hearing about tis this morning. Someone had to die for this child to be born. And I gather that the "womb transplant" is not like any other transplant where the organ becomes a permanent part of the recipient's body. I gather that a transplanted womb has to be removed after the birth.

I really really hope the news doesn't fuel the mentally iil portion of trans-identfied men who now think they can become pregnant. Apart from being hugely disrespectful to the dead donor, a man's body has none of the physiological systems to support a uterus and a pregnancy.

But when were trans-idntified men ever respectful of biology or women ?

Well there’s posters falling over themselves to donate their wombs on this thread so perhaps poor women with no choices in other countries won’t be expected to give theirs up.

I'm guessing they are being deliberately vague to protect confidentiality. Another post explains she/her family had given consent for other organs in the time honoured way and I am guessing the research team then made their approach and they agreed. The organs would all have been taken in the same op I guess.

Similar to other research recruitment really. But possibly a lot more high stakes.

Thank you for sharing. It's not particularly clear under what circumstances a donation could take place. Would it be that she was an organ donor and her family agreed?

I felt very emotional watching this on the news today especially when the new mum said how grateful she was to the deceased donor and her family.
My nephew died very suddenly at 26 (accident) and donated his kidneys and liver. His parents were sent letters from the recipients expressing how much their lives had been changed for the better thanks to his donation. It was of some comfort to them. This is no different.
Life changing and in a good way.

People used to call the first IVF baby the “Frankenbaby”. Vile.

There are lots of similar queries on the NHS Organ Donation FB page.

They answer with variations of:

"Hi Victoria, thank you for your question. It’s incredibly generous of anyone to want to donate organs. Deceased uterus donation is currently not part of the Organ Donor Register or the Presumed Consent (Opt Out) law. This is a small research programme and it’s also very rare that people die in circumstances where they can donate. So, we don’t ask for people to agree to this type of donation in advance. But we’d ask anyone who wants to help others through organ donation to record their decision on the NHS Organ Donor Register, and they discuss their decision with their next of kin. JM"