To find the idea of uterus donation and having the babies of a dead woman wrong and sick?

[SummerGems]

In general I am a supporter of organ donation. I do believe it’s a personal thing but for me the idea of donating the majority of my organs has never presented a problem. Until today.

Apparently a woman has given birth after receiving the donated uterus of a dead woman. Moreover, the babies she gave birth to were from the woman’s ovaries and eggs which were fertilised subsequent to her death.

Now, I am fully aware that people are going to say that it’s wonderful, that you can’t possibly know until you’ve been through fertility issues etc etc etc. But I personally think this is a step too far.

Obviously the people in question had choices and so on, but really, just because something can be done,doesn’t mean that it should. Are we really to believe that those children will be comfortable with the idea that they were conceived of a dead woman’s ovaries? That it’s right to create children where there is no biological parent just because someone has infertility? Not to mention the fact that according to the news reports all previous donations have resulted in miscarriages?

If uterus donation were to become a mainstream accepted thing I would be ticking the box to say that I didn’t consent. And if it were all or nothing I would refuse to be any kind of organ donor if it meant my uterus and/or my eggs would be donated.

In the case of surrogacy it is literally buying a child in the case of straight surrogacy where the surrogate uses their own eggs, or renting a uterus in the case of host surrogacy. Yes the law states that only costs can apply but let’s be honest here it doesn’t cost upwards of £10k to have a baby. It’s a personal objection and obviously people will still continue to do it, I just don’t agree with it and would never have gone down that route.

Quite the opposite, I would say that £10k is not nearly enough to pay for a woman risking her very life. The health cost can be much more than those 10k. But I think we agree on that it shouldn't be done.

Surrogacy is unethical, full stop. There's a grey area when a woman who personally knows the infertile woman does it as a favour to her friend, but even then, I think it advisable to make sure there's no coercion taking place.
Unlike donating a kidney to someone you know and love, a person doesn't need to have a baby to survive.

I miiight (if I had dangerous hobbies likely to kill me at a still fertile age) will my uterus to a woman I personally know and know would be a good mother.

Other than that, though - donating an uterus won't ever save a life, and could potentially create an unhappy child.
I aim to not increase the suffering in the world with my choices.

donating an uterus won't ever save a life, and could potentially create an unhappy child. I aim to not increase the suffering in the world with my choices.

So, you don't have children?

The - you don't have children question is irrelevant. We all get that infertility is tough. Some of us are infertile. But that does not mean that everything is justified to get a baby.
Buy a baby from a poor family - oh you can't criticise if you have a child, etc etc.
Fuck that. Some things are simply wrong.

If I die they can happily have my uterus. I won't need it anymore.

I know this wasn't the case with the baby that's just been born but I wouldn't want to donate my ovaries. If I decide to donate eggs in the future then I will, but I'm not sure how I feel about a biological sibling for my children walking around, not knowing. If I hadn't had children they could have them too, though.

So, you don't have children?

I will wait until definite, efficient measures against climate change are taken until I have children.

Oh, and until women get bodily autonomy while giving birth in a hospital. I also count my own suffering.

I think that @lweji's point was more specific-,every pregnancy, however it came about, has the potential to create an 'unhappy child' and what makes someone a good parent is fairly subjective.

Having a child doesn't justify everything. I fully agree.

But claiming to be against womb transplant because it could potentially create an unhappy child is hypocritical, unless the person making that claim is against having children in general.

I will wait until definite, efficient measures against climate change are taken until I have children.

So, never?

No it is not hypocritical. I do think surgery like this is experimenting, both physically and emotionally.

No it is not hypocritical. I do think surgery like this is experimenting, both physically and emotionally.

You'll have to explain your logic better, I'm afraid.

I have absolutely no issue with any part of my body being used after my death, if that can be of use to someone else.

My ovaries are no good any more as I've gone through the menopause, but if I'd died earlier, I'd have been happy for eggs or ovarian tissue to be used if that had been technically feasible at the time.

I've ticked the "use anything" box on the organ donor register box - but if you're not comfortable with the idea of certain parts of your body being used, then there is the facility to specify. Whatever you decide though, make sure that your nearest and dearest are aware. It's important to talk about these things.

(Unfortunately, I know that dh isn't comfortable with organ donation,so I'd have to respect those wishes but I am pleased that ds, who recently turned 18 and has got himself a provisional licence primarily for ID purposes has put himself on to the organ register )

I have not read the whole thread but was listening to something on this on Radio 4 news at one, and thought they said the donor would be living.

because donor conception is Deliberately creating parentless children who are missing a part of their identity. And it’s not the same as a parent whose relationship ends where the other parent decides to cut all ties, this is a deliberate act with no thought to how it might affect the child born of such a conception

Actually to be accepted for treatment with donor eggs you have to have counselling, so you are totally out of order to say that there is no thought of how it might affect the child.

I would give my uterus, but not my eggs. I don't want any biological children of mine out there after I'm gone. But not sure my womb would ever be used, I've had four sections so don't think it would even be considered.

Wait until they start to be transplanted into a trans woman. That's the next step.

donating an uterus won't ever save a life, and could potentially create an unhappy child. I aim to not increase the suffering in the world with my choices.

I actually read that accidentally as 'could potentially create a happy child' which, really, is the more likely outcome.

Very grandiose and self-righteous statement anyway. Who gets to decide who should or should not have children?

I'm disappointed with the open prejudice on this thread

Hopefully someone has already corrected this but the baby was categorically NOT conceived using the dead woman’s eggs. The donee was born without a womb but had ovaries and produced her own eggs which were harvested pre-transplant, fertilised with the father’s sperm, and planted in the womb several months after she received the transplant.

I think it’s a wonderful thing.

The ovaries were not from the deceased woman.

But don't let the pesky facts get in the way of a morally outraged headline, eh?

It's a medical marvel, and a breakthrough for certain.

But does it open the door to infertile women actively seeking a donated uterus in the quest to become a mother? And how should such transplants be funded? The NHS is skint and postcode rationing for IVF is a reality in many areas.

That is WRONG.... btw babes happy 18th birthday your also technically not my biological child and your biological mum is dead she donated me her uterus and eggs 😳 that wouldn't mess with your head would it.

I think the uterus donation isn't to bad but the eggs with it? Why not use an EGG donor at least the baby can get information that way

I think the uterus donation isn't to bad but the eggs with it? Why not use an EGG donor at least the baby can get information that way

Just pointing out:

Message poster QuizzlyBear Wed 05-Dec-18 14:55:32
The ovaries were not from the deceased woman.

But don't let the pesky facts get in the way of a morally outraged headline, eh?

I think it's amazing. The heartbreak that the poor woman must have gone through before getting to this point, and now medicine has found a way to offer her a solution. Wow!

And I also think it matters not one jot what you think OP. If you don't agree with it, don't donate yours. Simples.

I'd give my uterus now or when I'm dead, I don't need it and no I don't particularly care if it goes to one of these awful trans people Mumsnet is so horrified about, in fact I wouldn't want to know where it went or their circumstances. I'd assume the people making that decision were qualified to do so.

But claiming to be against womb transplant because it could potentially create an unhappy child is hypocritical, unless the person making that claim is against having children in general.

Nonsense.

That's like saying someone who doesn't want to give a child up for adoption to complete strangers who haven't undergone any kind of screening process, is hypocritical.

If I have children myself, I can predict with some certainty what kind of parent I am going to be.

If I give a child up for adoption, even anonymously, I know that potential adoptive parents will undergo a screening process to make sure they at least aren't obviously unfit. (Here, at least. I'd still want to meet the potential adoptive parents myself if I did give a child up for adoption)

If I just give someone I don't know my uterus to do with as they please, I have no way of knowing how the child born from my uterus will be treated.

HestiaParthenos

For starters, babies don't bud from wombs, so it wouldn't be your child, even if your womb was used.

Then, if the argument is the "potential" of unhappiness, then all children are born with the potential to be unhappy. Even if the person using that argument intends to be the best parent, or thinks they are.