U.K. first womb transplant

[VestaTilley]

The BBC has reported today that the first womb transplant has taken place in a hospital in England. A 40 year old woman donated her womb to her sister, hopefully enabling her to have children.

AIBU to be concerned about a potential dystopian future where women’s reproductive organs are harvested like car parts?

Journalists are treating this like it’s a positive, with few questions being asked about how the donor is recovering, how the foetus (if the recipient does conceive) will fare if the woman has to continue taking immuno suppressive drugs? Whether there is increased miscarriage risk?

Transplants are supposed to be life saving, not about wish fulfilment. Apparently 10 brain dead women are being lined up for future donation!

To me this all seems part of a bigger picture of surrogacy, synthetic embryo creation (reported earlier this year) and a drive to disassociate women from reproduction and the biology of our sex.

Am I alone in being bothered by this? I wish journalists would look more at the bigger societal picture.

Link here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-66514270

Vulnerable women will be forced to donate but is it any worse than being forced to donate a kidney?

I don’t see a problem with it.

Clarification * I do see a problem with vulnerable people being forced to donate obviously! but that is a separate issue.

Do people genuinely believe that there's no suggestion of men receiving a womb transplant? I feel like there's a bit of a twist of words/semantics but thats what research is isn't it? Looking into a suggestion to see if its medically possible?

No, at a private hospital in a private theatre, paid for by a charity.

Yes that’s what research is, it looks at the possibility of things. What it doesn’t do is answer the question if that possibility before and research has even been suggested. It also doesn’t change laws, account for wider ethical questions beyond consent or mean that the thing it’s researching is likely to ever happen.

It is not ‘just semantics’ to say the researcher here is not suggesting putting wombs in men, it’s fundamental to the argument because the semantics in this case are the difference between ‘we are planning to put a womb in a man’ and ‘we are not going to put a womb in a man but recognise that this is a plausible extension of my research into womb transplants for biological women’ - semantics is very, very important in scientific research and not understanding that is why people end up angry on the internet about things that aren’t true.

Whilst as a medical procedure I welcome it, I share the OPs concerns about what could happen in future, and that pressure or economic circumstances could lead to donations that are not really a free choice.

One of what I think would need to be several or more safeguards would be a period of time between offering and the donation actually happening, probably a period of years.

Do people genuinely believe that there's no suggestion of men receiving a womb transplant? I feel like there's a bit of a twist of words/semantics but thats what research is isn't it? Looking into a suggestion to see if its medically possible?

Yes I believe that's what they were doing, and yes I believe it's a question of semantics. As @ArabeIIaScott pointed out.

I don't believe whether it will actually be possible is the issue here, FWIW I don't think it is. I care only that they did research on it, and I'm not convinced it was just to cover all bases because I don't see any end conclusions ruling out the possibility. So they have left it open, and indeed the lead researcher on the Imperial College paper, who was one of the surgeons involved, has commented in the media today that he believes it will be possible within the next couple of decades. So clearly not so "impossible" in their minds, as I pointed out repeatedly.

They are also not the only research team in the world looking at it. There is one in India and two in the US that I can think of off the top of my head.

My first reaction was queasiness. It just instinctively feels wrong.

And yes, I know it's the Mail...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-12435963/Trans-women-benefit-womb-transplant-breakthrough.html

Some doctor somewhere will be willing to attempt a uterus transplant into a man, and the men who want this kind of thing will be in it purely for the fetish of having a womb inside them. Some of these men have a pregnancy fetish which, hopefully, will be completely futile and some of them will just get off on having what they see as the holy grail of womanhood harvested from an actual woman and implanted inside them.

The idea of poor women having to sell body parts so men can get their kicks is repellent, and I can't imagine many women would be happy to think that after death their uterus could be gifted to some creep after his ultimate thrill.

Yes, in that article he says (among others quoted around the world) that it is not yet technically feasible but his "suspicion is 10 to 20 years".

"Professor Smith said: 'We're very aware that 2010 Gender Equality Act mandates equal treatment for cisgender and transgender women."

He also thinks the Equality Act 2010 is just for the benefit of trans people, apparently

Same story in the Independent
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/richard-smith-imperial-college-london-university-of-alabama-sweden-mailonline-b2397710.html

The media are reproducing a PA news agency which quotes Richard Smith.

Some doctor somewhere will be willing to attempt a uterus transplant into a man, and the men who want this kind of thing will be in it purely for the fetish of having a womb inside them. Some of these men have a pregnancy fetish which, hopefully, will be completely futile and some of them will just get off on having what they see as the holy grail of womanhood harvested from an actual woman and implanted inside them.

The idea of poor women having to sell body parts so men can get their kicks is repellent, and I can't imagine many women would be happy to think that after death their uterus could be gifted to some creep after his ultimate thrill.

Some people are extremely naive. If they weren't, all this wouldn't have got this far.

Where does it say he thinks the equality act is "is just for the benefit of trans people". When the discussion is around trans, his answer will be in relation to that. He isn't going to mention ethnicity or disability when they are in no way connected to the conversation being had.

It wouldn't have got this far??

Like transplantation of limbs? Or skin? Or the research around pancreas transplants?

It's a tongue in cheek comment. There is no "2010 Gender Equality Act" in existence. It covers 9 protected characteristics, it isn't just about "gender". Clueless.

Yes, I feel like it's up to the organ owner. Should never be without consent, or for cash, though

It wouldn't have got this far??

Like transplantation of limbs? Or skin? Or the research around pancreas transplants?

Transgenderism as a political agenda

One doctor has already said that he's planning to transplant a womb into a transwoman

In India, where all those women are being coerced into having hysterectomies.

https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/indian-doctor-plans-world-first-womb-transplant-into-trans-woman/

If they think they can do it, they'll be racing to try.

Oh sorry, ironically when I referred to twist of words/semantics I meant yours as you have said there's no suggestion of transplanting a womb into a man, yet you acknowledged earlier (after saying no it hasn't happened iirc) research has taken place, so surely that's what research is? Looking into something that has been suggested could be possible? Like the unicorn example - no one would research unicorns, so why research transplanting wombs into men if its an absolute certainty that's not possible either?

Dear Fucking God. Quite apart from the rest of it...you're sticking by this bit are you?

all organ donations come from brain dead donors. If they were dead, their organs would be useless. Although they're working on this - yay science!

Because if you are, then I definitely agree with your last statement...

Uterus transplants to men have been tried before. Einar Wegener was a man who died from having this surgery in the 1930s.

all organ donations come from brain dead donors. If they were dead, their organs would be useless.

There are many living donations from altruistic donors and from relatives. No brain death involved.

A living donor is someone who has agreed to donate their kidney to you while they are still alive. This is possible as nearly everyone has two kidneys, but can lead normal healthy lives with just one kidney. A living donor will need an operation to remove one of their kidneys so it can be transplanted into you.
On average, approximately 30 out of 100 kidney transplants are from living donors.

https://www.nhsbt.nhs.uk/organ-transplantation/kidney/receiving-a-kidney/living-donor-kidney-transplant/