Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

organ transplant discussion on lbc right now

166 replies

Clairetree1 · 05/08/2018 09:21

anyone like to ring and explain they are opting out of organ donation because of claims of TRAs that they will be allowed to have our uteruses?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
Coldhandscoldheart · 05/08/2018 09:22

Surely you don’t opt out of the whole thing, you just make sure your family know that your uterus is not for donation?

TitsalinaBumSquash · 05/08/2018 09:25

How fucking stupid do you have to be to think your uterus would be donated without consent. It makes a whole mockery of people desperate for organs to stay alive. A step to far. Angry

Original poster
Clairetree1 · 05/08/2018 09:31

How fucking stupid do you have to be to think your uterus would be donated without consent

that is the whole idea, consent is to be presumed unless you opt out of organ donation.

so people who don't want their uterus donated need to be able to say that -

And TRAs are insisting that they have the right to take uteruses from women who are have not opted out of organ donating.

And that they are going to be able to get them sewn in.

personally, I don't think it will be possible, but that is not the point,

TRAs insisting that it is possible and they will do it is making women not want to be organ donars

OP posts:
TerfsUp · 05/08/2018 09:32

A transwoman cannot have a uterine transplant. Insertion of a uterus would be an implant.

And, yes. Echoing what others have said. You can't donate an organ without consent.

Coldhandscoldheart · 05/08/2018 09:36

This is why it’s so important to have the discussion about organ donation with your family. Family consent will always be sought for organ donation despite presumed consent, and so they need to know your wishes regarding your body.
Lots of people for example don’t want their corneas taken as another example. It’s a part of the whole discussion.
Organ donation is well recognised as a very sensitive area and medical staff always (I hope always) careful to treat families with care and concern.

TerfsUp · 05/08/2018 09:37

This is a load of angst for nothing: uterine implantation is years in the future.

A bit of common sense would be helpful here.

UpstartCrow · 05/08/2018 09:37

Female to male uterine implants are a fantasy.

Transplants are carried out female to female. Males are not capable of carrying a pregnancy to term. The uterus isn't the organ that supports the hormone changes that the developing fetus needs.
Pregnancy isn't like lego. Its a reciprocal process between the fetus and the mother. The mothers body adapts to the needs of the growing fetus.

Its the same with breastfeeding. Its not just making milk; the mothers body produces colostrum for the first few days, and after that tailors the milk to the needs of the baby.

Coldhandscoldheart · 05/08/2018 09:51

Yes, also what they said. Sorry I derailed a bit. Nonetheless, you should have the conversation with your family,

TroysMammy · 05/08/2018 09:56

I thought a transplant was removing a diseased organ and replacing it with exactly the same healthy organ. Taking out an uterus and implanting it where one was never there in the first place, unless a woman who didn't have one from birth, is not a transplant.

Original poster
Clairetree1 · 05/08/2018 09:58

And, yes. Echoing what others have said. You can't donate an organ without consent

the whole conversation is about the change in the law coming in, which is about consent being presumed.

OP posts:
Original poster
Clairetree1 · 05/08/2018 10:00

consent is presumed unless you opt out, and women are opting out because of the claims by TRAs that they are going to be able to snatch uteruses,

whether that is scientifically possible or not, doesn't change anything.

since when have TRA claims been in any way limited by scientific fact?

OP posts:
CircleofWillis · 05/08/2018 10:00

Totally irrelevant at the moment as the science for this is decades away. It would be just as meaningless to object to your brain being transplanted.
This might be a fight for our granddaughters or even our daughters but not for us...

Bowlofbabelfish · 05/08/2018 10:05

There are two main issues here I think.

  1. The technical side. You cannot do a female to male uterus implant with current tech nor is it anywhere in the next decade or two. The ethics of it are also dodgy, it’d present a huge risk to the foetus. As PPs point out a womb is not a jar, multiple systems work to gestate.
  1. The ethical implications of aggressive activists presuming they have a right to women’s organs. Literally proposing to use women and women’s body parts as they see fit. This is what should be being discussed - why women’s rights to boundaries are being pushed and eroded like this. Why women are being seen as disposable incubators.
Original poster
Clairetree1 · 05/08/2018 10:07

Totally irrelevant at the moment as the science for this is decades away

its not irrelevant, because the TRAs are claiming it is almost possible, and women are opting out TODAY and limiting organ availability TODAY because of the threat of uterus snatching

OP posts:
Bowlofbabelfish · 05/08/2018 10:10

Almost possible. Like fusion Wink

The real issue here is the stunning presumption that men are entitled to women’s bodies in every way possible. Lesbians must accept ladypenis. Women must accept men in all their spaces. It’s a view of the world that seems to see women existing purely as a service object to males. Uterus transplants are the ultimate in that - it shows that they see women as meat.

WrongOnTheInternet · 05/08/2018 10:25

Has anyone asked the NHS about this yet?

OldCrone · 05/08/2018 10:25

Clairetree1
Would they object to their uterus being transplanted into a woman who was born without one, or whose uterus was non-functioning? Because that is the only way it would be used at the moment.

sociopathsunited · 05/08/2018 10:40

I've never heard of a uterus transplant, woman to woman. Is it possible? It might be, in the future, but at the moment I think I'm more concerned at the attitude of a teeny tiny segment of the population looking at us in the same way a dog looks at a butcher's shop. I'm still on the organ donor register, and will stay there. I'm not letting the brave and stunning people frighten me into or away from anything. Its not possible, its science fiction, its fantasy, its not real life.

Bowlofbabelfish · 05/08/2018 10:44

Female to female has been done and resulted in live birth. There was a case in Sweden a year or so back.

I think (and I could be wrong) that the women were related and this may have helped with rejection issues? I also seem to remember the uterus being removed afterwards.

Bowlofbabelfish · 05/08/2018 10:46

think I'm more concerned at the attitude of a teeny tiny segment of the population looking at us in the same way a dog looks at a butcher's shop.

This is the issue for me. At the moment Female to Male is not happening and people are desperate for donated organs. Please don’t come off the transplant register for this.

However, DO point out that it shows a gross disrespect for women’s physical, medical and sexual boundaries

OldCrone · 05/08/2018 10:49

I've never heard of a uterus transplant, woman to woman. Is it possible?

According to this, it has been done, but it is a new procedure, with the first live birth in 2014.

IamtheOrpheliac · 05/08/2018 10:50

The response to people opting out because of TRA posturing needs to be providing the facts then. Uterus transplants to females is still a very rare thing. A uterus is generally not transplanted with ovaries and fallopian tubes intact, so a woman who did not have functioning ovaries herself would still be unable to conceive naturally. All of that aside, despite hormones, there are structural differences between male and female bodies that mean implanting a uterus into a trans woman is not something that is imminently possible or desirable. It would require a lot of reconstructive surgery simply to make space and to connect it to the neovagina. It would also require the patient to be on anti rejection drugs for the rest of their lives. If it was possible for the new uterus owner to carry a child, the pregnacy would be high risk due to the transplanted organ and the child would have to be delivered by cesarean because a male body is not equipped with a birth canal. I don't see the NHS funding it in a hurry, do you?

Original poster
Clairetree1 · 05/08/2018 10:52

I've never heard of a uterus transplant, woman to woman. Is it possible?

yes, this happens

OP posts:
Coldhandscoldheart · 05/08/2018 11:02

“ yes this happens “
This happened once in a female to female, familial transplant.

BarrackerBarmer · 05/08/2018 11:04

Having been on the organ donor register for many years, I removed myself when discussion began around presumed consent, and spoke to the transplant services about why I had done this.
If opt in is retained, I will opt back in.
For as long as opt out is on the table, I am out.

I do however remain a potential organ donor, and my family would convey my wishes. I just believe that consent must be explicitly obtained and never presumed, in this and in every other circumstance.

But the only thing I could do to dissuade the adoption of presumed consent was to show that the principle would have the opposite effect to that intended, of increasing numbers by presuming consent where none exists.

Presumed consent is an oxymoron.
If you have to presume consent, you simply do not have it.