An Unlimited Supply of Uteruses

[ClingFilmApplications]

.mode {
tinfoilhat: on;
}

Irrespective of people's views on the law change regarding assumed consent for organ taking donation, I can't help but wonder "why now?" - at the time when doctors are now claiming it may soon be possible for transwomen to receive donor uterus implants?

It's an awful thought to be sure - but when this kind of law change happens, it's always worth considering what kind of activities and situations this enables, and what the implications of such scenarios are.

Do join me under my tinfoil umbrella;
The people who think they are in charge are being useful idiots, driving us into a dystopian, highly controlled and manufactured future.

Theres an awful lot of money to be made from artificial/manufactured blood and organs.

A uterus is not an essential organ for a man Scarlett

Steady on, MadamBatty. Next you'll be telling us that humans can't change sex.

As opposed to your disgusting racism scarlet

A uterus is t essential for anyone.

I could have mine removed tomorrow with no negative impact on my life, can’t say the same about my liver.

Quelle surprise, said no one, as Scarletts thread was pulled...

If I die, please utilise my uterus.

everyone is entitled to receive organs that will help them in life

Erm... They're kind of not actually. That's why it's called "donation".

(somewhat telling slip-in of the word "entitled" there)

The reason ‘why now?’ is because of the years of campaigning, mainly from those directly affected by extensive disease, or the bereaved of those who died still waiting.

If you don’t want to participate, you can easily opt out. People do so for many reasons, and no matter what the reason, that’s OK.

I cannot donate any part of me (and am considering opting out simply do no one wasted time or hope in thinking that I might be suitable should I be more or less dead following an accident). There are all sorts of other reasons, and it doesn’t matter if people think them good, bad or indifferent. Just do it.

But whilst thinking of donations, could I urge those of you who can to register to donate bone marrow? You don’t need to be dead, and it is utterly life-saving. People are still dying because no suitable donor can be found, and of course living donors fall outside these changes

I doubt this will ever happen to be honest so not really worth worrying about.
Think of all the things that would have to be perfect to make a uterus transplant to a male work?
The hormones, blood flow, monthly cycle.
For what end?
I would think it's a better use of money to improve the outcomes for infertile women using donor surrogacy or for natal women needing a donor uterus rather than trying to recreate a uterus in a body not designed for this purpose.

I am waiting for whole body transplants to be the next big medical push. (Be prepared for a huge media campaign to encourage young women to take up biking).

So, just to be clear:

You think the recent change to assumed consent for life saving organ donation has happened because, at some point in the future, men may be able to have a womb transplant?

You think some grand transgender conspiracy controls the government and is making sure there is a good supply of wombs?

Even though this change has been debated for years?
Even though it doesn't apply to elective surgery?
Even though this government can't organise a piss up in a brewery?

The debate about opt in/ opt out has been running for years. I really don't think the change in the law has anything to do with harvesting uteri.

I used to be opted in but with specific exclusions which my husband knew about. I do not support assisted conception so I was always clear that no eggs or tissue could be used for anything connected with assisted conception , including research. I have now opted out but my husband knows any organ can be used except for those purposes.

Agree with iVampire and donquixotedelamancha - the change has absolutely nothing to do with harvesting uteri. The OP is ridiculous.

You think some grand transgender conspiracy controls the government

You don't need to "control" government to swing a policy change. That should be self-evident. It's called "lobbying" and there's often money involved.

@lassoffyvie

Out of curiosity, may I ask why you don't support assisted conception? Not judging your decision at all, and no pressure to answer as I don't want to derail the thread but I'm genuinely interested as I've not encountered anyone who has vocalised an opposition on this before.

WTAF!!
Presumed consent regarding organ donation has been legal in other countries for many years we are very slow to catch up. Transplanting a uterus into a trans woman is a relatively new idea and will be far more complex than transplanting one into someone born biologically female so I would imagine that will have to be perfected before anything else happens.
Also the main issue for presumed consent is that people die waiting for kidneys and lungs and hearts etc. Presumed consent is a victory, the fact that your trying to assign some "trans agenda" to this is ridiculous. Just opt out if you don't want your organs to be donated.

The OP is ridiculous

Well, quite possibly - I wasn't asserting this as a statement of fact, but it will be interesting to see how this pans out in the long run.

With regard to "elective" surgery, it's worth mentioning that trans activists regularly refer to trans surgery as "life saving".

Two separate issues. No need for a tinfoil hat here.

No one who knows the first thing about human biology will be advocating transplanting a uterus where no uterus existed before. But the need for other essential parts to replace those worn out or otherwise not up to the job far exceeds supply. This is the reason for pushing for an opting out system to replace opting in. I think they already have opting out in Wales? And in Spain...

You won't have to give a reason for opting out so if you don't like the idea of having no control over who gets your spare parts (though why would you mind?) then just opt out.

Oh of course it won't stop people fantasising. You can't really stop that.

Just opt out if you don't want your organs to be donated

And if despite opting out you are happy for some , but not all organs to be used, make sure that your family know that.

No one who knows the first thing about human biology will be advocating transplanting a uterus where no uterus existed before.

You mean in the same way no-one would think of attaching a penis where no penis existed before?

Transpecies transplants probably seemed like fantasy a while back, but Pig Pharmingg* is a reality now. The development of the anti-rejection drugs needed for it to succeed no doubt has other applications.

Incidentally, the person at the forefront of these remarkable medical developments is America's most successful transwoman CEOO*

It's very different sticking a penis on the outside than trying to grow a person on the inside. We know how a penis works, for example, but we don't fully understand all the physiological and hormonal changes from pregnancy.

The biggest problem, though, is that in reproductive ethics, the baby is considered, not just the person wanting body parts stuck in. What would it do to a foetus to be grown saturated in cross sex hormones and anti rejection drugs in a space too small, with a pelvis it can't escape from if things take a turn?

My surgical history is so minor compared to this theoretical person, but I've been advised not to have any more children, there's no way it would be safe.

All for what? The "mum," doesn't have her own eggs either, what is the benefit over adoption/surrogacy to make up for the enormous risks?

If we see male animals that this is tested on, we might be within 30yrs of it happening in humans, but none of the shouty activists will be getting a womb anytime soon.