Indian surgeon plans to transplant a womb into a transwomen

[kieronsmum]

www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-10796849/Indian-surgeon-plans-transplant-womb-TRANS-woman-pregnant-world-op.html

lost for words

It was only a matter of time. Brave New Fucking World. Am I the only person incensed the the UK give £55million + in aid to India annually yet they have a Space programme and means to do this crap?

I thought that aid was more like blood money to try and atone for all the crap we did to them in the past.

I'd like to go and live under a rock at this point

Bwaha it’s prone to fail. Women’s bodies are categorically designed for pregnancies, wide shallow hips, small bladders, brain chemistry. Transfer a womb all you want but it’ll never grow a foetus.

@veronicagoldberg

For now not may be impossible. But the fact it’s being considered is something.

let’s be real, we all know this will happen sooner or later. Before this there was talk of artificial wombs existing outside the human body which were being worked on, now this. It will happen eventually and we have to roll with it. You can say it’s unnatural but so is stopping periods or getting a vasectomy.

@SonicHg

”morality” aside it almost certainly will happen some time (though I’m sceptical India has developed the tech to do this which is unknown to everyone else). There are problems sure, but organ transplant was thought impossible once as were mechanised “smart” limbs which mover on command.

Its coming, most people won’t use it, but it’s coming.

Loads of stuff is theoretically scientifically possible but doesn't happen because of being ethically wrong.

We shouldn't put 'ethics aside' just because some people will try to.

Putting ethics aside, shrugging our shoulders and allowing ethically dubious stuff because 'it's inevitable' (ie because a man wants to do it therefore it will happen one day) is a dangerous route imo.

The difference with this is that it involves experimenting on the foetus - which takes this onto a different level. I know that medicine has been ignoring unethical experimentation on some children and only recently has acknowledged the damage done but suspect that this will be deemed totally unacceptable.

@MrsOvertonsWindow

At first it may be thought unacceptable by some - but it really is just a matter of time if it can be done. They will start small and once the idea has been around for a long time someone somewhere will do it - it will be controversial, then more will do it, then no one but some backwards types will care about the tiny minority who choose it. It’s inevitable whether people want it or not.

After all we allow abortion which is likewise doing something to the fetus (and I’m pro abortion rights), once that was illegal too. I believe there have already been some attempts at experimentation on highly damaged developmentally fetuses.

It is what it is, this Will definetly happen. Might not be for a long time though.

Yes. The difference is that the uterus implant will happen. I don’t believe there is one person on this thread who thinks that that particular operation will happen.

It is the pregnancy part that is the ethical issue. Because it involves the life of another human being used as the ultimate accessory.

The ethical issue of experimenting on embryos. Ethic boards only lifted that to 21 days very recently after decades. And only because of stem cells… genuinely life saving work.

So, it will be a very very long time for the ethics boards to agree to this. But there are unethical people who will do this but it will only happen a short time before it is exposed. Because it will be exposed as a scam, probably, and not because a patient suddenly realised how disgustingly unethical they were in being part of such an experiment. Ie. The way we will hear that this is happening away from ethics boards is unhappy patients is my point.

As I said earlier, this is a human baby in a bag experiment (even though I have been called disgusting on other threads for pointing out this fact). Even if some underground lab away from ethics boards and the media’s eye was successful in having a foetus develop to full term in a bag, that team would be advertising the success. Because it would be an incredibly lucrative business.

And it would then take decades of researching that infant throughout all life’s development stages to ensure there is no negative side effects physically to that process.

And that is not taking into the account the knowledge we already have from children of surrogacy, of donor conception or from different adoption options of some of the mental health issues experienced as adults.

No. The uterine implants will most likely go ahead. And there will be patient deaths because to maintain such an organ requires suppression of the immune system.

This automatic linkage of ‘then the pregnancies will start’ is the issue that we are all disputing on this thread.

No

The difference is that an abortion is not creating a foetus or an embryo deliberately to experiment on or to end its life to start with.

It is what it is, this Will definetly happen. Might not be for a long time though.

yep.

When a complete female reproductive system including the processing systems for monitoring the foetus’ development and allowing the foetus’ body to take what it needs from the mother to be implanted and all the ancillary processes can also be implanted.

Or … when we develop atomization technology that allows us to evaporate into atoms and then be reconstructed how we want. Like in Star Trek.

Just thinking about how likely (or not) this is.... Has anyone tried this in any other mammals? I don't recall any excited headlines "Boar gives birth to piglets" or similar and it's unlikely anyone would start with humans.

Yes, the Danish Girl.

In the event of a donation, your family would be approached, and your womb would only be removed with their consent on your behalf, in the same way as they confirm consent for everything else. They could accept most items and refuse the gift of your womb.

If you came off the donor list, wouldn't that mean the (potential) loss of your kidneys, lungs, heart because they wouldn't approach your family? Would that be OK or do you just mean to limit to your womb?

It is what it is, this Will definetly happen. Might not be for a long time though.

Honestly, if science was able to ethically allow a ‘human baby in a bag’ experimentation to be occurring, don’t you think it would have happened decades ago?

Because it is the next stage in commoditising infants.

What ethics do you believe will be overcome to allow this to happen anytime in the future when we have adults of surrogacy, donor conception now telling us about the mental health issues of being ‘created’ for someone else’s needs, created with the intention of providing a child because someone wanted one?

If one group in the world is being told they are ‘valid’ for being their true selves and the world takes note…. Why would any ethics board not take note of this other group who is telling of their issues and the very real repercussions on their lives?

A transitioned male demanding pregnancy cannot have it both ways. Cannot declare their experience valid while creating a human that has a high likelihood of suffering mental health issues associated with being ‘created’ in this way thus declaring a likely future human’s experience invalid. Just because that transitioned male has ‘needs’.

It will take a remarkable ethics board to overcome this.

But people will keep posting without ever acknowledging the needs of the child.

Hasn’t it been talked about with chimps?

Frankenstein came into my mind too. Aside from the shit load of drugs the transwoman would have to take, the mothers blood washes over the placenta doesn't it, and grows the baby, how could that possibly be replicated, I don't get it. Would they use the transwoman's sperm, so the fetus doesn't get rejected? Honestly my head is spinning.

The amount of hormones that would be required to sustain a pregnancy would be completely unethical.

It would be condemned with a woman. Why is it acceptable with a man?

So far it seems to only have been the disturbing experiment with the forcibly conjoined rats. Which to my mind shows that there are hurdles that science hasn't got a clue how to resolve, rather than in any way showing that there are ways forward with this as a genuine area of research.

And it all comes down to, if growing a human foetus could be done outside the body at all, wouldn’t it be being done to save foetuses where the mother’s body can no longer carry them?

After all, that is saving potentially two lives and would be ethical.

But no, we are told this is just around the corner. One poster told me on a thread once, it was starting within a few years.

@Helleofabore

Im not arguing about the morality of it - I’m just saying once it can it will happen. Like I said I think it’s probably a fair way off like maybe about as far as going to the moon was when Jules Verne was writing about it, but who knows maybe it will be quicker.

I could imagine experimenting on animals first and maybe some kind of implantation of an already developing fetus. Who knows how long it will take, probably beyond our lives, if not that will be interesting.

You are correct that the outside the body womb was to help mothers who were having problems, but I could easily see that being transferred to a surrogate volunteering removal of the fetus at an earlier stage for transferral to a “adoptive”/“real” parents outside the body womb - and eventually inside of theirs.

You might not want it to be true but all kinds of people have always been against things like this, from animal vivisection to autopsy and so on and so on. I think your seriously over estimating some ethics board always ruling against this.

There would be huge demand for an outside the body womb (if safe) from both mothers with possible complications or infertility, gay and lesbian couples, rich women who can do it like Amber Heard and there will also be demand for the womb transplant from transitioned women (or however you say it) or women who have had their own removed.

Like I said, I think a long way off but interesting to speculate on.

Oh my goodness, please tell me this isn’t true! They’ll be transplanting testicles into trans men then if this is the case. Madness & doomed surgery

Discounting ethics, anyone with an ounce of knowledge about biology knows that this would never work.

As far as I can remember it has been done in a woman, but obviously as she was a woman she had all the other kit that goes along with having a uterus. A man, no matter how many synthetic hormones he takes will never have a fully functioning female endocrine system, which if you want to carry a baby full term is an absolute must. A female endocrine system isn't just all oestrogen, it's alot more complicated than that.

Transplants are not just 'plumb the organ in and away you go'. They have a relatively high rejection rate and the recipient has to take large does of immunosuppressants until they die (or until the organ fails, which ever happens first).

Lastly (and most obvious as a sign of Horseshit) look at the source - It's a 'news' report from the Daily Mail about a Dr who runs a (presumably private) gender reassignment clinic in India FFS. He wants the publicity and money, the Daily Mail wants clicks.

I don't doubt there are some mentally ill people who will like this idea and are willing to spend lots of money to try and make it happen but it's not going to be happening. All that will happen is some doctors (like the one if the article) will get rich.

But how can it be a 'long way off' when the steps to get there involve ethical issues that we can see right now happening from fully legal processes that when they were 'experimental' had a very high chance of success - hence why they were allowed.

ie. The needs of the children produced in this way involves the likelihood of mental health distress persistent or that become apparent in adulthood.

That is one of my points.

The children of these processes are telling the world that there is an issue here. It is not hard to find the groups that are forming around this.

We know that the likelihood of these processes creating future distressed children/adults, that is a major ethical consideration that continues to be ignored by many people. We are just beginning to scratch the surface of babies deliberately created in labs for the 'needs' of adults.

I would suggest that the existence of these groups will start causing a great deal of push back on even the 'ethical' instances this can be used.

Or are we to believe that the children of these procedures futures don't count in the push forward to give males the ability to carry a pregnancy to term to achieve womanhood.