Baby born from dead donor womb transplant in UK first

[IwantToRetire]

Commisseration and support for the family of the woman who died, and happy for the new mother.

But feel sort of uneasy about this.

https://news.sky.com/story/simply-a-miracle-baby-boy-born-from-dead-donor-womb-transplant-in-uk-first-13511093

The possibilities of a child via IVF came about at about the same time as the possibility of adopting a new born dwindled. Prior to IVF being available couples who hadn't conceived after x amount of time could either choose to hold out hope for success one day or pursue adoption and be fairly certain that there would be a baby available to them.

What I meant is it's private medical information and none of your business.

I work with a lady with MKRH syndrome. She had a daughter through IVF/surrogacy. The daughter was born perfectly healthy, with a womb. All you're doing is showing your lack of education in reproductive disease and treatment.

It wouldn't. Now they are saying they used IVF to genetically modify the embryo as well so that the gene doesn't get passed on...which isn't in the article at all so is likely guesswork.

Thankyou that was one of my questions is it a regressive gene that you need to inherit two of to cause issues.

So the answer is no. The boy will still be able to have a girl free of it. How amazing is that 🙂

Who has said they have genetically modified the embryo? I have suggested they may have used genetic screening but that isn't the same thing as genetic modification.

Dont you need special permission for the womb donation, it’s not treated like other organs

There website says they recognise tw as women and it would be illegal discrimination not to give 1 a womb when science allows

So it’s not life limiting when women want to seek treatment for it, but it is when they create a child?

Ummmmmm, no it doesn’t. It literally states that they cannot carry out these transplants.

Where does it say that?

@PrizedPickledPopcorni was fortunate enough to have my own children. My sister in law has medical conditions which made her infertile and she had to have gruelling fertility treatment. Yes it was mentally difficult but their children have been worth it. Being a mum was something she always wanted to be.

her and my brother were fortunate enough that my great aunt paid for their treatment. She had never had children and had wanted them. She wishes that she could have had the option of fertility treatment. Even in her 80s she feels incomplete.

If they are passing on the same genetic fault to their children deliberately for their own gratification, yes. Their children and grandchildren then also have to go through the process of either having a womb implant or deciding whether to end the family line that they know their parents went all out to prevent happening. Ethically I find this problematic.

That is not what happens to these children at all. You're making yourself look really uneducated. And judgemental which usually goes hand in hand with uneducated actually.

https://wombtransplantuk.org/fact-sheet/the-potential-for-operations-for-transgender-women

The UK Womb Transplant Research Team is fully aware and respectful of the 2010 Gender Equality Act that mandates equal care for transgender women, assuming technical feasibility.

I think we have to assume that they are talking about the Equality Act 2010.

They have clearly got some dodgy advice and their interpretation of the act is wrong, unless they think that they would be obliged to provide this treatment for any man who requested it.

They do go on to say

However it is abundantly clear from all recent experience and research that technical feasibility for a safe and successful operation for a transgender female, together with the possibility of sustaining a successful pregnancy, does not currently exist and that many years of detailed medical research will be required before this might become a viable and safe option.

But many candidates for a womb transplant won't have a genetically heritable condition so that isn't a reason ban it completely.

I hope that whoever is responsible for the website blurb is not allowed near an operating theatre. Their attention to detail is somewhat lacking.

I saw that but it doesn't say that they "recognise transwomen as women" does it? It's totally clear that they are only looking at women for this. The wrong statue quote is bonkers though, very weird.

I think the issues here are that the articles don't explain what has been done to ensure their offspring don't have the same issues. If it had said they had screened to prevent reoccurance that would have put my mind at rest that this could be all used as a money making exercise, targeting families with these genetic issues in particular.

Hmm yes it does right before explaining why they can't yet ie the science isn't there yet

This is the first womb transplanted baby from a mother with this genetic issue so how can you possibly say "this isn't what happens to these children at all." ? You have no idea if this child has the gene or if it was screeened.

Because women with this condition have been having their own biological children via IVF/surrogacy for years and that is not what has happened to their children at all.

Being carried in a transplanted womb instead of a surrogates womb makes no difference to the baby's life long health or any conditions they may inherit.

This is no where near the first biological child of a mother with MKRH syndrome. Do you understand that?

Again, it doesn't explain this because it is private medical information and none of your business.

Nope.

Yeah, thank goodness those days are gone for unmarried mothers. I'm not particularly fond of "buying" children from overseas either.
We have 2 adopted kids and I have permanent foster kids in my family. There is no difference in treatment by the wider family. They are cherished and treated the same as the "blood" (god I so hate that) kids.

So why do they claim that it would be discrimination to refuse men with trans identities wombs when its possible?