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

If we are debating the ethics of this, then it is completely relevant. Either the kids have it and have to then make life changing decisions as and when they want to have children which puts a burden on them, or the IVF has screened for it and they would presumably always do this when doing womb implanted embryo IVF. It is a huge part of the story.

That’s not what they have said.

This. Organ transplants should only be about saving lives, not giving a lifestyle choice. Pay privately if that's what you want.

This is private.

There are NHS non life-saving transplants done though. There are corneas, voice boxes, hands, skin - lots for you to go and protest.

Ok im paraphrasing but yes ot is though they call them trans females and that it's not yet possible. The link and quote have been posted twice on this thread so I don't know why you're lieing about something thats so easy to disprove.

Worth looking at Scotgov's recent campaigns to persuade young women to donate eggs.

I posted the original quote.

It does not, anywhere on that page, state that when the research is done they will carry out a womb transplant on a trans woman. Id thank you to retract your accusation calling me a liar.

They said it would be discrimination not to Ergo they will so no i won't retract anything

Oh FFS

Okay so you don’t agree with kidney transplants? It’s technically possible to survive with dialysis only.

Or a heart transplant, if the person is surviving with ECMO or LVAD, it’s not life saving. Same with lung transplants, or cornea transplants.

No, it's actually a reasonable argument. Women are the only humans with wombs. If a womb comes to be seen as a commodity with a market value, which it could, given that surrogacy has gone down that path, then women who need money are likely to be exploited and coerced by amoral middle-men into selling their wombs. The risk of death and disfigurement is present with any kind of major surgery. Unscrupulous people would develop a trade in wombs for sale. Women would suffer.

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

Actually they seem pretty clear. It also aounds like theyve had enough enquiries to have to male a statement.

Depends where you stand and what your experience teaches you.

I did nurse training sometime in the 80s. I had a heated discussion with an entitled, arrogant male nurse tutor, about how much "use" a uterus is. He maintained that a uterus is pretty valueless and women should be pleased to have it removed after they've finished having children.

Estimates suggest that about 10% of transplant organs come from illegal sources

https://www.theguardian.com/news/article/2024/sep/10/for-me-there-was-no-other-choice-inside-the-global-organ-trade

You don't need to question the ethics of organ donations to acknowledge that there is a trade in organs, that a womb is an organ that only a woman has and that there are sex specific reasons that women are at risk of exploitation.

That's terrifying - I would never have guessed it's that high.

I am uneasy about all of it.

I think it is being slightly glossed over that the recipient of the donor uterus underwent a TEN HOUR operation to receive this organ. She then went through IVF cycles to become pregnant. She is now on anti rejection drugs and there is both further ivf, another pregnancy and CS and then a hysterectomy planned.

The number of people for whom this course of action is even remotely possible let alone advisable must be pretty small?

What are the long term health impacts of all of this?

I'm not saying organs aren't taken from trafficked men and women abroad. This doesn't apply if you're on an NHS waiting list for one as all donated organs are centrally managed and given to the most at risk.

Happy to donate my organs to save a life, or someone's sight. I would never consent to donating my womb. I think that kind of experiment is an unjustifiable risk.

As for growing children in a lab, completely dystopian. We may never understand everything about the complexities of the mother-baby bond, it's hubris to think we can just replace a mother's body without unforeseen consequences.

The personal choices of individuals about their own care is not for you to know or judge to decide whether a womb transplant being possible is awful for children or not.

There are many conditions that aren't inheritable that would also make this transplant useful. Gynae cancer survivors for one.

I noticed you've stopped replying to facts about we know a womb transplant doesn't enable genetically defective children to be born and suffer and why we know this. It's very clear you just want to make personal judgements on the women who need fertility treatment because you think they should be adopting instead.

Precious !
The work of Surgeons & surgical ward staff. etc. etc.
Huge amount of £££££

Yes males do have a longer larger colon & rectum than females. Males also have a prostate gland which isn’t in females.

All being paid for by the charity, and not the taxpayer.

I didn’t say where the money was from.
But I’m sure there’re plenty more deserving places

This charity is literally set up with the purpose of funding this research. This money has been donated and funded for this purpose.

so given the consultants etc., all worked extra hours, and were paid by the charity, what resources have been used?

Well, you don't get to decide that because it's not yours to spend!

Just because there are other deserving causes it doesn't mean this cause isn't deserving.

If people raise money for cancer you can't then complain it should be spent on heart research because it's more important. The people who think heart research is more important raise their own money for hearts.