Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

First Birth From Human Womb Transplant

Posted by timothy on from the grandma-where-do-babies-come-from? dept.

BarbaraHudson (3785311) writes The headline sounds like something from the tabloids — "Woman becomes first to give birth from transplanted womb — using one donated from her own mother.'" But it's from The National Post, quoting The Lancet: "The breakthrough was reported by The Lancet medical journal on its website last night. It is thought the birth occurred within the last month after doctors transplanted wombs into several women who had a rare genetic condition that meant they were born without their own womb. In January, one of the patients underwent in-vitro fertilization treatment that resulted in an embryo being transferred to her new womb. The donated womb came from the woman's own mother, so the baby is also the first born to a woman using the same womb from which she emerged herself. In wake of the Lancet article, the Swedish team refused to confirm a baby had been born, saying: "As soon as there is a scientific peer-reviewed paper, we will comment on this. I will provide you with information as soon as we have some." Eight of Dr. Brannstrom's patients received their wombs from close relatives, reducing the risk of their bodies rejecting them." There's nothing at The Lancet online yet." There is, though, an article at the BBC.

15 of 120 comments (clear)

  1. Just because you can... by Rande · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...doesn't mean that you _should_.

    In this case, what happens when the child has the same genetic defect? Pass the womb on 3rd hand?

    1. Re:Just because you can... by burni2 · · Score: 4

      Well sience has 20 years to find a solution for that.

      Btw. what you ment with "should" is, that you want to hinder reproduction - natural and assistent - because of the possibility of transfering a birth defect.

      To paint the picture you could also say "Sterilize the genetically disabled"

      Or to go further, why should you support disabled people who cannot care for themselves, naturally they would die!?

      My answer to this is: because it's the difference between humane and inhumane.

    2. Re:Just because you can... by ImprovOmega · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That would seem statistically unlikely. The womb itself does not contribute to the genetics of the person and presumably it's possible to not have a uterus but still have ovaries. In this case the woman's defect would almost certainly be canceled out by the man's sperm since even though she is a carrier, it is incredibly unlikely that he is also, and even if so it's a 50/50 proposition. It's completely and utterly different than inbreeding in which you're recombining the same defects.

    3. Re:Just because you can... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2

      Personally I think allowing people who can not care for themselves to be born is absolutely inhumane.

      Well, I guess that takes care of the human race ... no human can take care of themselves without a lot of care in the first few years, and even later we still depend on each other as a society, to provide jobs, policing, etc.

      Or we could go all Romulus and Reemus, and let the wolves raise our kids :-)

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    4. Re:Just because you can... by burni2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Is that difference really that big?

      If you look into the history of eugenics you can clearly see that both arguments (sterilizing disabled and euthanasia of so called "unworthy life") come from the same way of thinking - rationalism.

      And well (nazi)germany has implemented both - crimes against humanity, however the philosophy of total rationalism (which eugenic & euthanisia) was discussed in many other countries at that time including (pre-nazi)Sweden and Great Britian.

      In Sweden(yes Sweden the country of the Nobel prize!) till the early 1990s disabled people were being sterilized - this btw. does not only include physical or cognitive disabilities but also cases of psychiatric patients.

      And you said it yourself you "chose" not to breed,
      nobody made the choice for you.

      There is no real difference between both solutions:

      Because they both stem from the same "total rationalistic" way of thinking. The totalitaristic rule of the total rational thinking, will treat human life and freedom of choice being somewhat expendable and hindering.

  2. Amazing progress... by Elledan · · Score: 4, Informative

    Amazing progress, but it would be nice if the attitude within the medical scientific community to for example intersex-born individuals wasn't still stuck somewhere in the 19th century. Progress is relative.

    How many people here actually know what intersex is? I didn't know it existed (among humans at least) or what it was called until I was 21 and I was born intersex (hermaphrodite).

    Don't get me wrong, it's great that these women born without certain reproductive organs are getting them transplanted, but on the other side doctors are also chopping up the genitals of intersex infants and manipulating intersex adults like yours truly into 'normalization' surgeries.

    Heck, after consulting dozens of 'experts' in about a dozen countries I honestly couldn't tell you which reproductive and related organs I do or don't have exactly. I also meet so many others who had to discover as a teenager or adult that their parents and medical file have withheld details about surgery being performed on them as an infant.

    So yes, happy news for some, but just a bitter feeling for many others who had the misfortune of not being born a 'normal' male or female even one missing some bits...

    Excuse the brief rant :)

    --
    Site & blog: http://www.mayaposch.com
    1. Re:Amazing progress... by PeeAitchPee · · Score: 4, Funny

      Indeed. There is still a lot of womb for improvement.

    2. Re:Amazing progress... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I Doubt any kind of genital surgery was common in the 19th century

      Excuse me, but the poster was talking about medical and scientific attitudes, not medical and scientific acts.

      Also, you're wrong. Surgery on the intersexed goes back at least to the mid-1700's. See page 49 this report. That's the 18th century.

      And if you read the rest of the paper, the problem is that the attitude of many in the medical community has not changed - doctors want to "fix" children at a very young age, without any real test to know what the right solution is in any individual case, or whether the patient is content to just leave well enough alone. At least with transsexuals you can get feedback from the patient, even at a young age, as to what is "right" for them.

      If you feel that's not the case I would recomend offering solutions or suggestions instead of just whining about the way things are.

      Posting on sites like slashdot IS doing something - it's providing real-life examples of "hey, there's a problem here" and getting it out into the open. We can't all say "well, there's a problem, so I'm going to devote the next 2 decades to becoming a doctor and THEN fighting it." Just not practical, and in the meantime another 20 years of IS children "get it in the groin", so to speak. I know, that's rather blunt language, but how would you like someone messing around with your "bits" without your permission, or even knowledge?

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    3. Re:Amazing progress... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2

      It is related to the topic at hand. This procedure possibly allows some of those who are intersexed and whose reproductive organs are not sufficiently developed for either sex, or whose reproductive options were removed without their knowledge or consent when they were young, to carry a child.

      Now what most women want to see is the replication of the situation in John Brunner's "Stand on Zanzibar", where men are complaining about back pain, morning sickness, job impact, etc., because it's "their turn" to carry the baby to term.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    4. Re:Amazing progress... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2
      And yet it's still routine for doctors and parents to decide what gender an IS baby or young child should be, without the patient's knowledge or consent.. And the summary makes a point of saying that since 1950, this practice has become systemic. So, while the attitude may have changed, the practice hasn't.

      Posting all this on a slashdot article about an artifical womb is the wrong way to go about things.

      The article is about increasing reproductive options for people who were born without a womb. How is that *not* on topic for those who are intersexed, where some of the reproductive organs are either not present, not developed fully, or have been mutilated? It's certainly more on-topic than all those jokes about "hand-me-down wombs" and stuff elsewhere in the thread.

      Look, I get it. It's not something everyone deals with on a daily basis - but for those who do have to deal with it, why not let them bring their perspective to the table, and give them at least a bit of credit for having the courage to open up about it. The original post may not have made the point that I'm making - that it is definitely on topic - but the point has now been made, and it wouldn't have been without their original post wrt the intersexed. So, instead of criticizing them for "whining", why not discuss the real issue - that this is a reproductive option society is going to have to come to grips with, the same as we did with both artificial insemination and "test tube babies," and discuss how it impacts the various members of our society differently? :-)

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  3. Womb with a view... by Bob_Who · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Talk about hand me downs, this makes wearing you mothers wedding gown or grandmothers wedding ring seem like a quaint gesture. Re-gifting doesn't come close to re-wombing in terms of tradition and family heritage....

  4. Nature got there first by Krymzn · · Score: 2

    Other people's wombs have been used before, though not deliberately: They were using their own twin's womb because they were a chimera. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...

  5. Re:Is that treatment for women only? by Kilo+Kilo · · Score: 2

    Look at me! Mr. "I'm my own grandpa!"

  6. Adopt! by Charliemopps · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I will forever be thankful for our fertility doctor. We sat in front of him and he told my wife she could never bare children. She asked "what can you do?" He smiled and said "Given enough hope and money, there's practically no end to what I could do. But there are desperate children all over that need parents. It may be that life is giving you a hint." That line will remain with me for the rest of my life because it rang so true and cut through the bullshit of modern life.

    I'd not thought of adopting... and I immediately thought "That will be a hell of a lot less work and my wife wont get fat!!"

    I was wrong on both accounts in the end, but, I'm currently the proud father of the best son a father could ever have. Standing on the outside and looking at it you think you could never love an adopted kid the same as you would your own flesh. But I'm here to tell you that you can and will. He is my son. He knows he's adopted and he thinks it's cool. He brags to his friends that "His parents went all the way to Africa for him!"

    Anyway, I find it sad that we go to such extreme, untested and dangerous lengths to solve a problem that already has a very simple solution. Adopt, you wont regret it.

  7. Re:Overpopulated by ncc74656 · · Score: 2

    There are already too many humans on this planet. We are a virus that is wiping out life and resources at a faster rate than they can be replenished.

    If you really believe this nonsense, why haven't you done your part and killed yourself already?

    Coward.

    --
    20 January 2017: the End of an Error.