Two Soylentils wrote in about the failure of the United States' first attempted uterus transplant:
The Cleveland Clinic, in Cleveland, Ohio, has embarked upon a programme of uterine transplantation, with surgeries planned on a total of ten patients. The first recipient, however, has suffered an unspecified "sudden complication" and the transplanted uterus, which was obtained from a cadaver, has been removed.
The first uterine transplant, which was unsuccessful, was performed in 1931. This was the first time the procedure had been attempted in the United States, where it is still considered experimental.
coverage:
[Continues.]
The first ever attempted uterus transplant in the U.S. has failed after an unknown complication occurred:
The Cleveland Clinic says it has removed a transplanted uterus — the first-ever in the U.S. — after the patient suffered from a "sudden complication."
The clinic conducted the landmark operation in late February. As we reported, the procedure is intended to "open up another possible path to parenthood besides surrogacy or adoption for U.S. women who do not have a uterus, or who have a uterus that does not function."
The transplant was part of a study that the clinic says is meant to include 10 women with uterine factor infertility, meaning "they were born without a uterus, have lost their uterus, or have a uterus that no longer functions." The clinic says in a statement that the study will continue despite this setback.
The risky procedure takes into account the chance of the body rejecting the organ by including the administration of anti-rejection drugs throughout the years following the surgery as well as monthly cervical biopsies to check for organ rejection. In vitro fertilization is used to create embryos that will be implanted in the uterus. The transplant is intended to be temporary, and after the successful childbirth of one or two babies the transplanted uterus is either removed by a hysterectomy or allowed to disintegrate. Nine uterus transplants have taken place in Sweden, resulting in 5 pregnancies and 4 births.
Study about the first ever live birth following a uterus transplant: Livebirth after uterus transplantation (DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61728-1)
(Score: 3, Interesting) by ledow on Friday March 11 2016, @04:43PM
You should have spoken up before sperm donation, infertility treatment, etc.
And, let's be honest, a vasectomy is not something you NEED. It's something you choose to have. I'd rather have a million parents who CHOOSE to have a child having them (even if that means transplants and treatments) than one who chooses NOT to being forced, or unable to find assistance in stopping it, to have one.
Hence we should speak out against anti-abortion, anti-contraception, forced marriage, etc. too.
But a womb transplant? No worse than any other infertility treatment.
I'd much rather we spent any time arguing against that on getting rid of parents who should never have had children in the first place.
This is also my answer for people who foster, adopt, or have children in homosexual relationships. You're almost saying "How dare they desire to look after a child so much that they undergo radical and dangerous medical procedures to do so?" I'd rather have them than some kid who sleeps around or some rape victim being forced (socially or legally) to have a baby they don't want, or some drug addict having babies because they were high and don't remember the conception, or they might get child benefits for it.