{"id":207176,"date":"2019-07-27T12:07:56","date_gmt":"2019-07-27T17:07:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=207176"},"modified":"2019-07-27T22:20:18","modified_gmt":"2019-07-28T03:20:18","slug":"hold-applause-uterus-transplants-ethical-concerns","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/hold-applause-uterus-transplants-ethical-concerns\/","title":{"rendered":"Pro-lifers should hold their applause for uterus transplants due to major ethical concerns"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

Earlier this month, the Cleveland Clinic announced<\/a> it had delivered a baby born to a mother with a uterus transplanted from a dead donor, marking the first such birth in the U.S. While the news of a healthy birth is always a cause for joy, the broader implications of the medical procedure are fraught with moral and physical perils.<\/p>\n

Women seeking uterus transplants most often suffer from a condition called Mayer-Rokitansky-K\u00fcster-Hauser (MRKH) syndrome<\/a>, which affects 1 in 4500 women. Women with MRKH syndrome, despite often having functioning ovaries, are born either with underdeveloped or entirely absent uteruses. The first baby delivered to a uterus transplant, a major surgery requiring more than 10 hours of surgery<\/a> and up to a year of healing, occurred in Sweden in 2014. Since then, approximately a dozen babies have been born to mothers who had uterus transplants. In 2018, a hospital in S\u00e3o Paulo, Brazil became the first<\/a> to deliver a baby from uterus transplanted from a dead donor. The most recent Cleveland Clinic case occurred in June of 2019 during an ongoing trial<\/a> conducted at the facility.<\/p>\n

READ:\u00a0\u2018Social surrogacy\u2019 on the rise in U.S. for reasons of convenience<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Uterus transplants always require IVF<\/b><\/p>\n

Due to the fact that the implanted uterus is not connected to the fallopian tubes<\/a>, women with uterus transplants cannot conceive children through natural means. The only option for women to become pregnant with a transplanted uterus is by using in-vitro fertilization (IVF), a $5.8 billion industry<\/a> replete with the devaluation human life, the commodification of babies<\/a> in their most vulnerable condition as embryos, and the use of eugenics and selective abortion.<\/p>\n

IVF is a highly problematic procedure<\/a> in which multiple babies are conceived outside the womb and then screened for any \u201cundesirable\u201d traits or conditions. Those with conditions such as Down syndrome are destroyed. As a USCCB article<\/a> put it, \u201cIn IVF, children are engendered through a technical process, subjected to \u2018quality control,\u2019 and eliminated if found \u2018defective.\u2019\u201d Several of the \u201cpreferred\u201d babies are then introduced one by one (frequently several at a time) until at least one is implanted in the womb. The rest are frozen indefinitely<\/a>, a process in which some die immediately or can even be left for decades in limbo. (Learn more about embryo adoption here<\/a>.)<\/p>\n

After pregnancy begins, if multiple children are successfully implanted, doctors will often label the pregnancy \u201chigh risk\u201d and often recommend the euphemistically-termed \u201cselective reduction<\/a>,\u201d or a cruel form of abortion in which the doctor uses a needle to inject a fatal chemical directly into the heart of one of the babies, with the killing usually viewed live on ultrasound<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Risks to mother and child associated with uterus transplants<\/b><\/p>\n

Aside from reliance on IVF, uterus transplants<\/a> are controversial due to possible major risks to mother and child. Dr. Robyn Horsager-Boehrer, M.D., of Chief of OBGYN at a University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, notes<\/a> that the anti-rejection drugs women are required to take can cause \u201clow birth weight, premature birth, and increased risk of birth defects.\u201d In one Swedish uterine transplant<\/a>, organ rejection began at around 18 weeks of pregnancy, and although an increase in drugs prevented rejection, the baby was born premature at 31 weeks as a result of the mother developing pre-eclampsia. Risks to the mother include \u201cblood loss requiring transfusion, infection, organ rejection, and the potential for adverse reaction to anti-rejection medications,\u201d according to Dr. Horsager-Boehrer. And uterus transplants are only functional for a maximum of two deliveries<\/em>, after which they must be surgically removed.<\/p>\n

Although the sample size is small, Dr. Horsager-Boehrer believes that the procedure is not ethically justified: \u201cFor an elective procedure meant to result in pregnancy, the risks outweigh the potential benefits.\u201d As Professor Sharona Pearl of the University of Pennsylvania points out<\/a> that, unlike other fertility treatments whose end goal is a baby, \u201cthe end goal of the uterus transplant is a pregnancy,\u201d such that \u201ccarrying a child becomes a need whose fulfillment justifies tremendous risk, possibly to multiple people.\u201d<\/p>\n