Skip to main content

Womb transplants get ethical approval in UK



Regulators have now given the go-ahead for Womb transplants. The UK Womb Transplant Research group has been granted ethical permission to begin an expanded series of 10 womb transplant operations.

As many as 50,000 women of childbearing age in the UK have no viable womb, a surprisingly high number, and affecting 1 in 5000 women, and 1 in 500 women of child bearing age who suffer from womb factor infertility.

In the UK adoption and surrogacy are the only options and the vast majority of children born to UK parents suffering this condition are born abroad. Surrogacy is only possible and legal in a few special cases in the UK. So how many women would be likely to benefit from womb transplantation in the UK?

Womb Transplant UK, the charity behind the research in the UK, say they currently have 104 potential patients who meet their criteria for a transplant.

Research in the UK on the potential for womb transplants has been undertaken for the past two decades. Each womb transplant will be labour intensive, requiring a team team of 12 for each operation; 5 for the retrieval of the donated womb and 7 for the transplantation. The donated womb would be the gift of a woman who has died. So how successful could it be?

There is a great deal of uncertainty about the risks and potential success.  This is why those involved will be moving forward cautiously.

 The World’s first womb transplant was carried out in the Middle East some 10 years ago. The transplanted womb was viable but had to be removed after three months. Several years ago a successful transplant was carried out in Turkey and the recipient became pregnant but miscarried after a few weeks.

However, a Swedish team have undertaken nine womb transplants, with seven being successful (78% success rate). They officially reported the first live born child following uterine transplantation in September 2014. It has since been reported that a further three have delivered healthy babies whilst another has become pregnant resulting in a pregnancy rate of at least 71%. 

There is specific ethical concern because the transplant is not 'life saving'.  Some have referred to it as a 'luxury'. Whatever the argument, it is certainly life enhancing and life creating if successful. Furthermore, womb transplantation may become the only option for women who are unable to conceive for reasons such as cancers or infertility or in cultures where surrogacy is an unacceptable option for couples owing to religious or ethical reasons.

There are concerns about  the effects on the developing baby of immunosuppressive drugs required during the pregnancy to prevent rejection of the uterine transplant. However, there is  now extensive information regarding the effects of these drugs. Since 1954, over 15,000 successful births have occurred in women with other transplanted organs, and the evidence supports the safety of various immunosuppressive drugs.

Further information can be obtained from Womb Transplant UK.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba...
7 comments
Read more

Ethical considerations of a National DNA database.

Plans for a national DNA database   will be revealed by the Prime Minister this week. This is the same proposal the Tories and Liberal Democrats opposed when presented by the Blair government because they argued it posed  a threat to civil liberties. This time it is expected to offer an 'opt-out' clause for those who do not wish their data to be stored; exactly how this would operate isn't yet clear. But does it matter and does it really pose a threat to civil liberties? When it comes to biology and ethics we tend to have a distorted view of DNA and genetics. This is for two reasons. The first is that it is thought that our genome somehow represents the individual as a code that then gets translated. This is biologically speaking wrong. DNA is a template and part of the machinery for making proteins. It isn't a code in anything like the sense of being a 'blueprint' or 'book of life'.  Although these metaphors are used often they are just that, metapho...
2 comments
Read more

The unethical language of 'welfare dependency'

It is unethical to stigmatise people without foundation. Creating a stereotype, a generalised brand, in order to  demonize a group regardless of the individual and without regard for the potential harm it may do is unfair and prejudicial. It is one reason, and a major one, why racism is unethical; it fails to give a fair consideration of interest to a group of people simply because they are branded in this way. They are not worthy of equal consideration because they are different.  It seeks also to influence the attitudes of others to those stereotyped. If I said 'the Irish are lazy'; you would rightly respond that this is a ridiculous and unfounded stereotype. It brands all Irish on the basis of a prejudice. It is harmful certainly; but it is worse if I intend it to be harmful. If I intend to influence the attitude of others. And so it is with 'the unemployed'. All I need do is substitute 'work-shy' and use it in an injudicious way; to imply that it applies to...
2 comments
Read more