Susan's Place Transgender Resources

What are peoples thoughts on this post?


https://www.yahoo.com/health/surgery-could-give-men-wombs-1302360099545142.html


I would jump at the chance as I love children and would love another of my own :)

I would be first in the queue.

To be able to experience what is properly the ultimate female experience, falling pregnant and carrying the child to term. Having a womb, would mean I would need a uterus, which means monthly periods.. but I don't care.. I kinda always wanted to experience a period as that is something all women go through.

It makes me sad, that I cant give my man a baby, with a womb transplant, I will be able to for-fill this dream. I would love to carry his baby.

In 10 years time, I will be only in my mid 30's and that is young enough to have a child.

In something less than a heartbeat

Huggs
Catherine

I could only imagine how much of a circus that's going to be for everyone involved. They made a movie about that in the 90s. "Junior" with Arnold Schwarzenegger and Danny Devito.

I don't think that I could put anyone I cared so deeply about through it. Transition is more that enough attention at the moment.

Right this minute! I know it probably won't be widespread for years but I can hold out hope! Forty is the latest I would have a child and I still have thirteen years.

Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk

At mi age an physical status I wouldn't do it but I said yes, as iffin I was still in mi 20's or something I totally would. I was once married an I do have 2 Daughters, I was so painfully lost in turmoil an jealousy when mi Ex was pregnant that it really tore mi up hard.

If I am ever stable enough to support a child on my own I have had my heart set on adopting a trans kid. I have had dreams about becoming a mother through the need of a child someone else abandoned since I was a teen. That's the dream I want to fulfill.

If it was possible definitely!

I think about what it would be like to be a mother a lot. Might end up adopting in the future.

Is there a maybe option? It's worth mentioning the anti-rejection medication aspect, pretty serious stuff (which personally makes me pretty uneasy about a transplant). Would I carry a child? Yes. Do I want to carry a child? Not right now.

No, because...
...I could not give birth through my vagina.
...of the need to suppress my immune system forever.
...the child would not carry my DNA.

Not in its current incarnation of the surgery. No.

It's like a kidney or heart transplant and you're taking those wretched anti rejection drugs. The uterus has to come out anyway after a couple years.

Call me when they can put one in permanently, made with stem cells or similar.

BTW 35 is considered the end of prime child bearing years by many in the medical profession although I've seen women as old as 55 in fertility clinics.

C section is no big deal. Lots of women have it and they wear the scar as a badge of honor. In any case you'll be going in with a scar.

One final thing is that you need a donor womb and donor eggs because you have no ovaries or Fallopian tubes. But the egg problem is being solved as they are developing techniques to make them from other cells. But the womb has to come from a living or dead donor. That's one of the reasons this isn't ready for prime time yet.

In a heartbeat if it was tested and ready now.  If it takes another 10 to get it right?  Not so sure I'd want to be pregnant in my 50s.....

!" way too old, 2" the truck load of pills I already take .3: I'll be dead of natural causes by the time it's available

Not me.

1) I'm 46.
2) I never wanted kids.  I halfway raised my own sister and that was enough for a lifetime.
3) I'd probably get the kid I deserve anyway.
4) I don't take pills unless absolutely necessary.  Anti-rejection drugs? No way. I'm saving my liver for bigger and better things.
5) Yay, more surgeries?
6) 9+ months without drinking? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Yeah, no.

Yes, as long as I've got chance to actually use it. Otherwise it is of more use to somebody else.

It's something I've dreamed of. I would absolutely have a womb transplant if the risks and chance of success were reasonable. I guess the anti rejection drugs wouldn't be forever, the womb could be taken out once pregnancy was over.

On the downside, I'm not getting any younger and it would probably be quite expensive (+ Jill F's 3rd and 6th points, no doubt)

I also wonder how safe anti-rejection drugs are for a developing fetus, and how hormone levels would need to be regulated to make sure the kid doesn't turn out transgender or intersex as well.  I would certainly not wish my own suffering upon my child.

So let's see.  I'm 66 so five to ten years would make me between 71 and 76.  Nah, think I would pass.  Now if I was between 21 and 26 that would be a different matter.

Quote from: Jill F on November 25, 2015, 03:39:35 PM

4) I don't take pills unless absolutely necessary.  Anti-rejection drugs? No way. I'm saving my liver for bigger and better things.

This is why when they create one from your own cells that will be the real breakthrough.

I think it's safe to say 99% of us here who want kids either need to adopt or have one with a cis woman. I do see hope for the future generation though. Yes I think Dr McGinn is VERY optimistic but she's the surgeon, not me.

Definitely. I've wanted to be a mother since even before I knew I was transgender. (Don't get me wrong, I would be satisfied with adopting, but I would like to experience pregnancy.)

I'm definitely interested....but  my husband who's 22 years older than me, prob not so much.

In its current form, no way. Surgery is a big deal and anti rejection drugs can have a major impact on your life expectancy. It just sounds like way too much risk for a compromise right now.

Yep I would have, bit late now tho :(

Hurts me watching childbirth so would have liked the experience of bring someone to  life and nurturing them through life.

Katy xxxx

I've always wanted to have a child of my own.

With that said, with the state of medical technology right now, I don't feel like for me it would be worth it.

It's just too expensive, just too many possible complications, too major of a surgery, too much hassle just to keep your body from rejecting it, and even though it would allow me to carry a child we're still not at the point where I could biologically be the mother of the child, I'd have to use donor eggs, so really it's still basically adoption, albeit "adopting" a child that you give birth to yourself.

We're getting close to technology that will make it possible one day. And if we were in that medical future, where a trans woman can have a womb grown from her own cells, impregnated using her own egg cells converted from stem cells, and in an era where such things have become commonplace and thus reasonably affordable, I would do it in a heartbeat.

But regrettably, for now the reality is that I just don't think for me it would be worth the pain and hassle and expense and overall imperfection of this in-its-infancy technology. And I doubt that it will be advanced enough before I'm too old to benefit from it.

I recall an article many years ago about researchers studying this very thing. I haven't thought about that article in quite awhile,
I too have spent much time saddened by the fact that I will never bear children. I çant imagine anything more miraculous or awesome, regardless of tje pain and discomfort than carrying and giving birth to ones offspring.

Sent from my XT1031 using Tapatalk

In less than a heartbeat.


Speak to you as soon as I'm out of the OT

Huggs
Catherine

Well, no I wouldn't opt for that. First of all I am way too old and I have never had maternal/paternal urge to have a child of my own. I don't mind other people's babies but once they reach the age where they can say my tummy hurts and use the bathroom on their own, for me their life expectancy goes waaaayyyyy up! Not everyone is cut out to be a parent.

Anyway, if I thought GCS was bad, I can only imagine what that must be like!

Love,
Clare

In my late teens or early 20s I'd say yes if it included the whole package. Nowadays hell no.

Quote from: Christine Eryn on November 26, 2015, 03:18:33 PM
In my late teens or early 20s I'd say yes if it included the whole package.

Lets hope for starship enterprise technology  :)


hugs

Quote from: Sarah leah on November 25, 2015, 08:48:03 AM
What are peoples thoughts on this post?


https://www.yahoo.com/health/surgery-could-give-men-wombs-1302360099545142.html


I would jump at the chance as I love children and would love another of my own :)

Yes, I want to be a mom...my boyfriend who knows I'm a MtF gets kidded at school would love to have me as his wife...I would be a great mommy. I help mom with my 14 month old brother.

Quote from: Laura_7 on November 26, 2015, 03:35:34 PM
Lets hope for starship enterprise technology  :)

Ya think!? 

In the purely hypothetical, yes, I would.  My wife and I joke that if I could, we'd already be pregnant. 

Realistically, pretty much zero chance. 

I'm too old (mid 50's). 
I haven't even started to think about any kind of transition if, let alone when. 
I'm currently on bone density meds so I'd be risking a lot if I did go onto hormones, probably. 
I'm also on thalidomide-derivative meds for some bone marrow issues, which I'd have to go off of, and again, risk large consequences. 

It is kind of fun to think about though. 

I'm no medical doctor or biology anything but from what I was reading the "holy grail" is when they can figure out how to direct cells to produce certain types of tissue. Right now lab grown anything needs similar cells, I believe. Maybe with genetic engineering and gene splicing it could happen. You get some donor tissue (maybe from your mom or another willing female relative), splice in your genes to prevent rejection and grow that into a uterus. That would be the way to do it without the "holy grail."

But with the ability to direct stem cells to produce any kind of tissue that won't be needed.

Right now though I think that is science fantasy more than anything but that's how I see it happening.

There are also "ethical" issues to overcome but I think once it's available anywhere in the world we will travel to get it.

Quote from: iKate on December 12, 2015, 08:39:06 AM
There are also "ethical" issues to overcome but I think once it's available anywhere in the world we will travel to get it.

I'm curious about your take on ethical issues, what do you think they are: limited resources, as in how do we choose who gets them?

Regarding the science, I understand that making the functional cells is the "easy" part.  Getting the cells to come together as functional organs is another story.  Scientists have been able to create replacement bladders by planting created bladder cells from stem cells onto an organic framework.  But the bladder is a pretty simple organ, just a storage tank for all intents and purposes.  (Not that I couldn't use more storage, right?)  They're still pretty far away from building a heart, even though they can create living cardiac cells. I imagine that building a functional uterus is yet another level of complexity. 

Quote from: BeverlyAnn on November 25, 2015, 07:21:12 PM
So let's see.  I'm 66 so five to ten years would make me between 71 and 76.  Nah, think I would pass.  Now if I was between 21 and 26 that would be a different matter.

Hi Beverly Anne

I have to laugh I will pass too I'm 58 and have three from my Passed. I think at this stage the thought of raising another child. Someone put me in the looney bin. LOL  >:-)
Although if I was young I would definitely consider it so yes for that. :angel:

Hug's Lyndsey

Maybe if I was 22 and not 32.

Interestingly enough, on something of a tangent, a natal female presenting and living as a man was the first to perform a successful c-section in Europe in centuries. They learned how to do it while serving in the military in south Africa, if I remember correctly. The significant thing was anesthetics. Since the church believed that women were supposed to feel the pain of child birth because of the biblical fall, they were denied anesthetics, meaning that c-sections were attempted without any, which also led to shock, and death for a few centuries. Good ol-Christians.

The problem with any major surgery is that it is rough on the body, and the stress of it reduces your life-span. I would do it if it were like, the full package, to just receive female internal organs grown from my own DNA. I would also prefer to be inseminated from a woman, from synthetic sperm made of her cells (which is also something they can do), that would be pretty damn cool in my mind. Otherwise not so interested.   

Yes..... But no.

Only will do this if the transplant is identically safe for the baby as a natural womb. And if I was still under 45 and I had a top knotch doctor ensuring that the baby will come out alright. Finally, if the baby was my own.

I want no baby to suffer for my selfish desire to be pregnant.

In a heart beat <3

Wouldnt our articicial hormones feminize the womb?

Im being honest.

Quote from: Wild Flower on December 12, 2015, 06:31:20 PM
Wouldnt our articicial hormones feminize the womb?

Im being honest.

During pregnancy estradiol and progesterone levels are many times ours.

IVF procedures also use hormone regimens somewhat similar to what MTFs use. I know because we were IVF patients and had to do the injections daily.

So no real risk. The womb also keeps out the mother's blood supply from mixing with the baby's.

Quote from: Dayta on December 12, 2015, 09:00:53 AM
I'm curious about your take on ethical issues, what do you think they are: limited resources, as in how do we choose who gets them?

My general view is that we are on equal footing with cis women born without a uterus. So limited resources shouldn't come into play. But you'll have many accusations of "playing God." Miscarriages by these procedures will be looked at as killing babies (nevermind that many women miscarry naturally) and people will inject all sorts of FUD into the debate just to de-legitimize us, and because God.

QuoteRegarding the science, I understand that making the functional cells is the "easy" part.  Getting the cells to come together as functional organs is another story.  Scientists have been able to create replacement bladders by planting created bladder cells from stem cells onto an organic framework.  But the bladder is a pretty simple organ, just a storage tank for all intents and purposes.  (Not that I couldn't use more storage, right?)  They're still pretty far away from building a heart, even though they can create living cardiac cells. I imagine that building a functional uterus is yet another level of complexity.

There is another option which is 3D printing. They're already 3D printing blood vessels and are working on printing hearts made of biological material.

I still think it's a ways off before we reach this point where a MTF can have her own permanently installed uterus though. I would say 30-50 years from now.

Quote from: iKate on December 12, 2015, 06:41:07 PM
During pregnancy estradiol and progesterone levels are many times ours.

IVF procedures also use hormone regimens somewhat similar to what MTFs use. I know because we were IVF patients and had to do the injections daily.

So no real risk. The womb also keeps out the mother's blood supply from mixing with the baby's.

I never knew that. In theory if we raise our hormones to pregnant women level were like at the same biological level of a woman at pregnancy?

Pregnant women are known to be even more attractive... The glow.

Quote from: iKate on December 12, 2015, 06:47:14 PM
My general view is that we are on equal footing with cis women born without a uterus. So limited resources shouldn't come into play. But you'll have many accusations of "playing God." Miscarriages by these procedures will be looked at as killing babies (nevermind that many women miscarry naturally) and people will inject all sorts of FUD into the debate just to de-legitimize us, and because God.

There is another option which is 3D printing. They're already 3D printing blood vessels and are working on printing hearts made of biological material.

I still think it's a ways off before we reach this point where a MTF can have her own permanently installed uterus though. I would say 30-50 years from now.

30 yrs is still relatively okay. Women can still have children in their 50s. I think our hormones keep us younger biologically than in average woman. Like our biological clock never ends... As long as the "equipment" is young and our bodies are artifically running on its own accord.


"The oldest verified mother to conceive naturally (listed currently in the Guinness Records[8]) is Dawn Brooke (UK); she conceived a son at the age of 59 years in 1997 while taking estrogen."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pregnancy_over_age_50

Hell....

This is a genius field to get into... Lots of pieces to this puzzle.

I would love to, but as I will be 41 in February,  by the time this is available mainstream I would be far too old..oh well...

No, as I don't want (any more) children. So unless I was born with a womb, which would be cool, I don't see the point in getting one as an end in itself.

Yes! Yes! Yes! Like many others I would literally do anything for my own child

I have 13 nieces and nephews, another one on the way and one great niece and another on the way. In total this time next year I will have 15

I have no children and would love just one of my own and to experience carrying a child and childbirth would be a dream come true

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

*

'Surgery Could Give Men Wombs of Their Own Within 5 Years' (Lisa Kaplan Gordon, 17 Nov 2015)

Dr. Karine Chung, Director of the Fertility Preservation Program at the University of Southern California's Keck School of Medicine:

   -  'Probably at some point, somebody will figure out how to make that work.'

iKate, sumcr8r, Dayta, Elsa Delyth, Wild Flower, and others:

I can do better than a transplant and all its attendant complications and rejection.

I conducted independent study research at both University of Utah Medical School and University of Arizona Medical School (1981 - 1986) and established the feasibility of using one's own stem cells to activate one's own vestigial Mullerian (or Wolffian) duct system.  In other words, a patient, whether cis or transsexual, would use their own anatomy to develop their own missing 'upper third' female internal genitalia (ovaries, Fallopian tubes, uterus).

My report fell on deaf ears and shock that anyone would dare do such a thing for a transsexual.

That was three decades ago.  My papers sit in a box collecting dust in storage until someone else wants to add to them or put them in laboratory research for true viability

Any takers in the medical community nowadays???  I am still not holding my breath.

(BTW:  This is not the first time I have referred to my study on a Susan's thread.)

*

If I were 20-30 years younger I would definitely go for it  :icon_chick:

Quote from: Sharon Anne McC on December 13, 2015, 07:40:58 PM

I conducted independent study research at both University of Utah Medical School and University of Arizona Medical School (1981 - 1986) and established the feasibility of using one's own stem cells to activate one's own vestigial Mullerian (or Wolffian) duct system.  In other words, a patient, whether cis or transsexual, would use their own anatomy to develop their own missing 'upper third' female internal genitalia (ovaries, Fallopian tubes, uterus).

My report fell on deaf ears and shock that anyone would dare do such a thing for a transsexual.

That was three decades ago.  My papers sit in a box collecting dust in storage until someone else wants to add to them or put them in laboratory research for true viability

Any takers in the medical community nowadays???  I am still not holding my breath.

(BTW:  This is not the first time I have referred to my study on a Susan's thread.)

*

Oh wow. If this became viable... I would absolutely spring for it.

Nope, not gonna happen. Kate, you are a highly rational person. Thank you. Sharon Anne, fascinating stuff.

The religiously self-righteous would march with torches and pitchforks if non-cis women could be impregnated with a "precious child" (who they don't care about post-natal).

*
iKate, diane 2606:

It is as much about timing as well as the times we live.

If you are old enough, think back to the first half of the 1980s and the right-wing politics that controlled many aspects of American life.

Part of my study included using embryonic stem cells that were otherwise actually tossed in the garbage.  Nope.  Politicians and religious rather throw a fit than develop scientific research.  The mere mention of actually diverting embryonic stem cells otherwise headed for the trash got me tossed from a few offices.

Yep, there does seem to be a baby step forward, so to speak, but politics and religion still control medical science to a great extent.

I proved it works on paper - my research.  The next step was actual lab experiments using stem cells that no one would allow to be used then.  If not then, when???

The extension of my research included the question of whether a person could re-grow other organs or other body parts.  Imagine a blind person re-growing a viable eye.  It is science fiction become science fact.  Stem cells are the building blocks and all they really need is that blueprint from a vestigial cell.

*

Quote from: Wild Flower on December 12, 2015, 06:53:24 PM
30 yrs is still relatively okay. Women can still have children in their 50s. I think our hormones keep us younger biologically than in average woman. Like our biological clock never ends... As long as the "equipment" is young and our bodies are artifically running on its own accord.


"The oldest verified mother to conceive naturally (listed currently in the Guinness Records[8]) is Dawn Brooke (UK); she conceived a son at the age of 59 years in 1997 while taking estrogen."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pregnancy_over_age_50

I don't doubt that older women can conceive. The chances just become less. I've seen women in their 50s at fertility clinics.

Quote from: Wild Flower on December 12, 2015, 06:48:55 PM
I never knew that. In theory if we raise our hormones to pregnant women level were like at the same biological level of a woman at pregnancy?

Pregnant women are known to be even more attractive... The glow.

Yes, in fact some of us are at high levels equivalent to first trimester pregnancy.

I've been asked if I was pregnant by friends (who I haven't told about my history) a few times in fact. I just smiled and shook my head.

YES YES YES Please ABSOLUTELY POSITIVELY DEFINATELY  :) .Sorry for getting carried away I think The answer is yes

Quote from: diane 2606 on December 13, 2015, 10:12:08 PM
Nope, not gonna happen. Kate, you are a highly rational person. Thank you. Sharon Anne, fascinating stuff.

The religiously self-righteous would march with torches and pitchforks if non-cis women could be impregnated with a "precious child" (who they don't care about post-natal).

Maybe in the USA but remember we are experts at medical tourism.

If the religious extremists had their way we would be all committed to an asylum. (A friend told me that he would like to see Caitlyn Jenner in an asylum. I asked him what he thought about me and he says nah you're cool. I'm debating whether he should still be my friend :\ )

But if it can happen in other countries we will do it. People hire surrogates from other countries like India already anyway.

Cost will be something to overcome. I don't imagine something like this would be cheap. IVF for cis women with functioning ovaries is expensive. Cheapest about $10,000 plus medications which can add another $10,000 to $15,000. Per cycle. Few get pregnant on the first cycle. Add to that the costs of the other stuff.

But you know what? We made progress over the years. I am confident this will happen. Maybe not now but for future generations.

Definitely!!! But age is sadly against me.

YES

It's a shame that in 10 years I'll be 53.

Absolutely as long it's a womb with a view. Seriously, YES YES YES if it were possible. Luckily I have a boy and a girl that I did the nurture thing with and it was very rewarding. I love my kids. But to have that possibility. That would be the ultimate.

I would love to see experience the nine months.  Body changes. Baby kicks. Pampering   breast feeding all of it. 

Yes.

Yes, without question. I would love to experience pregnancy.

I would love to, but I'm too old already  :(

Nope. No Chance.  I love OTHER peoples children.  Never been interested in any of my own.

Nope. Got two amazing kids already, and having seen my wife go through two labours, not something I'd like to do.

I would say that the only reason i would want it would be to have the same parts as a cis woman since i dont really want kids. So i would say no and let others who do want kids have it but if science gets so far that they can grow body parts (have read a few articals about that so not too far fetched) or something like that i might want it.

Nope. I occasionally had dreams about being pregnant when I was early on HRT, and I admit I'd be curious enough to sign up for a test run of a couple days of pregnancy if that were possible... :)  But I have no desire to do the whole 9 months, much less menstruation, and I don't want kids anyway. After watching what my wife's gone through, the hassle and worry (and occasionally terror) of making sure the uterus stayed *unoccupied* wouldn't be worth it. Especially since I'd be on anti-rejection drugs forever, which are serious stuff.

Probably not.  It's not a massive piece out of my life or something I dwell on.

However, my OH has said previously if it was available, she would ask me to seriously consider it from the child bearing point of view.

So personally, no. But love makes you do stupid crazy things.

no i rather adopt a kid and not be a selfish ass to add more heads to feed in this already overpopulated earth ...

Would I like to have my own uterus, cervix, etc., conceive, carry and birth my own child? Yes.

Would I like a uterus transplant? No.

Lots of risks come with it. I would prefer some advance in science that allowed me to produce my own uterus, not someone elses. Just doesn't seem authentic enough for me. I'd essentially just be a surrogate.

Quote from: SerenaOhSerena on August 07, 2016, 06:37:46 PM
Would I like to have my own uterus, cervix, etc., conceive, carry and birth my own child? Yes.

Would I like a uterus transplant? No.

Lots of risks come with it. I would prefer some advance in science that allowed me to produce my own uterus, not someone elses. Just doesn't seem authentic enough for me. I'd essentially just be a surrogate.

So in other words the kid would not be of our own gene pool but some other person gene pool (well unless one saved their sperm before transition ) ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk