There's been rumors that in 8 to 15 years technology will be advanced enough to allow FtMs (and MtFs too I think) to have their own biological kids without having to be the ones to get pregnant and still have a chance at having kids (through getting a surrogate mother/sperm donor and using your eggs). I know technology is already that advance but it is not available to everyone and not promising yet (cost, etc). I was wondering what you guys think about it. I was interested on the subject because kids are important to me and one day I want to have my own, but because I'm a trans guy it may get a bit more complicated and I worry that it may never be possible.
with what's happening today it can be possible
At the moment transwoman could have sperm frozen and transguys have eggs frozen, prior to HRT etc.. So at any point they could have a surrogate carry a child for either of them with a partner of their choice in the future. They would of course need an egg or sperm donor to complete the process but anonymous sperm donor banks already exist, I'm not sure about egg banks though.
For carrying or fathering a child respectively, I'm not sure that will be in the near future. Not a lot of society interest to drive it.
Cindy
I think you're referring to some news that, apparently, the DNA from an egg cell was extracted and inserted into a sperm cell. It was earlier this year.
That was done on a 'lower' life form. It may be possible to do the same with humans.
As for someone who is MtF carrying a baby through to birth, that is an entirely different matter.
Yeah. I meant an FtM freezing his eggs though. Do you think they'll ever make it more affordable? I know all I am worrying about right now is actual transition and that alone is pricey but to become who I want to be it is totally worth it.
Do you think they'll ever make it more affordable?
I don't think they want too. Similarly, with the above cited technology, the price point is going to make it well beyond only the richest people.
Sounds a bit like the articles that have been appearing in journals for the last 30 years or so, promising the use of pig organs for transplants is only 5 years away.
Quote from: justmeinoz on December 24, 2010, 06:18:26 AM
Sounds a bit like the articles that have been appearing in journals for the last 30 years or so, promising the use of pig organs for transplants is only 5 years away.
pig organs...? er.. I am not sure if this is sarcasm or not :S
Quote from: Josh T on December 24, 2010, 12:33:08 PM
pig organs...? er.. I am not sure if this is sarcasm or not :S
It's true; pigs are very well matched in size a genetics to be organ donors to humans. Says a lot really.
Honey the difference between you and any Great Ape is less that 1% of your total DNA.
This already exists.
TODAY, there is the IVF technology to collect eggs and freeze them as eggs or to collect eggs and fertilize them to create embryos (which can be frozen) - and then used for future implantation in a surrogate.
It's just costly, the egg harvesting requires a course of drugs & extraction (like most IVF treatments do), and the likelihood of the eggs surviving are lower than that of an embryo surviving.
Do I think it'll get cheaper some day? No. I don't.
Ok. Well then what about getting one of my close male cousins to be a sperm donor? How much would that cost? I'm sure it's at least less invasive than the egg freezing procedure?
Quote from: CindyJames on December 24, 2010, 01:54:36 PM
It's true; pigs are very well matched in size a genetics to be organ donors to humans. Says a lot really.
Now that I think about it... but still, that's just. Weird. Isn't it?? I think I'll pass on this one =P
Quote from: Josh T on December 24, 2010, 03:27:17 PM
Ok. Well then what about getting one of my close male cousins to be a sperm donor? How much would that cost? I'm sure it's at least less invasive than the egg freezing procedure?
I really hope this was a joke!!! :)
No, no, I mean use his sperms and get a surrogate mother, jeez =P
that's what I though too when someone else told me about it. I'm just trying to figure things out here. Haha.
Like current fertility treatments they are going to price point this stuff to upper middle class and above*, no one wants poor people having more kids. Sorry, that's just an economic reality.
* This is done primarily by not making it covered by insurance.
Scientists make sperm from embryonic stem cells (http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/156730.php).
What does this mean for us?
Hopefully that eggs can eventually be made from MTF adult stem cells and sperm from FTM adult stem cells.
Hopefully, hopefully. But even still. It's going to be pricey. That is a major concern for me and I keep pointing it out because I get kinda depressed when I figure I might never be able to have any biological kids of my own. But times are changing I suppose?
MTF adult stem cells and sperm from FTM adult stem cell
Great, and why not just assign them to 'approved parents' right from the start too?
No Western nation wants poor people to breed. Such procedures are going to be reserved for the very rich, or at the least, the almost rich.
Just so you guys know I live in Canada if that helps at all. I guess adoption and finding a kid that looks like me is also an option....?
Quote from: tekla on December 24, 2010, 04:54:02 PM
MTF adult stem cells and sperm from FTM adult stem cell
Great, and why not just assign them to 'approved parents' right from the start too?
What? ???
QuoteNo Western nation wants poor people to breed. Such procedures are going to be reserved for the very rich, or at the least, the almost rich.
Eh? Poor people do most of the breeding.
What?
Well, if we can have designer kids, we're sure going to need designer parents.
Eh? Poor people do most of the breeding.
Yeah, that's the point.
Quote from: tekla on December 24, 2010, 08:19:41 PM
What?
Well, if we can have designer kids, we're sure going to need designer parents.
Who said anything about designer kids? This is about letting infertile people have access to sperm and eggs that are their own DNA.
There's nothing 'designer' about it. It's still a lottery as to which genes the kid gets.
The huge issue with any technology (and that's what we're talking about) is who get access to it, and for what ends, and I doubt this is going to be used to give even more kids to even more people. It will be used to give more kids to the 'right kind' of parents.
As the planet is overpopulated already I can't see the point myself ( after helping bring 2 children into the world myself- I carry my own double standard into battle!) Nothing wrong with adoption, the Romans were into it in a big way for one.
I was pointing out in my earlier post that the immune system is so fiendishly clever at rejecting things it doesn't like, that the promised advance is always another 5 years down the track.
Merry Christmas to all too. :) Sandra.
Quote from: tekla on December 24, 2010, 08:53:34 PM
The huge issue with any technology (and that's what we're talking about) is who get access to it, and for what ends, and I doubt this is going to be used to give even more kids to even more people. It will be used to give more kids to the 'right kind' of parents.
That doesn't equate to taking children away from people or making 'designer babies'.
Your argument is flawed.
Quote from: tekla on December 24, 2010, 04:54:02 PM
No Western nation wants poor people to breed. Such procedures are going to be reserved for the very rich, or at the least, the almost rich.
I think they want us to breed, they need our kids for cannon fodder. But they don't want us to think too much. That's why they maintain a middle class. A bunch of over educated automotons who follow whatever trends are placed in front of them and believe what they are told.
Dettol anyone?