The American Medical Association floated a trial balloon for uterus transplants for biological men who identify as transgender, pushing the next phase of “Frankenstein tech” for cross-sex procedures.
An ethical analysis of uterus transplants for males published in the AMA’s Journal of Ethics in June detailed the ethical arguments behind such a procedure, including whether or not it should be taxpayer funded.
UP FOR DEBATE: WHERE TRUMP, DESANTIS, AND REST OF REPUBLICAN 2024 FIELD STAND ON KEY ISSUES
The first successful uterine transplant, which was conducted on a woman, occurred in Sweden in 2013.
The article notes that some reasons transgender-identifying biological men might want the transplant, UTx, is to gestate their own children or to “consolidate their identities but not gestate children.”
“Rather than funding objective medical studies on transgender medicine, the AMA has chosen activist positions on this delicate topic,” Dr. Martin Makary, professor at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, told the Washington Examiner. “Why don’t they fund a study on the 10-year regret rate of children who undergo transitioning surgery? What is the suicide rate among those who undergo aggressive hormone or surgical treatment versus long-term talk therapy?”
According to a 2021 study done on the perceptions and motivations for uterus transplants for men identifying as women, 94% of respondents believed that the ability to birth children “would enhance perceptions of their femininity.” Eighty-eight percent of respondents believed the ability to “menstruate” would also add to this perception.
The movement in the medical field has been growing in recent years, with persons like Jacques Bayala, an obstetrician-gynecologist and clinician scientist at McGill University, arguing that a woman who is born without a uterus and a man who starts identifying as a woman “have a similar claim to maternity if we consider them to have equivalent rights to fulfill the reproductive potential of their gender. And I think that we should.”
“Medicine has many crisis issues today — overtreatment, the medical-industrial complex, stagnant cancer research, and skyrocketing healthcare costs,” Makary said. “It’s odd that the AMA is skipping over these giant issues to focus on uterus transplants for transgender people.”
Most studies favorable to uterine transplants for biological men make the case for the rare, risky, and expensive procedure on the grounds of justice and equality. One study, for example, concludes that transgender women denied the procedure could suffer “psychological harm” similar to that of biological women who are unable to conceive.
“Transwomen lack a trait (the ability to bear children) that may cause them to experience psychological dissonance in a way that undermines their health and well-being,” the ethics paper says. “The lack of a uterus also closes off the prospect of gestating a child in a way that is available to women as a class. It follows that lack of a uterus is an obstacle to full participation in the social goods attached to women’s identity.”
The AMA paper, written by Illinois University College of Medicine philosophy professor Timothy Murphy and University of Texas medical student Kelsey Mumford, says not all candidates for such a procedure would have the “same standing” to receive federal subsidies or insurance coverage for it and points out that fertility treatments, such as in-vitro fertilization, are not typically covered by government or insurance companies.
In the United States, costs for UTx range between $100,000 and $300,000.
While the article provides some counterarguments to the provision of uterus transplants for biological males, such as the “competing claims on limited resources,” they are heavily outweighed by arguments in favor. However, the authors admit, “Morally weaker cases involve claims grounded in personal interests unrelated to having children or achieving other kinds of status equality and involve relatively greater risk than benefit.”
Moral and ethical issues surround the conversation.
Makary pointed to several problems, including the American medical establishment spending resources on this issue as opposed to other pressing ones.
“The irony of the AMA’s focus on promoting uterus transplants in biologic men is that other gender-affirming treatments they push for are making children permanently infertile,” Makary said. “The AMA leadership’s believe that children can simply pick a gender as they do an ice cream flavor lacks scientific support.”
Terry Schilling, president of American Principles Project, said another concern is the wholesale rejection of natural humanity in favor of corporate “narcissism.”
“Our sex is a gift, and the activists in science and medicine aren’t thinking enough about the societal problems and effects that will result from introducing this Frankenstein tech to humanity,” Schilling told the Washington Examiner. “We shouldn’t waste anything, including our bodies. But this for-profit industry built on narcissism seeks to upend all of humanity to pursue their worthless goals.”
While groups like the AMA are being increasingly “dominated by partisan activists,” Makary said, their membership numbers are dwindling because advocacy of this kind is “alienating many of their physician members.” Dissent, however, is contentious.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
“There is currently a modern-day McCarthyism that is canceling researchers in this field,” Makary said. “Mayo just suspended Dr. Michael Joyner, a world-renown exercise physiologist, for suggesting that testosterone in transwomen sports may result in unfair competition. Mayo said he did not follow ‘prescribed messaging.'”
After the publication of this article, the AMA told the Washington Examiner that it does not have an official policy on uterus transplantation.
