First U.S. baby born from transplanted womb

For the first time in the United States, a woman born without a uterus gave birth to a healthy baby, according to a report released last Friday.

The woman, who remains anonymous, was part of a small trial studying uterine transplantation and pregnancy in women with Absolute Uterine Factor Infertility—meaning their uterus either does not function properly or is nonexistent—at Baylor University Medical Center at Dallas.

A 36-year-old mother of two donated her uterus to the recipient, according to Time magazine. Doctors transplanted the donated uterus last year and then later implanted an embryo conceived using in vitro fertilization (IVF). (The women in the trial all have functioning ovaries that are not attached to the donated wombs, so IVF is necessary.) The recipient became pregnant and carried the baby to term. Last month, doctors successfully delivered the baby—reportedly healthy and screaming—by cesarean section.

The achievement is astounding both personally for this new family and professionally for the team of doctors who oversaw the transplant, pregnancy, and birth. An estimated 50,000 women in the United States could be candidates for a uterus transplant, according to The New York Times.

Yet despite its feel-good nature, this story raises serious ethical concerns.

The Baylor transplant is the first in the United States, but doctors in Sweden have led the way. In 2014, Sweden was home to the first baby in the world born from a transplanted womb. Seven more babies have since been born in further trials.

Following those births, medical ethicists started sounding alarm bells, asking to what lengths and at what costs medicine should go for women to experience pregnancy. They warned that amidst the excitement of a new fertility technology, the significant costs and ethical implications of uterine transplantation were being ignored.

The health risks of womb transplants are serious and far-reaching. Uterus transplants are not life-saving, so all the risks are undertaken by women—both recipients and donors—who would otherwise lead healthy lives. The five-hour surgery on donors is more complex and invasive than a typical hysterectomy. Recipients run the risk of organ rejection, which can cause serious medical problems. The immunosuppressive drugs to prevent organ rejection can have serious side effects, so the uterus is taken back out after one or two pregnancies.

Baylor’s current trial involves a total of 10 transplants. So far eight have been completed, with three of those failing and one other woman becoming pregnant.

There are also ethical and moral implications. Uterus transplant pregnancies require IVF, a process that often results in additional embryos being destroyed. The whole process costs hundreds of thousands of dollars, expensive for a non-lifesaving measure when other options, like adoption, exist. Also, some ethicists worry that if the technology continues to develop, women could be exploited for their uteruses, similar to concerns about poor women being exploited for surrogacy.

Scientists also have suggested that they hope to use the technology so that men who identify as women can experience pregnancy, a development that would pose serious risks to the baby and radically depart from God’s design for sex and childbearing. Last month, Richard Paulson, a doctor and president of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, said of transgender uterus transplants, “You could do it tomorrow,” according to The Telegraph of London.

These concerns outweigh any benefits of uterine transplants, according to Christian doctor and medical ethicist Paige Comstock Cunningham in an article for the Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity.

“Infertility must be understood within the context of the sin and brokenness that mars all of creation,” she wrote. “From our limited human perspective, it is regrettable that for some couples, biological children may not be part of God’s good and gracious will.”

But Cunningham noted that God calls us to humility and trust, a pattern that is “radically at odds with the aggressive, and extravagantly costly, pursuit of a ‘child of one’s own’ via uterus transplantation.”

Cunningham added that while babies born from transplanted wombs are “precious little ones, made in God’s image,” the “serious identified ethical concerns counsel that womb transplants should not be continued.”

Facebook’s new little minions

This week Facebook launched a new free chat app designed for children ages 6 to 12. Messenger Kids allows children to message or video chat with approved contacts on their smartphone or tablet.

Facebook promotes the app as a family-friendly, safe option for kids to connect with friends and relatives online, and it has a lot of perks: Children don’t need a Facebook account or phone number to have the app, the app lives on a child’s device but parents control the activity through their own Facebook account, and parents approve all contact requests and can edit the contact list. Plus there are no ads or in-app purchases.

Facebook’s message to parents is simple: Your kids are already using chat apps, so you should at least control how they do it. In a rollout announcement on Monday, the company cited research that found 93 percent of U.S. kids ages 6-12 have access to a tablet or smartphone (66 percent have their own devices), and 3 in 5 parents said their under-13 children use messaging and social media apps.

But critics argue Facebook is just grooming its next generation of members, creating a pipeline for children too young to legally have an account. Federal law—the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA)—restricts social networking sites to users ages 13 and older.

The question no one is asking, but should be, is “whether or not we want our children these ages to be so digitally connected with anyone under any circumstance,” said Albert Mohler, president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and a WORLD board member, during his podcast, The Briefing, on Wednesday.

Regardless of parental controls, the app encourages kids to spend time investing in virtual, not face-to-face, relationships. And social scientists have warned that virtual communication—texting, messaging, photo-sharing—is having a disastrous effect on young people’s mental and emotional health.

An occasional video chat with Grandma in Milwaukee? Seems harmless enough. But then why not just use Mom’s phone to call her? —K.C.

An unfair advantage

A transgender New Zealander medaled on Tuesday at the World Weightlifting Championships. Laurel Hubbard, 39, who previously competed as Gavin Hubbard, is believed to be the first transgender athlete to compete at a world championship level event. Hubbard took second in the snatch and in the overall for super heavyweight women, beat out by American Sarah Robies. The victory adds to a growing debate about the fairness of transgender athletes competing across gender lines.

The International Weightlifting Federation follows the guidelines of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) for allowing transgender athletes to compete. Hubbard, who lived as a man until age 35, underwent testosterone tests for a year before being allowed into the competition.

Critics cried foul. “I don’t think anybody was impressed with the whole situation,” Tim Swords, Robies’ coach, told the New Zealand news site Stuff. “I hope the IOC will do something about it because this is really going to hurt our sport in the long run.” —K.C.

Grassroots success

Delaware announced this week it is pulling a proposed rule that would have allowed students to change their gender or race without parental consent or knowledge. In response to public outcry, the state announced it is sending the proposal, Regulation 225, back to the Delaware Department of Education for substantive changes.

“We’ve never seen so many people engage on an issue in such a unified way as we did with this regulation,” said Nicole Theis, president of the Delaware Family Policy Council. “We’re thanking God for the media opportunities to inform people and sound the alarm to wake up parents.” —K.C.