One of the most incredible things about medical limitations in our world today is that they are often temporary. Science and technology in the medical field are constantly evolving, changing and implementing new procedures and theories in order to “fix” what natural or worldly issues the body undergoes. Disadvantages from birth can be corrected, and individuals are given another chance to walk, to breathe, to live and even to procreate. The advent of these new procedures is usually cause for immense celebration but, as a society, we must also look at the flip side of these advances. Just because science allows us to do certain things, that does not necessarily mean it is always beneficial to the greater good.
A recent issue connected with this very sensitive topic is extremely controversial on a personal level and in a broader sphere. A 26-year-old woman from Texas just became the first woman in America to receive a new uterus through transplant surgery. The woman, who preferred to be known by only her first name, Lindsey, was born without a uterus and was never able to conceive. She and her husband adopted three boys, but she hopes this medical advancement will finally give her the chance to give birth to a child of her own.
When I first encountered this story, I had no apprehensions about the possibility of women who were born without a uterus, had to have it removed or had severe damage to the reproductive organ being finally able to become pregnant. Infertility is an extremely emotional subject for each woman who experiences it. The fact that 50,000 women were eligible for the transplant surgery in the United States essentially meant that any of them could finally conceive with the help of modern medicine — and I definitely have no complaints regarding the reproductive freedom of women.
However, one aspect of the new treatment gave me pause and forced me to play devil’s advocate to explore some subsequent issues that would follow the birth of 50,000 babies post-transplant: the amount of children already without parents or caregivers, as well as the neonatal health issues oftentimes associated with fertility treatments or surgeries. It is no doubt a beautiful thing to be able to give birth to a baby that is genetically and biologically yours. But that gift is entirely comparable to the opportunity given to many parents to take on the responsibility of a child that does not necessarily stem from them biologically. In the U.S. alone, more than 120,000 children are orphans, and 400,000 live within the foster care system. In addition, our country has one of the fastest-growing populations in the world, growing by around 2.5 million people each year. It is also crucial to note that 21.1 percent of people 18 and under were in poverty in 2014, a statistic that is steadily increasing.
It may seem to some that a woman’s choice to undergo surgery in order to conceive is no one’s business. However, while privacy is important, we must look at how these huge medical progresses will affect society at large. Adoption should be greatly encouraged long before the option of a uterus transplant, which is an extremely extensive surgery. Additionally, many babies born after fertility treatment or reproductive surgeries can suffer from a premature birth. The health of preemie babies is shaky at best for many weeks after birth, and these health problems often follow the child as it grows, resulting in cognitive issues, respiratory problems and even early death.
Being able to advance technology in the medical field is undoubtedly a great thing and, as Americans, we are lucky enough to reap the benefits of these improvements. But in the case of uterus transplant surgery, there is more at stake than just the woman on the hospital bed. If more people took the time to think about not only effects on the community, but also of the health of future babies, maybe more would pause before opting for a transplant.