Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Not-Quite-Science Forum Men Can Now Bear Children

Nov:1999

BRITAIN'S foremost fertility expert Lord Winston, says advances in medical technology mean men can now bear children.

Lord Winston, who as Professor Robert Winston was ennobled three years ago by Tony Blair, says doctors could use today's techniques to implant an embryo in a man's abdomen, allowing him to carry it to term and then
have it delivered by caesarean section.
The treatment, overturning millions of years of evolution, would allow homosexual couples to have children and help heterosexuals if the woman could not become pregnant.
"Male pregnancy would certainly be possible and would be the same as when a woman has an ectopic pregnancy - outside the uterus.
Winston, who will outline the concept in his new book, The IVF Revolution, to be published in April. 2000.

Dr Simon Fishel, director of the Centre for Assisted Reproduction in Nottingham, said: "There is no reason why a man could not carry a child. The placenta provides the necessary hormonal conditions, so it doesn't have to be inside a woman."
The procedure's possibilities were recently demonstrated in the remarkable case of a woman in Oxfordshire who carried a baby outside her womb.
A scan revealed the embryo had travelled into the mother's abdomen and had attached itself to her bowel. She decided to continue with this rare type of ectopic pregnancy and the baby was delivered without mishap.

Dr Gillian Lockwood, a clinical research fellow at the John Radcliffe hospital, Oxford, who knew about the case, said: "This shows the possession of a uterus is not absolutely necessary and that male pregnancies are theoretically possible."
Although leading figures in the homosexual community predicted that there would be many gay couples keen to carry their own children, any fertility doctor considering it would have to obtain approval from the UK Human
Fertilisation and Embryology Authority.
Suzanne McCarthy, chief executive of the authority, said: "If an application were made, we would give it serious consideration but we would not be interested only in the science of how safe and effective it would be,
but also why it was being done."
Tim Hedgley, chairman of the national fertility association Issue,welcomed the possibility of allowing men to be mothers. "It is not ghoulish in any way and you certainly could not stop a man from doing this in legal terms on the grounds of sex, because that would be discrimination," he said.
Some scientists, however, rejected the treatment out of hand. The fact that male pregnancies were possible did not mean they should be allowed.

Surely this is like human cloning, we know it could be done, but like mike says--should it be done?


Of one thing I am certain--- if this idea became 'normal' and men bore the children, then families would consist of only children.

That was almost 12 years ago. Is it known if any men have taken up the challenge yet?

When I said this is 'like' cloning I did not mean that the procedure was the same as cloning. I meant that the ethical problem raised was similar- ie that maybe be both could be done, but should either be done. Reproductive science is outpacing our experiences very fast indeed.

I must confess to some amazement that so far there seems to be no credible account of cloned humans being successfully gestated. It may be that the first man to carry a child would be thus able to satisfy his desire for that child most completely by implanting his clone and thus becoming not only the sperm donor but also the gestational parent.

As usual Shakespeare has a few words for it --- "Oh brave new world that has such people in it". (OK I adapted the quote a bit!)