For centuries women have fought the right to have a voice in a male-dominated world. Much has been said about how women should treat their bodies in recent years. In 2000 the very first uterus transplant was performed in Saudi Arabia. This procedure caused chaos around the globe; however, other countries, including the United States, have attempted this surgery. A review of whether a uterine transplant violates ethical and legal concerns will be discussed here. Science has played a significant role in allowing women to conceive and carry a child or children to term. The ability to birth a child can be considered a blessing from a higher power; however, not all women can conceive or carry their pregnancy to term. While science has done its part, childbirth may feel like a burden to some. Countless hours, days, and years of trying to conceive place unwanted stress on hopeful couples or women wanting to parent a child.

Any procedure or protocol introduced to the medical community must go through legal and ethical processes to avoid offending the population it is intended to serve. "In the past, closely related women, for instance, mothers of the recipients, were willing to donate their uterus after menopause to their daughters who needed it" (Brannstrom etal., 2014). "While the willingness to have a normal childbirth can be shared between a woman and her close relatives, donations from an unrelated woman make us question the donor's intentions. Legal issues can crop up here where monetary benefit or other forms of coercion may be used to bring in potential donors. Not only will this lead to the exploitation of the vulnerable and people experiencing poverty, but this can also potentially lead to medically unsuitable people becoming donors" (Taneja et al.,2019). Also, "the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) Committee for the Ethical Aspects of Human Reproduction and Women's Health called uterus transplantation ethically unjustifiable because of a lack of information on its safety and efficacy, attempts have been made to answer questions which are relevant to the ethics of uterine transplantation" (Milliez, 2009). Because of these concerns, cadaver grafts have also been discussed.

The most recent surgery occurred in India, known for its cultural and religious differences. The Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act (THOTA); was enacted into law in 1994 to regulate the "storage and transplantation of human organs for therapeutic purposes" (Sangwan, 2020). The act was introduced to an Indian parliament to widen the number of organs and tissues that could be donated. The question in India was whether the THOTA would need to be amended to have control over uterine transplants or whether these decisions should be left to gynecologists and fertility specialists. THOTA has general guidelines for specific procedures, but as uterine transplants gain popularity, these procedures must be monitored on a case-by-case basis. The pressing cultural and religious concerns are that of non-relative, transgender, cadaver transplants, and ownership, to name a few. Ownership is a hot item due to determining who legally owns the uterus. With ownership, then begs to question, will the donor have rights to the child?

Legally, ethically, morally, culturally, or religiously uterine transplantation has many twists and turns. Women all over the globe that would like to be mothers can turn to science for assistance. Instead, the procedure is governed by a gynecologist, fertility specialists, or THOTA should not hold a woman hostage from receiving what she believes is due to her. There are no doubt legal and ethical implications. However, do those implications differ from kidney, heart, or lung transplants? Yes, those organs are vital. But the change in conceiving and nurturing a child is just as crucial to have a better quality of life as having a new kidney.

Provide a Discussion Board Reply