title: Should Deceased Donation be Morally Preferred in Uterine Transplantation Trials?
abstract: In recent years much research has been undertaken regarding the feasibility of the human uterine transplant (UTx) as a treatment for absolute uterine factor infertility (AUFI). Should it reach clinical application this procedure would allow such individuals what is often a much-desired opportunity to become not only social mothers (via adoption or traditional surrogacy arrangements), or genetic and social mothers (through gestational surrogacy) but mothers in a social, genetic and gestational sense. Like many experimental transplantation procedures such as face, hand, corneal and larynx transplants, UTx as a therapeutic option falls firmly into the camp of the quality of life (QOL) transplant, undertaken with the aim, not to save a life, but to enrich one. However, unlike most of these novel procedures - where one would be unlikely to find a willing living donor or an ethics committee that would sanction such a donation - the organs to be transplanted in UTx are potentially available from both living and deceased donors. In this article, in the light of the recent nine-case research trial in Sweden which used uteri obtained from living donors, and the assertions on the part of a number of other research teams currently preparing trials that they will only be using deceased donors, I explore the question of whether, in the case of UTx, there exist compelling moral reasons to prefer the use of deceased donors despite the benefits that may be associated with the use of organs obtained from the living.
authors.forename: Nicola
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Williams
mesh_terms: D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007247:Infertility, Female / Q000601:surgery* / Q000628:therapy*; D019520:Living Donors; D016377:Organ Transplantation / Q000941:ethics*; D011788:Quality of Life; D013548:Sweden; D014019:Tissue Donors / Q000941:ethics* / Q000523:psychology; D009927:Tissue and Organ Procurement / Q000941:ethics; D014599:Uterus / Q000637:transplantation*
keywords: autonomy; beneficence; non-maleficence; quality of life transplants; reproductive ethics; transplantation ethics; uterine transplants
references.citation: Fertil Steril. 2013 Jul;100(1):280-94
references.pmid: 23557761
references.citation: Fertil Steril. 2012 Jun;97(6):1269-76
references.pmid: 22542990
references.citation: Arch Surg. 2000 Jan;135(1):14-6
references.pmid: 10636340
references.citation: Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2008 Apr;1127:83-91
references.pmid: 18443334
references.citation: Hum Reprod. 2007 Jan;22(1):288-94
references.pmid: 16920722
references.citation: Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2004 Winter;13(1):105-9
references.pmid: 15045922
references.citation: Fertil Steril. 2013 Feb;99(2):348-9
references.pmid: 23122953
references.citation: Fertil Steril. 2013 Feb;99(2):470-6
references.pmid: 23084266
references.citation: Fertil Steril. 2014 Jul;102(1):40-3
references.pmid: 24784936
references.citation: Fertil Steril. 2013 Nov;100(5):1358-63
references.pmid: 23830110
references.citation: Womens Health (Lond). 2014 Jul;10(4):455-67
references.pmid: 25259905
references.citation: Hum Reprod Update. 2010 May-Jun;16(3):329-45
references.pmid: 19897849
references.citation: Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2002 Mar;76(3):245-51
references.pmid: 11880127
references.citation: Fertil Steril. 2014 May;101(5):1228-36
references.pmid: 24582522
references.citation: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2006 Nov;1(6):1148-53
references.pmid: 17699340
references.citation: J Med Ethics. 2003 Feb;29(1):4-7
references.pmid: 12569185
references.citation: Transpl Int. 2012 Apr;25(4):439-47
references.pmid: 22356169
references.citation: Hastings Cent Rep. 2007 May-Jun;37(3):18-20
references.pmid: 17649898
references.citation: Maturitas. 2014 Jan;77(1):20-3
references.pmid: 24314618
references.citation: Bioethics. 2013 Feb;27(2):65-73
references.pmid: 21726265
references.citation: Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2001 Fall;10(4):399-407
references.pmid: 14533406
references.citation: J Am Coll Dent. 2014 Summer;81(3):4-13
references.pmid: 25951677
references.citation: J Med Ethics. 1995 Apr;21(2):91-6
references.pmid: 7608947