Article Text
Abstract
Since 2000, 11 human uterine transplantation procedures (UTx) have been performed across Europe and Asia. Five of these have, to date, resulted in pregnancy and four live births have now been recorded. The most significant obstacles to the availability of UTx are presently scientific and technical, relating to the safety and efficacy of the procedure itself. However, if and when such obstacles are overcome, the most likely barriers to its availability will be social and financial in nature, relating in particular to the ability and willingness of patients, insurers or the state to pay. Thus, publicly funded healthcare systems such as the UK's National Health Service (NHS) will eventually have to decide whether UTx should be funded. With this in mind, we seek to provide an answer to the question of whether there exist any compelling reasons for the state not to fund UTx. The paper proceeds as follows. It assumes, at least for the sake of argument, that UTx will become sufficiently safe and cost-effective to be a candidate for funding and then asks, given that, what objections to funding there might be. Three main arguments are considered and ultimately rejected as providing insufficient reason to withhold funding for UTx. The first two are broad in their scope and offer an opportunity to reflect on wider issues about funding for infertility treatment in general. The third is narrower in scope and could, in certain forms, apply to UTx but not other assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs). The first argument suggests that UTx should not be publicly funded because doing so would be inconsistent with governments’ obligations to prevent climate change and environmental pollution. The second claims that UTx does not treat a disorder and is not medically necessary. Finally, the third asserts that funding for UTx should be denied because of the availability of alternatives such as adoption and surrogacy.
- Transplantation
- Reproductive Medicine
- Concept of Health
- Allocation of Health Care Resources
- Distributive Justice
This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt and build upon this work, for commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Request Permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information:
Linked Articles
- Feature article
- Feature article
- Feature article
- Feature article
Other content recommended for you
- Commentary on Nicola Williams and Stephen Wilkinson: ‘ Should Uterus Transplants Be Publicly Funded? ’
- Uterus transplantation: ethical and regulatory challenges
- What would an environmentally sustainable reproductive technology industry look like
- Decreased chance of a live born child in women with rheumatoid arthritis after assisted reproduction treatment: a nationwide cohort study
- Cyanotic congenital heart disease following fertility treatments in the United States from 2011 to 2014
- The new Italian law on assisted reproduction technology (Law 40/2004)
- Live birth and adverse birth outcomes in women with ulcerative colitis and Crohn 's disease receiving assisted reproduction: a 20 - year nationwide cohort study
- Assessing cardiovascular remodelling in fetuses and infants conceived by assisted reproductive technologies: a prospective observational cohort study protocol
- Getting beyond the welfare of the child in assisted reproduction
- Access to infertility evaluation and treatment in two public fertility clinics and the reasons for withholding it: a prospective survey cohort study of healthcare professionals