I will not be here for a couple of hours, but I thought I would start this to see what some of your thoughts on this subject are.
I heard a strange thing in the news a while ago. Something along the lines of "first pregnant male". Yeah, freaked me out a bit. Later, after doing some research, I found that this 'male' was actually a female, who had a sex change operation. That does not actually count as being male, in my book. Testes make a male, ovaries make a female, in a simple way to put it.
What is everyone's thought on this? Another thing to think about - are you confused by this topic? Probably not as confused as that he/she's baby will be...
kanethebrain posted this: Also, from my reading of the news storiesabout this couple, they apparently had to go doctor-hopping before they found a doctor that would go through with the procedure. I'd be interested in seeing why those doctors turned this couple down. They had to go doctor hopping because many doctors did not think it was natural and refused. Also, some doctors had staff who were unwilling to work with the couple. In my view, as long as the baby is well, I have no problem with this occurring, I mean, come on, in the modern world, anything can and will happen.
Nerdius: Do you know that or are you just postulating? If you know that, I'd love to see a link to a story, since I find this interesting.
Otherwise, I can think of a number of medical reasons why doctors wouldn't be comfortable doing this. Reasons like: How with the hormones the mother has received affect the baby? How will the baby affect the mother after her treatments? Will complications be handled the same way? If there were unacceptable risks to either mother or child, I can easily see doctors turning them down. Just like doctors sometimes turn down women in their 60s that want to have children because of the risks involved.
He just stopped taking his testosterone (injections I think?), and it slowly left his body until he has normal female hormone levels again. I am sure that complications would be dealt with the same way, because he still is physically a female. He just looks like a male now. But he physically has a uterus, so how could it be any different?
Oh heavens, if you are still confused about the essential points, I've written the summary at the bottom of the first page. Also, most of you still need to read the post on how gender relates to sex (which I left a link to also on the first page).
* If the patient is no longer on hormone therapy then the pregnancy should carry no extra risk.
* Learning the reality of your parentage (whether you were adopted, born out of wedlock, or have same-sex parents) is not what generates sociopaths; if anything, it would be more likely the constant exposure to a maladaptive, closed-minded environment that engenders a deep-seated resentment and alienation.
This is borne from a normative fallacy- thinking that we are born already with some conception of what is right with the world, which isn't exactly the case (not to say that we're a tabula rasa, but rather that we don't spring to the world with the expectation that we have a mother and a father and it's the apocalypse if this isn't the case). People are more adaptive than that, and kids are more adaptive than adults. If the kid has the chance to realise that there's nothing wrong with it, then there's no issue.
* I don't know the realitym but the professional code of conduct stresses that doctors must not refuse a treatment that a patient wishes to undertake on moral grounds: this is simply unprofessional. It still happens- doctors reportedly refuse abortion treatments even where abortion is legal on moral grounds, and this is wrong on the doctor's part.
More likely doctors would refuse treatment because they do not have the experience or the expertise to deal with the patient's needs sufficiently well.
Strop, you always make great points. Unfortunately, I think most of who has posted here let their ADD kick in and didn't read it. They just go about responding to the topic and do not read. Saddens me...
Dragon, I also agree that a lot of people are more narrow-minded than they think they are. I think that if people learned to see things from different views, it does not mean they have to AGREE with everything. No one has to agree with what this couple is doing, but they doesn't mean they do not deserve the proper respect or medical assistance.
I totally concur with what Asherlee has just previously stated. I am in no way taking a stance that this couple should not receive any medical assistance, I was just trying to bring up my point of view. Personally, the parents can do whatever they please, but I truely feel sorry for the child they are about to bear (if they have not already had it).
I don't care...how the pregnacy started, I'm wondering how this is going to turn out and how the cosmetics that make she a he will affect a c-section since that's the only choice..unless they come up with a good birth process. But, besides, we need to worry about the dieing Y chromosome since it seems to be getting smaller according to some scientist............
WarriorsCreed, I don't they they did any cosmetic changes to the man's genitals, so the birth can proceed as normal.
I don't know what you're talking about with the Y chromosome. There's almost no way it could be shrinking without causing massive birth defects, which we aren't seeing. Unless you're talking about telomeres, which affect all chromosomes equally.
But, besides, we need to worry about the dieing Y chromosome since it seems to be getting smaller according to some scientist............
Haha, awesome, I know what this is referring to. Right now, I'm under the impression that the claim (that the male parts of the human genome are disappearing from subsequent generations of offspring) is too controversial for anything concrete to be made of it; the consensus among my academic professors appears to be "not compelling enough to be of concern for the moment".
@ Homegrove: Feeling sorry for the (future) kid is a reaction probably shared by many, but also provides an opportunity to look further into the workings of stigma.
I assume that the reasons one would feel sorry for the kid include either being born to an 'abnormal' circumstance, or possibly having a future of being subject to discrimination.
But I put this to you: this in itself is a form of discrimination, because it still subscribes to the distinction and, indirectly, feeds the same stigma.
So to address everybody generally, the best way to deal with such 'differences' is really to disregard them. There has been a lot of "such and such are people just like us" and this is the kind of attitude that resonates most strongly with those affected by stigmas such as a 'homosexual background'. It does not matter that other people may still discriminate or make something of a "differentness" that is not desired- so long as you do not do so yourself.
Kanethebrain posted: Nerdius: Do you know that or are you just postulating? If you know that, I'd love to see a link to a story, since I find this interesting. Well, as I said in my first post on this topic, I saw the thing on Oprah for this story. When Oprah talked to the family about getting a doctor, they said it was hard to get one for the reasons I had posted. I don't know a site off the top of my head, but I will try to find site with info. about this, maybe a youtube record on the Oprah thing.
I found a video that might help you kanethebrain, it is right here this is one part of the interview with Oprah. The user who posted this has two more vids on this interview (small part, just this has doctor part in the second segment)
