Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Uterustransplantation. Ethisch gerechtfertigt?

Is the transplant of uterus ethically acceptable?

  • Originalarbeit
  • Published:
Ethik in der Medizin Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Die Uterustransplantation ermöglicht Frauen mit einer absoluten uterinen Infertilität eine Schwangerschaft mit biologisch eigenem Kind. Das neuartige experimentelle Verfahren wirft eine Reihe von ethischen Fragen auf. Ziel dieses Artikels ist es, relevante ethische Problemkonstellationen im Kontext der Uterustransplantation überblickshaft darzulegen und kritisch zu diskutieren. Als systematischer Rahmen der Darstellung dienen die vier Prinzipien der Medizinethik Autonomie, Nicht-Schaden, Wohltun und Gerechtigkeit nach Beauchamp und Childress. Nach eingehender ethischer Betrachtung plädieren die Autorinnen mit Blick auf die Akkumulation schwerwiegender ethischer Probleme für die Notwendigkeit einer grundlegenden und umfassenden ethischen Debatte über Uterustransplantation. Ausgangspunkt einer solchen Debatte muss eine kritische Reflexion des normativen Stellenwerts des Leidens an einem unerfüllten Kinderwunsch sein.

Abstract

Problem description

For women suffering from infertility, uterus transplantation provides the possibility to become pregnant with their own child. This new experimental therapy generates several ethical questions.

Methods

With reference to the four principles of Beauchamp and Childress—autonomy, nonmaleficence, beneficence and justice—we will present and critically discuss the main ethical problems related to uterus transplantation.

Conclusion

In view of the sum of ethical problems raised by uterus transplantation, we plead for a broad ethical discussion with a focus on the normative status of suffering caused by an unfulfilled desire to have a child.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. Hier und im Folgenden verwenden wir aufgrund der besseren Lesbarkeit das generische Maskulinum.

Literatur

  • Akouri R, Maalouf G, Abboud J, Waked A, Nakad T, Bedran F, Gjannam GA, Hajj P, Hanafy A, Brännström F, Merzah S, Gharhemani M, Dahm-Kähler P, Brännström M (2017) Uterus transplantation. An update on the Middle East perspective. Middle East Fertil Soc J 22(3):163–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alghrani A (2016) Uterus transplantation. Does procreative liberty encompass a right to gestate? J Law Biosci 3(3):636–641. https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsw048

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Arora KS, Blake V (2014) Uterus transplantation. Ethical and regulatory challenges. J Med Ethics 40:396–400

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Barbieri R (2015) Uterus transplantation: medical breakthrough or surgical folly. Although uterus transplantation has been proven to be feasible, is it practical or ethical? OBG Manag 27:8–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayefsky MJ, Berkman BE (2016) The ethics of allocating uterine transplants. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 25:350–365

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Beauchamp TL, Childress JF (2013) Principles of biomedical ethics Bd. 7. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Beier K (2013) Reproduktive Autonomie als biopolitische Strategie. Eine Kritik des liberalen fortpflanzungsmedizinischen Diskurses aus bioethischer Perspektive. In: Finkelde D, Inthorn J, Reder M (Hrsg) Normiertes Leben. Biopolitik und die Funktionalisierung ethischer Diskurse. Campus, Frankfurt a.M., S 69–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Brännström M, Caiza A, Altchek A (2010) Experimental uterus transplantation. Hum Reprod Update 16(3):329–345

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brännström M, Diaz-Garcia C, Hanafy A, Olausson M, Tzakis A (2012) Uterus transplantation. Animal research and human possibilities. Fertil Steril 97(6):1269–1276

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brännström M, Johannesson L, Bokström H, Kvarnström N, Mölne J, Dahn-Kähler P, Enskog A, Milenkovic M, Ekberg J, Diaz-Gracia C, Gäbel M, Hanafy A, Hagberg H, Olausson M, Nilsson L (2015) Live birth after uterus transplantation. Lancet 385:607–616

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brännström M, Johannesson L, Dahm-Kähler P, Enskog A, Mölne J, Kvarnström N, Diaz-Garcia C, Hanafy A, Lundmark C, Marcickiewicz J, Gäbel M, Groth K, Akouri R, Eklind S, Holgersson J, Tzakis A, Olausson M (2014) First clinical uterus transplantation trial. A six-month report. Fertil Steril 101(5):1228–1236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruno B, Arora KS (2018) Uterus transplantation. The ethics of using deceased vs. living donors. Am J Bioeth 18(7):6–15

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Catsanos R, Rogers W, Lotz M (2013) The ethics of uterus transplantation. Bioethics 27(2):65–73

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Catsanos R, Rogers W, Lotz M (2016) The ethics of uterus transplantation. In: Kuhse H, Schüklenk U, Singer P (Hrsg) Bioethics. An anthology, 3. Aufl. Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester, S 91–101

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan C, Ng E, Ho P (2005) Ovarian changes after abdominal hysterectomy for benign conditions. J Soc Gynecol Investig 12(1):54–57

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Constantinescu S, Pai A, Coscia LA, Davison JM, Moritz MJ, Armenti V (2014) Breast-feeding after transplantation. Best practice & research. Clin Obstet Gynaecol 28(8):1163–1173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2014.09.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahm-Kähler P, Diaz-Garcia C, Brännström M (2016) Human uterus transplantation in focus. Br Med Bull 117(1):69–78

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dickens BM (2016) Legal and ethical issues of uterus transplantation. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 133:125–128

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Favre-Inhofer A, Raffi A, Carbonnel M, Revaux A, Ayoubi J‑M (2018) Uterine transplantation. Review in human research. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod 47:213–221

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Friesen P, Kearns L, Redman B, Caplan AL (2017) Rethinking the Belmont report? Am J Bioeth 17(7):15–21

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Guntam L, Williams N (2018) Positioning uterus transplantation as a “more ethical” alternative to surrogacy: exploring symmetries between uterus transplantation and surrogacy through analysis of a Swedich government white paper. Bioethics 32:509–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guntram L, Zeiler K (2016) ‘You have all those emotions inside that you cannot show because of what they will cause’. Disclosing the absence of one’s uterus and vagina. Soc Sci Med 167:63–70

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen M, Bower C, Milne E, de Klerk N, Kurinczuk JJ (2005) Assisted reproductive technologies and the risk of birth defects. A systematic review. Hum Reprod 20(2):328–338

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hauser-Schäublin B, Kalitzkus V, Petersen I, Schröder I (2000) Der geteilte Leib. Die kulturelle Dimension von Organtransplantation und Reproduktionsmedizin in Deutschland. Campus, Frankfurt a.M. New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs C, Gross C, Messersmith E, Hong B, Gillerspie B, Hill-Callahan P, Taler S, Jowsey S, Beebe T, Matas A, Odim J, Ibrahim H (2015) Emotional and financial experience of kidney donors over past 50 years. The RELIVE study. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 10(12):2221–2231

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Järvholm S, Johannesson L, Brännström M (2015a) Psychological aspects in pre-transplantation assessment of patients prior to entering the first uterus transplantation. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 94:1035–1038

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Järvholm S, Johannesson L, Clarke A, Brännström M (2015b) Uterus transplantation trial. Psychological evaluation of recipients and partners during the post-transplantation year. Fertil Steril 104(4):1010–1015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johannesson L, Järvholm S (2016) Uterus transplantation: current progress and future prospects. Int J Womens Health 8:43–51

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston J, Zacharias RL (2017) The future of reproductive autonomy. Hastings Cent Rep 47(6):6–11. https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.789

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King LP (2017) Should clinicians set limits on reproductive autonomy? Hastings Cent Rep 6:50–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kisu I, Mihara M, Banno K, Umene K, Araki J, Hara H, Suganuma N, Aoki D (2013) Risks for donors in uterus transplantation. Reprod Sci 20(2):1406–1415

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Krones T, Richter G (2008) Ärztliche Verantwortung. Das Arzt-Patient-Verhältnis. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz 51:818–826

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Krones T, Neuwohner E, El Ansari S, Wissner T, Richter G, Ethikkommission Marburg (2006) Kinderwunsch und Wunschkinder. Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der In-vitro-Fertilisations-Behandlung. Ethik Med 18(1):51–62

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lefkowitz A, Edwards M, Balayla J (2012) The Montreal criteria for the ethical feasibility of uterine transplantation. Transpl Int 25:439–447

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie C, Stoljar N (Hrsg) (2000) Relational autonomy. Feminist perspectives on autonomy, agency and the social self. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Moorman O, Myers E, Schildkraut J, Iversen E, Wang F, Warren N (2011) Effect of hysterectomy with ovarian preservation on ovarian function. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 118(6):1271–1279

    Google Scholar 

  • Mumtaz Z, Shahid U, Levay A (2013) Understanding the impact of gendered roles on the experiences of infertility amongst men and women in Punjab. Reprod Health 10:3

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Nair A, Stega J, Smith RJ, Del Priore G (2008) Uterus transplant. Evidence and ethics. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1127:83–91

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ozkan O, Akar ME, Ozkan O, Erdogan O, Hadimioglu N, Yilmaz M et al (2013) Preliminary results of the first human uterus transplant from a multiorgan donor. Fertil Steril 99(2):470–476

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Persad G, Wertheimer A, Emanuel E (2009) Principles for allocation of scarce medical intervention. Lancet 373:423–431

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Petrini C, Gainotti S, Morresi A, Costa AN (2017) Ethical issues in uterine transplantation. Psychological implications and informed consent. Transplant Proc 49:707–710

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rauprich O, Steger F (2005) Prinzipienethik in der Biomedizin. Moralphilosophie und medizinische Praxis. Campus, Frankfurt a.M. New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Roache R (2016) Infertility and non-traditional families. J Med Ethics 42(9):557–558

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson JA (2016) Other women’s wombs. Uterus transplants and gestational surrogacy. J Law Biosci 3(1):68–86. https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsw011

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Saborowski M (2006) Der „ethische Wert“ des „eigenen Kindes“. Eine Analyse der bioethischen Diskussion um ungewollte Kinderlosigkeit und Reproduktionsmedizin. Pflege Ges 11(4):306–321

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherwin S (1998) A relational approach to autonomy in health care. In: Sherwin S (Hrsg) The politics of women’s health. Temple University Press, Philadelphia, S 19–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Sickand M, Cuerden MS, Klarenbach SW, Ojo AO, Parikh CR, Boudville N et al (2009) Reimbursing live organ donors for incurred non-medical expenses: a global perspective on policies and programs. Am J Transplant 9:2825–2836

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Testa G, Koon EC, Johannesson L et al (2017) Living donor uterus transplantation: a single center’s observations and lessons learned from early setbacks to technical success. Am J Transplant. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.14326

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tong A, Chapman JR, Wong G, Kanellis J, McCarthy G, Craig JC (2012) The motivations and experiences of living kidney donors: a thematic synthesis. Am J Kidney Dis 60(1):15–26

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Voo TC, Koh S, Campbell AV (2016) Ethical issues in live-donor reimbursement program. Transplant Proc 48(3):742–744

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Whiteford LM, Gonzales L (1994) Stigma. The hidden burden of infertility. Soc Sci Med 40(1):27–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WHO (2006) Constitution of the World Health Organization. http://www.who.int/governance/eb/who_constitution_en.pdf. Zugegriffen: 20. Jan. 2019

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiedebusch S, Reiermann S, Steinke C, Muthny FA, Pavenstädt HJ, Schöne-Seifert B, Senninger N, Suwelack B, Buyx AM (2009) Quality of life, coping, and mental health status after living kidney donation. Transplant Proc 41:1483–1488

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wiesing U (1993) Die In-vitro-fertilisation. Vom Einfluß einer Technologie auf die ärztliche Ethik. In: Ach JS, Gaidt A (Hrsg) Herausforderungen der Bioethik. Frommann-Holzboog, Stuttgart, S 157–173

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson S, Williams NJ (2016) Should uterus transplants be publicly funded? J Med Ethics 42:559–565

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Ethik und Geschichte der Medizin, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, Stefan-Meier-Str. 26, 79104, Freiburg, Deutschland

    Claudia Bozzaro & Melanie Weismann

  2. Zentrum für Seltene Erkrankungen, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Deutschland

    Franziska Krause

Authors
  1. Claudia Bozzaro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Franziska Krause
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Melanie Weismann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Claudia Bozzaro.

Ethics declarations

Interessenkonflikt

C. Bozzaro, F. Krause und M. Weismann geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Ethische Standards

Dieser Beitrag beinhaltet keine von den Autoren durchgeführten Studien an Menschen oder Tieren.

Additional information

Die Autorinnen C. Bozzaro, F. Krause und M. Weismann haben zu gleichen Teilen zum Manuskript beigetragen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bozzaro, C., Krause, F. & Weismann, M. Uterustransplantation. Ethisch gerechtfertigt?. Ethik Med 31, 113–129 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00481-019-00519-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00481-019-00519-4

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation