Since we've had the subject of birth...

[Emily HW]

What does everyone think about this?
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23482682-401,00.html

Yes, he's transgendered, but I'll tell you, I'd love it if my husband were going through my morning sickness right now. :-)

So, with the advances in science, do you think that birth should only be limited to women?

[Marta Jespersen]

Giving birth is the one thing--other than menstruation--that is unique to women and as much of a pain as it can be somedays it's something that I would never ask my hubby to go through. I don't think I'd be able to look at him and see a man in the traditional sense of the word. On the other hand, for couples who can't have children traditionally maybe it would be a good alternative. They wouldn't have to go through that extremely emotional conversation with a good friend about surrogacy or pay someone to do it. I suppose if the risks are minimal to both dad and baby then yes, it's a phenomenal idea. But, then you blur the lines on defining mother and father...since mother is usually (except in instances of surrogacy) the one who bears the child and the father is the one who insemminates the mother. There are definately a lot of moral, psychological and convention breaking issues that would need to be dealt with before this were to become commonplace.

One would have to ask themselves how is our child going to be affected by this growing up? How are their peers going to take this and treat them because of it? Will there be any deep psychological issues sprung due to this? How do we make our child feel normal after having been borne in such an abnormal way? What are our religious/moral convictions and beliefs? What does society expect from us? How does our family (grandma/grandpa etc) feel about our decision? The list of questions goes on and on and unless there's a positive answer to most of these questions then it definately would be worthwhile considering the alternatives.

Besides a womans body was meant for child bearing and birth. We create the hormones naturally and we have a higher internal pain/stress tolerance; according to studies. Furthermore, the male body was not designed to take that kind of punishment. This transgendered man, who was born this way with a few modifications i believe, has a natural ability to do this while most men don't. There would be an innumerable amount of complications and hormone supplements etc. It's definately not a decision to make lightly!

[Heidi]

I'm all in favor of anything that expands reproductive options to everyone, and I'm also in favor of anything that makes societally-dictated gender roles less narrow. I think it's awesome that Thomas Beatie is carrying his child, and I applaud his courage in doing so.

But a transgendered man is a bit of a different story from a person who is born a man. Beatie's situation works for him and his wife because she can't have children and he still has his female reproductive parts. Obviously it would take a lot more to impregnate someone born without the right biological equipment. I think it would be really cool if scientists could figure out a way to make it happen, but part of me thinks that all the resources that would be needed to develop technology to make men pregnant would be better spent to provide care for the millions of children in foster care and awaiting adoption. Something like this seems like it might be more technology for technology's sake than for any kind of societal good.

But theoretically, if it could happen, I do think it would give women greater freedom if men could be pregnant too. Maybe men would be more invested in child-rearing and the domestic sphere in general if could have babies too. And men are capable of breastfeeding too, so that would further lessen the load on mothers. And personally, despite its rough moments, I loved pregnancy, and I feel sad for anyone, female or male, who is unable to experience it (should they want to, of course).

So I guess my position is: I don't think birth should be limited only to women, and I think there could be a lot of positive results from men being pregnant. But at the same time I'd hate to see resources spent to develop such a thing (for people born as men) when there's no real need for it, and when there are so many other valuable things we could spend those resources on. Still, good for the Beaties for dong what's right for them, despite the criticisms being made.

[linda hatfield-southern]

she is not a man. i believe that biology as in chromosomes determine whether you are male of female. i am so po'd at the media for heralding a man is giving birth. but is you look at the equipment he has the same pussy i do.

[Heidi]

Not exactly, though. The hormone treatments caused him to grow a small penis (he talked about it on Oprah). So he has a uterus and vagina, but also a penis, no breasts, facial hair... not strictly man or woman if we're talking biology. It's still biological even if it's artificially created. Sure he's not truly a pregnant man but he has gone to a lot of time and effort to be recognized as a man, legally and socially -- legally he is a man, so they're not incorrect in calling him one.

[linda hatfield-southern]

its the chromosomes that determine male or female. she has xx, she is female.

[Heidi]

Okay, you're right if we're referring to sex only, but gender is much more fluid than that and it's difficult to discuss a case of transgenderism without taking gender into consideration.