Vallium Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 (edited) I've thought of this for awhile now...scientists already know the process of how life is created, a sperm and an egg, so they can duplicate the insemination process artificially in a petri dish. Even being able to see cell growth within the dish before implanting it into the womb. But can we go father? Can medical science replicate the function of a uterus? Giving a fetus an environment to grow and gain nutrient as would one in a human body? This sounds...very strange, admittedly. But imagining all the pros that could come from an advancing modern day society. Working females would no longer have to take leave from their working lives, being able to support their new family alongside their partners. The process would be cleaner, healthier (the developing child would be in a hospital environment and constantly on a watch for issues, and the mother does not risk pregnancy complications), and painless. It would be like adopting a child from an orphanage, except from a hospital, newborn, and genetically yours. Coupled with sterilization (with sex cells stored safely) it would greatly reduce parents procreating unwanted human lives that are more likely to be neglected or abandoned. The drawbacks? Naturally anything of eugenically sounding base sounds like a dystopic society, prone to being taken advantage of by harsh goverment rule and regulation. Naturally, I feel sterilization and insemination should be a choice, a more commonly by culture nature one that overrides others typically. Such as the choice to use condoms, birth control, vasectomies, hospitals for birthing etc. (some of which are rejected due to those who believe in intervening natural processes as wrong, strange, or immoral). Because of course having everyone be coerced into sterilization (or by a dystopian government standard, a certain few who are deemed lowly) is prone to error, and regulating who can artificially inseminate (it should be everyone interested and no one should be barred) would be what makes it dystopic, imo. Overall though, I find the idea fascinating, and very plausible... Edited March 13, 2016 by WolfNightV4X1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#00Buck Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 Straight people will still alway want it put it in the va jay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vallium Posted March 13, 2016 Author Share Posted March 13, 2016 12 minutes ago, #00Buck said: Straight people will still alway want it put it in the va jay. And they can always do that without "Oops I accidently made a human" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 I don't want a future where babies come out of things that might look like the human battery pods in The Matrix. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Endless/Nameless Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 On one hand, I really wouldn't want to see creepy shit like this; but on the other hand, I'm a little surprised we haven't already developed something like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xaende Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 I think it has the potential to save women from the pains of childbirth, but how might it impact the kid's development? There would have to be more research conducted on this before I'd feel comfortable with it. Like, if scientists were to create identical twins, one to grow in its mother's womb and the other to grow in an artificial environment, would one end up being noticeably healthier than the other? Unfortunately, such research would likely be considered unethical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misomie Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 I am so for this. Not only will it be great for the fertile women but also the disabled, infertile, so on and so forth. Heck, it will make it easier for males as well. If it becomes mainstream, the cost of having your own genetic child can be much more affordable to the single father or gay couple. I would gladly have my uterus ripped out if this was possible. No need to ruin my body, no need to waste my time resting, no need for expensive dr visits, no need for all the vitamins a pregnant body craves, and not to mention that it ensures the baby is protected from substances like alcohol and cigarette smoke. Of course it's a new concept that people will fear and call "playing god" but I have always liked the idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nova Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 You should really go to sleep and drink LSD :v Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spot Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 I would rather not a future that resembles a dystopian life like that of Krypton. No sir, I don't like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snagged Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 In the western countries, if the practice of having to reproduce by only using external womb becomes mandatory, then I could see a lot of problems coming out of it. The birthrate would plummet, the amount of "unregistered" citizens would also skyrocket since poor people can't afford the constant hospital treatment of the fetus(es) and it would be hell of an expensive. And even in the western countries, there are poor people, especially USA. And who would pay for the growth of the fetuses? Government? If government controlled birth too then having babies born in external wombs is dystopian because I agree that cherry picking the "donors" to fertilize the life is not good. Like I said earlier, it would mean birthrate would plummet, way too big percentage of population will become elderly and having a right to give birth (man or woman) would further widen the gap of social equality. And I could also imagine that once knowledge of genetics will improve, the qualities of a baby could be altered before they're even born. Having "high quality" babies could become the only standard or that those who have not been altered for optimization will become distinguishly low class citizens. I much rather would like to see artifical birth process controlled privately. No or very little restrictions who can give birth. Having a price barrier is better than never being able to give birth due to regulations. I just don't trust government enough not to put regulations on something they should not meddle with. All in all, I think artificial wombs could give us a lot of security in regards to birth control but I could see it taking a lot of freedoms regarding birth control, which I don't like As for the idea of the external womb itself, I like it. It could be developed to be a much safer and convenient option than natural birth and you don't need a woman in order to give a birth. It is very possible to create a working artificial womb. I believe in it. Even gay pairs could have their own genetic child(ren) without having to rent a woman's womb who is somewhere in India. It is the application of this technology that concerns me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clove Darkwave Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 With more research I think it could be a reasonable option for people to pursue. Obviously there's a lot of dangers in childbirth both to the parent and to the child. Being able to take away factors such as mothers that partake in smoking/drinking/drugs while pregnant may have an eventual benefit to mental health in general so long as this option was reasonably available. It'd be really difficult to determine the psychological impact of hospital grown methods I imagine but nonetheless I'm willing to agree that it has a lot of potential for being the next step towards the future of humanity and could maybe be a viable option in some nightmare scenario where overpopulation was an actual risk. But if it resulted in the overall betterment of lives and harm reduction of mental illnesses would it not be in the right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#00Buck Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 9 hours ago, WolfNightV4X1 said: And they can always do that without "Oops I accidently made a human" That is how most humans are made. That is why there is overpopulation. If you offered this stage technology only a fraction of people would use it. Everyone else would just continue to bang like they always have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hikaru Okami Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 Easier on the women. No risk of death from child birth. No need to take time off of work. Children wouldn't have to worry about malnutrition or birth defects. Sterile folks can have babies. All of that seems well and good for personal reasons, but that's just it. Personal. The cons come from mostly politics and government. Who's going to fund this? Will taxes increase to help keep these external hospitals running? These kinds of advance science is going to be expensive so it's more likely that lower class folk won't have access to it. If they did would some expenses be covered by the gov? If it was I'm sure some ethics will be involved with restrictions. How many kids are one person or family allowed to have? Will income influence how much nutrition, care, regulation the fetus will receive? Speaking of income if this becomes mainstream will people have to work longer hours? What about after the baby is born? Still need to work or will there be some time off? Let's not forget about religious radicals. Oh the ethics that will turn heads and provoke protests just like the protests of planned parenthood. I could go on and on but this is only one of those 2am thoughts that prevent sleep. TLDR: Pros: good for parents. Cons: governmental ethics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derin Darkpaw Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 While a fascinating idea there are a large list of logistical problems that would need to be solved before something like this would be possible so I don't think it is something that will happen any time soon. If such a thing were possible I would be all for the development and use of it as an optional form of childbirth, but unless we are under some fairly extreme circumstances I do not believe that we should take away an individual's right to decide to have a child and carry it to term within their own body. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kinare Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 Aside from the fear of "dystopian future", this just seems like another way to bring even more kids into the world when there's many already needing love. I get why people would want something like this, but I could never be convinced that the benefits outweigh the negatives. I'd rather see the effort put into making adoption more accessible to couples that want but can't have kids (mostly just making it cheaper would help it seems). Seems like the only people that might be able to afford this sort of technology though would probably be people who can already afford to adopt, but would rather bring their own spawn into the world. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LazerMaster5 Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 Why make more children when the world is headed to overpopulation already? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.