Posted in Undogegorized by chamblee54 on October 14, 2021

@jimgoad “I had an aneurysm before finishing the headline.” The headline in question is Doctors seek approval to transplant dead man’s sex organs onto trans-identified woman, appearing in The Christian Post. The story is tacky yellow journalism. A major source appears to be Jennifer Bilek, who has created a cottage industry out of badmouthing trans people. A comment typifies the approach here: “Frankenstein. And not much different than attaching the dead religion of the Torah/Talmud onto the living word of the New Testament.” This is a repost.

“Penis transplant performed on soldier at Johns Hopkins in Baltimore considered a success” The procedure has been performed, although not on ftm trans. “… a complex genital transplant on a soldier who also lost his legs in a bomb blast in Afghanistan, the man says he has normal functions and is “feeling whole.” The man … received a donated penis, scrotum and part of an abdominal wall during a 14-hour surgery in April 2018. … the man has “near-normal erections and the ability to achieve orgasm,” and can urinate “while standing, without straining, frequency, or urgency, with the urine discharged in a strong stream.” … Hopkins covered the $300,000 to $400,000 cost of the procedure and doctors donated their time. The hospital approved up to 60 more such procedures for service members, though not for transgender individuals or those born with defects.”

The CP article linked to a more serious medical magazine, Hospital Debates Penis Transplant in Transgender Patient. This article had some solid information, and will be quoted in the next few paragraphs. This article got a comment: “This is such a long article, that I feel comments probably are needed to be made, but I can think of nothing to say.”

“The main objectives of penis transplants are to provide an aesthetic phallus, urinary function, and sexual function (including erections and “erogenous sensitivity”) … While outcomes remain unknown, the prospect of penis transplants in transgender men is “huge” … phalloplasties – in which phalluses are constructed from flaps of skin – have complication rates of 80% to 90%, and that’s not the only limitation. … phalloplasties “don’t have the same aesthetic appeal [as natural penises] and they don’t enlarge and get hard on their own. They’re always the same size.”

“Metoidioplasties (met-oh-id-ee-oh-plas-tees) are another option for transgender men, but they also have limitations. In these procedures, surgeons form neophalluses out of clitoral tissue. The phalluses are disappointingly small … “You do have an erection and it can stay hard. Some people are capable of penetrating a partner, and some are not.”

“Compared to these existing options, a penis transplant ideally will offer “fewer urethral complications, better cosmetic outcome, and better physiological sexual capacity.” Still, limitations include the fact that transgender men who receive penis transplants will not be able to ejaculate since they lack a male reproductive system. It’s also not known if they’ll be able to have erections. For now, … the plan is to see if physical stimulation of the transplanted penis will engorge the clitoris enough to trigger blood flow to the corpus cavernosa in the penis – an erection.”

“Not surprisingly, penis transplants in transgender men will be more challenging than in cisgender men. In addition to connecting nerves and blood vessels, … patients will need urethra lengthening, as in phalloplasties, so the transplanted penis can urinate. However, … “the beauty of taking transplanted tissue is you can take as much tissue as you want. You can take the extra length of the donor’s urethra so you wouldn’t have to do the lengthening procedure.”

“Penis transplants in transgender individuals raise many other questions. Will scrotums also be transplanted, as was done in the Johns Hopkins transplant? What about testicles, which could produce sperm and – conceivably – offspring of the original donor? Testicles were not transplanted in the soldier … at Johns Hopkins for this reason … “Then the offspring is technically whose child?”

“VCA transplants (vascularized composite allotransplantation) in general are a controversial topic among bioethicists, especially in light of their high cost, high risk, and need for lifetime immunosuppression. “Unlike most solid organ transplants which are typically lifesaving, the goal of VCA is to improve quality of life. One of the challenges in VCA is that the [bioethics] field is still determining how to define and evaluate quality of life.”

“One critic questions whether penis transplants should be performed at all. They raise “ethical questions concerning aesthetics, morbidity, function, and cost-burden given the more readily available and less morbid alternative of phalloplasty” … The cost of a penis transplant in a transgender patient would likely be covered by research grant funds. … The transplant at Johns Hopkins cost a reported $300,000-$400,000, all covered by the institution.”

Pictures are from The Library of Congress. Here is another look at ethical issues.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: