The Artificial Womb: A Very Real Controversy

During the 1600’s and 1700’s, around 1200 women died per 100,000 in childbirth.

Around 1900, the number shrunk to only 600. Today, the number of women dying in childbirth

is around 15 per 100,000. Advances in pregnancy and neonatal care, increased understanding of

reproductive science, and the general uptick in healthcare around the world has helped decrease

maternal mortality rates, miscarriages, stillbirths, and other tragedies related to pregnancy.

Today, with the growing interest in the artificial womb (AW), society seems to be headed

towards a future where no child or mother ever dies in a pregnancy related event.

An artificial womb acts just like a real womb but are shaped like a bag. They are sealed-

tight to ensure that no germs enter the bag and potentially harm the fetus inside. Then the AW

would be connected to machines that would help pump fluid and maternal blood into the fetus’s

environment while also providing necessary oxygen and nutrients; all the things a fetus would

need to survive. However, the AW relies off of the fetus’s heart to assist in pumping the

materials and an artificial placenta to regulate the exchange between waste products of the AW

and outside fluids (Bulletti et al., 2011). However, there is no question as to whether they work;

scientists already have proven that it can work reliably. In April of 2017, researchers at the

Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia did an AW experiment on a lamb fetus using a bio-bag. It

worked and the lamb gestated in the AW. However, no such experiment has been run on

humans, but that isn’t necessarily something to be fearful of. As Frida Somestein noted in an

article from 2006 “The history of science tells us that impenetrable barriers are only temporary.

It is only a matter of time and research until someone, intentionally or by chance, finds a way to

overcome these obstacles” (Simonstein, 2006). Therefore, the question is not “will it?” but “will

we?” and that is the topic of discussion in today’s article.

 Obviously there are huge benefits to an AW. It’s primary benefactor would be women

with health complications. Currently, the earliest a child can be delivered is 22 weeks, however

80% do not survive and 95% of premature babies have major defects, like blindness, deafness,

neurological issues, and problems with organs (Prasad, 2017). However, artificial wombs could

help solve these issues. Artificial wombs could serve as more realistic incubators for premature

babies so they could gestate until they reach full maturity (Bulletti et al., 2011). The health

benefits also extend to women who may have issues with pregnancy. A fair size of the female

population, around 15% use drugs or alcohol during pregnancy. Other women have no wombs,

either from birth defects or disease. And for many women, the burden of in-vitro-fertilization is

too much for them. Yet, AWs could solve these problems. Women who cannot carry or fail at

IVF could have their child gestate in artificial womb, and women who are at high-risk for drug

use or alcohol use during pregnancy could opt to have their child put in the AW. Moreover,

commentators have suggested that AWs could have other benefits outside the realm of neonatal

and female health. Some have suggested it could decrease commercial surrogacy by offering a

safer alternative for all parties with the AW. Others have suggested it could help equalize

parenthood, destroy gender hierarchies, and radically change how we view of private lives. Some

have even argued that when parental roles are equalized, male will no longer be an excuse for

“male dominated boardrooms or political parties” (Sedgwick, 2017). People that are part of the

LGBT group would finally have a way of having offspring and children without turning towards

surrogates. There are also feminist critiques of the artificial womb. Shulamith Firestone, a

feminist writer, was excited, authoring that with the potential for asexual reproduction cloning

materials and stem cells could finally free men from their dependence of women. Other feminist

critics have argued that it could free women from the tyranny of their reproductive biology.
 There also happens to be ramification of abortion if AWs were to be mass produced. Roe

v. Wade, Planned Parenthood v. Danforth, and Colautti v. Franklin, all cases which deal with

the legal issue of abortion all define viability of a fetus the point at which a fetus can survive

outside of the womb, even by artificial means. If AWs were able to be used extensively, it would

justify more and more legislatures in restricting access to abortion by justifying that a fetus is

viable and should not be terminated.

This leads me into the drawbacks of an AW society. Firstly, it could be used to curtail a

woman’s 14th Amendment right to continue or terminate pregnancy as legislatures could argue

that women should have to transfer fetuses over to AWs before terminating pregnancy. And

while no one will contest the health benefits of an artificial womb, many will rail against it for its

social implications. An area of major concern is that of the parent-child relationship. Research

has shown the importance of maternal care and interaction between babies and parents,

especially mothers, yet, there is a fear that an AW would create feelings of detachment between

parents and children which would hurt the all important relationship (Landau, 2007). That

detachment might only be furthered in the idea that while a woman works at her job, the child

grows in a bag in a hospital which completely annihilated the relationship that mother and child

have, having been inseparable literally for 9 months. Even feminists are concerned with artificial

wombs. Some feminists believe that AWs would only marginalize women more than they

believe they are today by removing the most defining characteristic of a woman. What is most

telling, however, is actual polling. A study in Israel revealed that majority of people did not want

to see an artificial womb developed, in fact, women were less supportive of AWs overall when

compared to male respondents.

 Thus, we are left with the question: Should society use artificial wombs? The answer is

hard and complicated but can best be summarized with “yes, but with limits”. Obviously, saving

a mother’s life with an artificial womb is a must in an egalitarian society such as ours and

making sure that premature infants can survive is necessary. We should have artificial wombs for

their health benefits but only sparingly; we should not have an “artificial womb society”. Women

still are the symbols of fertility and parenthood which disrupt societal norms. Mass usage of

AWs will surely detach parents and children even more than are today, especially with the

advent of technology. The more we move towards a mass production of AWs the farther we

move away from what we as humans need in our lives. I reject both feminist arguments, for and

against the artificial womb, as being too far a stretch from reality. As to the legal ramifications, it

is important that, either through jurisprudence or through statutes, that we make sure that women

still have access to their constitutional right to abortion, as a matter of law even with the medical

use of artificial wombs.