Growing Fetuses Outside the Human Body
I am fully aware that this idea is some combination of 1) emotionally inflammatory, 2) politically controversial, 3) technologically still out of reach in fully viable form. In fact, if I ever receive a death threat because of my public-facing contributions, I would expect it to be in response to this post (To my future death threat author, rest assured that I will treasure and even frame your gift.). These are also three of the reasons why I believe the idea is worth considering very seriously.
I am not going to present an exhaustive history of this idea or plumb the state of the art in this area of biotechnology, termed ectogenesis or exogenesis. What I am going to argue in this post is that this idea is worth serious and long-term attention and discourse among the public, policy makers, doctors, and politicians, and not only among the relatively few research scientists who work in this area.
I will also merely speculate as to why this idea has not caught on like wildfire among biotech topics.
I open by saying to all the potentially childbearing folks in the world: If you want to exercise your right to choose to grow a fetus endogenously (i.e. by good ol’ pregnancy), then I am not arguing against that right or desire in the slightest; I discuss ectogenesis from a motivation to expand human liberty, not reduce it. By that same token, endogenous reproduction has effectively been forced on 50% of humans for the entire existence of our species because we haven’t had a viable alternative.
What would it mean for human life if traditional pregnancy weren’t the only option? It’s an overwhelming question. There are so many details I can point to in my own life that would be completely invisible and non-deducible to someone else, mostly at the psychological level. Multiply roughly that by 4 billion and the consequences are inconceivable at full granularity; however, there are some true statements we can make about potential impact (with the qualification that there would be remnants of the status quo among those who wish to proceed with endogenous reproduction).
- We can imagine a world in which miscarriages are pretty much a thing of the past. Miscarriage is wasteful, often devastating, and can be a partially hidden source of suffering in societies because the occurrence of a miscarriage is often kept very private (which I am not arguing against).
- We can imagine a world in which the negative health repercussions of pregnancy and childbirth are a thing of the past for both childbearers and children.
- We can imagine a world in which ectogenesis technology is good enough that infant mortality and difficulty conceiving are things of the past. In particular, I claim that decreasing infant mortality is one of the few outcomes for humanity that are desirable no matter which point in human geography or history we’re talking about.
- We can imagine a world in which the morality of abortion becomes a moot point; if a childbearing person has an unwanted endogenous pregnancy, then once we have a viable ectogenesis technology, I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch to imagine that we could transplant fetuses from the womb to growth by ectogenesis.
- Gendering forces on individuals presumed capable or one-day-capable of childbearing would hopefully lessen over time, because there would be a greatly decreased social expectation that those people would become vulnerable or burdened due to pregnancy. There would hopefully also be less gendering pressure on those presumed incapable of childbearing now or in the future to be the sole protector/provider figure for a family unit, which might not be the ideal role for a given such person.
I contend that these statements are sufficient for justifying the idea becoming a part of mainstream public discourse—even before the science and technology to instantiate it have been actualized. I don’t know why it hasn’t been part of the zeitgeist. I merely speculate that endogenous reproduction has been obviously so necessary and foundational to human existence for so long that societies with advanced medical technology have had a blind spot about mechanisms of reproduction. There could be the additional blind spot that the costs of endogenous reproduction aren’t necessarily known or motivating to men, who have arguably been better positioned to actually do something about those costs in the scientific and political domains. Even assuming that the blind spots are penetrated, there would tremendous social fear on religious or ethical or safety grounds to overcome to make this technology function effectively in society, and the anticipation of that fear might be enough to deter researchers and government or private funding agencies.
A couple of closing questions:
- What would it take for you to want you and your children to live in a world where ectogenesis is a viable and accessible option for reproduction?
- What do you think the rough priority of this topic ought to be among humanity’s long list of concerns?