Buckle up, campers, because things are going to get even weirder this evening, courtesy (once again) of the folks at the American Medical Association. According to a recent report published in The Daily Mail, a representative of the AMA has suggested in the June issue of its Journal of Ethics that taxpayers could be put on the hook for a $300,000 surgery to transplant a uterus into a male patient to “subsidize” the cost of the very expensive and totally experimental surgery. And why would anyone need to do this? Two reasons. First, it could alleviate ‘psychological dissonance’ in the trans patient. But even better, they seem to believe that they may be getting closer to allowing a man to actually get pregnant and deliver a baby. Your head-desk response is assumed.

The American Medical Association (AMA) has suggested that taxpayers should subsidize uterus transplants worth up to $300,000 to help transgender women get pregnant.

Arguments were made to reduce the cost of the surgery in its Journal of Ethics issue in June titled Patient-Centered Transgender Surgical Care.

But the AMA has been criticized for floating the idea and has been accused of holding an ‘activist position’.

As usual, I will preface my response with my usual disclosure that I AM NOT A DOCTOR and don’t even play one on television, so do your own research and reach your own conclusions. But I don’t think any reasonably intelligent (and, let’s face it… sane) person needs to be a doctor to see what’s so very wrong about this entire story. And you can also see what is increasingly wrong with the American Medical Association, which has been hijacked by activists from the trans movement and is now simply spouting politically correct and, in this case, potentially lethal nonsense.

You can read the full article in the Journal of Ethics here. The entire June issue is dedicated to nothing but transgender medical issues, but the one about transplanting a uterus into a man is really over the moon. I should also warn you that the linked article at The Daily Mail contains a rather graphic cartoon walking you through the process of performing such a transplant, so be prepared. It’s unsettling, to say the least.

One thing you may notice if you read the Journal article is that they make reference to “Swedish researchers involved in the initial successful uterus transplants resulting in live births.” This might lead the unwary to believe that these trans-plants (sorry… couldn’t resist) and births are already happening. That is not remotely accurate. The transplants in question were done using a donor uterus from either a deceased woman or a patient having hers removed for other reasons, with the organ being transplanted into a living woman. (Not a “woman with a penis.”) She already had all of the required parts and needed a replacement uterus. Still something of a medical miracle, but not related to the topic at hand.

As far as the proposal in question goes, the entire idea of male pregnancy is still entirely theoretical. It’s never happened and it probably can’t. There is a lot more involved in bringing a baby to term than the “simple” act of combining a sperm with an egg and seeing if the resultant zygote attaches to the uterine wall. The woman’s body is doing a lot of work throughout the process, work that a male body is not equipped to perform. And the initial procedure (as described in the illustration I mentioned above) involves incredible medical gymnastics to attempt to wedge a donor organ into a place that it was never intended to be.

This is full-on Doctor Frankenstein territory. If you intentionally create an embryo in a place where it almost certainly will not survive, that’s not just massive medical malpractice. You are tiptoeing up to the territory of murder. The idea that the AMA could endorse such a thing, to say nothing of calling on the taxpayers to subsidize it, is an atrocity. The AMA is completely out of control at this point and ethically undocked. They are an unregulated group that still wields enormous influence and power and they are using that position to promote evil here. Something needs to be done. I just wish I knew what it was.

UPDATE: (Jazz) We were contacted by the AMA who objected to this article claiming that the content in the article in the referenced journal (which they clearly support and endorse as a publication) reflects the opinion of the authors and not the AMA. Here is the pertinent portion of their objection.

“The erroneous attribution of the ethical study to the AMA was done despite a clear disclaimer noting “The viewpoints expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the AMA.”

References in the Hot Air headline and reporting falsely presume the viewpoints expressed by the authors of the ethical study are reflective of AMA policy. Make no mistake, the AMA has no position – existing or anticipated – on the issue of uterus transplantation in transgender individuals. The content of the ethical study must be properly attributed to the work of the actual authors when referenced by reporting published by Hot Air.”