Ethics aside, the author is overstating the science. Yes, brain dead pregnant women have been kept alive long enough to deliver the fetus. Most of the real life examples are third trimester or were women in comas, not brain dead.
That is not the same as doing IVF and completing an entire 40 weeks in a brain dead woman.
Practically, the demand for the organs of the brain dead will always be far greater than the demand for surrogacy.
Ethicists usually lobby for pulling the plug on a “brain-dead” woman carrying her own baby. Husband wants to pull the plug, sure! Husband wants to keep her on life support, save the baby, pray for a miracle, NO! That’s treating her as a vehicle and not respecting her dignity. I remember cases from 30 years ago.
Ethicists think skewed to morality. What is usable (spare parts!) and what is novel are the issues that concern them, academic fun and games and published papers.
Yup. They are already working on synthetic wombs, which once feasible will be less expensive and ‘messy’(ethics et al).
It’s always about profit and organs are profitable.
This BS is taking Biotechnology and creating a scary narrative instead of addressing legitimate concerns surrounding the field.
Artificial wombs: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7216961/
Organ transplants in Biotechnology:
https://www.synthego.com/blog/crispr-pigs-xenotransplantation