Magazines | News | Transgender

BigGayDeal.com

This Man is 22 Weeks Pregnant

Thomasbeatie

Thomas Beatie is transgender, legally male, and has a wife, Nancy. He's also 22 weeks pregnant. The couple's first attempt at pregnancy was fraught with life threatening medical isses. However, their second attempt has resulted in, by all accounts, a healthy pregnancy. Eight years after having his last menstrual cycle he stopped taking bimonthly testosterone injections and his body regulated itself so that he was able to conceive.

Beatie writes, in The Advocate: "Our situation sparks legal, political, and social unknowns. We have only begun experiencing opposition from people who are upset by our situation. Doctors have discriminated against us, turning us away due to their religious beliefs. Health care professionals have refused to call me by a male pronoun or recognize Nancy as my wife. Receptionists have laughed at us. Friends and family have been unsupportive; most of Nancy’s family doesn’t even know I’m transgender."

Beatie is due on July 3.

Labor of Love [the advocate]

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. I saw this story the other day and I couldn't help but just shrug my shoulders at it. Sorry, they made their bed, no lie in it. You wanted to be a man, men don't get preggers. Attention seekers.

    Posted by: Mike | Mar 26, 2008 8:43:22 AM


  2. ignorant comment. if you had bothered to read the article you'd see that the "wife" of the marriage was unable to conceive due to a hysterectomy. While odd, I don't see why they should be discriminated against and wish them the best.

    Posted by: jjd | Mar 26, 2008 8:47:12 AM


  3. Trippy. I wish them luck. They'll need it.

    Posted by: YankinTex | Mar 26, 2008 8:52:03 AM


  4. I swear, I looked at my calendar to make sure it wasn't April 1st.

    Posted by: Michael W. | Mar 26, 2008 8:55:24 AM


  5. I read the article. I am for his right to be male. I don't think that Mr. Beatie should carry the child for several reasons. The first reason is taking all that testosterone all these years may have had adverse effects on his ability to carry this child to term. The second reason is that they are getting poor medical treatment from professionals. I know they shouldn't but this might endanger both the health of the child and the parent. A final reason why I disagree is that the child might develop some kind of mental issue as he/she grows up. I know from growing up gay that kids can be hard on us. I can't imagine what this child will have to deal with. I think a surrogate mother would have been the better choice in this situation.

    Posted by: Matt | Mar 26, 2008 8:58:47 AM


  6. I'm all for "live and let live" but I can't help but think that, despite the cessation of the testosterone shots, the baby's health may still be affected by the years of male hormones the mother/father took. God Bless them all.

    Posted by: dh | Mar 26, 2008 9:00:42 AM


  7. I believe people with wombs are still considered to be women.

    Posted by: nie | Mar 26, 2008 9:01:10 AM


  8. JJD, I did read it. What would a typical male/female couple do in this situation? This guy wants to be seen as male and men don't get pregnant.

    Posted by: Mike | Mar 26, 2008 9:01:34 AM


  9. I'm all for "live and let live" but I can't help but think that, despite the cessation of the testosterone shots, the baby's health may still be affected by the years of male hormones the mother/father took. God Bless them all.

    Posted by: dh | Mar 26, 2008 9:02:19 AM


  10. Well, they shouldn't be discriminated against, but come on. What do they expect? A guy is pregnant!

    Good luck to them. I'm sure they'll find a nice doctor who will take care of them.

    Posted by: David | Mar 26, 2008 9:04:33 AM


  11. I have seen a few situations where the female in the partnership couldn't get pregnant... and heard comments from the male that "if he could carry the baby, he would".

    It doesn't seem that outlandish to me.

    It does seem really surprising to me that he still has all the proper parts required to make a baby, though. I would have guessed he would have also had a hysterectomy, in the process of changing.

    Posted by: lis | Mar 26, 2008 9:26:23 AM


  12. To each their own.

    I gotta admit, I am a bit envious at first. I recall some medical study a decade or so ago where they discovered males CAN carry a fertilized embryo (for a few weeks). The peritoneal tissue of the male is identical to the female in and around the abdominal cavity. When I had first read this article, I had thought they had advanced the science.

    But a uterus is a uterus is a uterus. You can opt to change your sex, but unless there is a complete removal and sex reassignment, under the covers, a woman is still a woman.

    I wish them well.

    Posted by: Rad | Mar 26, 2008 9:27:57 AM


  13. These people are exploiting their situation for the money (I know this first hand), They have made the decision to fan their story out there (they will be on Oprah, Timothy is writing a book) to make cold hard cash. Medically, humanely and morally they are not being responsible. The child's health is at risk. They are not receiving proper health care. It's interesting from a gender standpoint (it will certainly raise some great discussion) and everyone has a right to live the way they want to but only without incurring physical or mental harm to others -- and why exploit it? For the betterment of (wo)man, or for personal $$$ gain?

    Posted by: chims | Mar 26, 2008 9:36:32 AM


  14. These people are exploiting their situation for the money (I know this first hand), They have made the decision to fan their story out there (they will be on Oprah, Timothy is writing a book) to make cold hard cash. Medically, humanely and morally they are not being responsible. The child's health is at risk. They are not receiving proper health care. It's interesting from a gender standpoint (it will certainly raise some great discussion) and everyone has a right to live the way they want to but only without incurring physical or mental harm to others -- and why exploit it? For the betterment of (wo)man, or for personal $$$ gain?

    Posted by: chims | Mar 26, 2008 9:37:57 AM


  15. "men don't get pregnant..."

    I read (a while ago) that some British scientist were saying it was quite possible for men (biological men)to carry a pregnancy to term by attaching a fertilized egg to the small intestine. Then, of course, the baby would be delivered by a caesarean. How many "normal" folks who've had babies the normal way have been f---ked up parents? Give these "unusual" parents a chance. As far as the physical health of the baby: don't some biological males & females have different levels of male/female hormones naturally--in both male & female bodies? Y'all sound like straight people.

    This blog and others have taught me that there are many types of gay people with many different beliefs, standards of behavior, social prejudices, etc. DUH? Yeah, I was naive. I was naive enough to believe that being "gay" necessitated a certain type of liberalism--live and let live, and let humans express themselves as they want to as long as they don't hurt others. I've come to realize over the last decade that homosexuals who call themselves "gay" often share nothing in common except our sexual attraction. I guess that's one of the reasons why these Gay Pride Parades and festivities seem to get smaller and smaller in attendance every year.

    The conformist homosexuals now dominate the "gay world" (atleast the American Gay world). I kinda' wish they'd stayed in the closet-- which is where they were 30 years ago. For these homosexuals, acceptance by the socially conservative straight world is progress. For a defiant minority of us it means the death of "gay".

    Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Mar 26, 2008 9:46:56 AM


  16. It's amazing how discriminative, narrow-minded and bigoted could be people, who complain of discrimination, narrow-mindness and bigotry on daily basis. You give the same shit worth comments that the straight bigots have been giving to the LGBTQ community for years now, and still manage to be at piece with yourself.

    Well, next time when you want to be recognized as what you are, don't wonder why someone thinks less of you just because you don't fill THEIR stupid frames. And yes, that goes to "well, to each their own, live and let live, but if you're gay you're still not a REAL man". Well, DUH.

    Remember "quote one, quote them all"? Well, if you're to use this argument, freaking observe it yourself too!

    Posted by: Alex | Mar 26, 2008 9:52:51 AM


  17. More power to them. As long as the father-mother receive good medical care that ensures the health of the baby, what's the problem? This is an act of love. Think about all of the heterosexual couples where the woman can't carry a child. I'm sure there would be a lot husbands who carry a child. Infertility issues devastate marriages. The cost of a surrogacy are also large--there's trend to outsource surrogacy to India because fees are less.

    I imagine that a lot of gay men in committed relationships would like to have a child that shares genetic material of both parents. If science allowed and helped a man to carry a child, wouldn't some gay men do so?

    Does anyone remember the Arnold Schwarzenegger movie where he played a scientist who carries a child to term?

    Posted by: noah | Mar 26, 2008 9:53:25 AM


  18. eh

    inherintly female anyway

    Before reading the article I thought "WOW, they did it. They replicated the baboon experiments."

    Scientists were succesful in implanting a fertilized embryo onto the wall of the large intestines of a male baboon. It attached and grew. It didn't ultimately survive but its growth was impressive.

    Anyway; good for them, but nothing ground breaking scientificly

    Posted by: Jimmyboyo | Mar 26, 2008 9:58:07 AM


  19. PS

    I just did a quick search. Turns out the baboon experiment might not be as authentic as I thought. The scientist that suppsoedly did it never showed the pregnant baboon to other scientists and ended up later being very shady on other issues.

    Posted by: Jimmyboyo | Mar 26, 2008 10:03:24 AM


  20. Derrick, while we usually do not agree, I am proud that you have learned that all gays are not the same. It is certainly different but it is their reality. If they cannot get support from the LGBT community who will support them? Come on everyone, open you minds! We all know many of us here are far more closed minded than we want to admit.

    Posted by: RB | Mar 26, 2008 10:05:58 AM


  21. Derrick, while we usually do not agree, I am proud that you have learned that all gays are not the same. It is certainly different but it is their reality. If they cannot get support from the LGBT community who will support them? Come on everyone, open you minds! We all know many of us here are far more closed minded than we want to admit.

    Posted by: RB | Mar 26, 2008 10:06:15 AM


  22. Thomas Beatie was born female. It says Thomas was female to male transgender, however, Thomas hedged bets and is now pregnant.

    The Advocate link says the fertilization was done at home but it also says sex reassignment had taken place.

    Thomas may be male on paper but doesn't appear to have fully taken on that gender identity. I'm quite shocked a hysterectomy was not performed or required for the change in legal status. Thomas seems to be a selfish mockery of the transgender community.

    I fully support those in the medical community who see this as needing ethics review or who feel uncomfortable with their ability to provide proper care for such a patient.

    Posted by: queendru | Mar 26, 2008 10:08:53 AM


  23. This happened years ago here in S.F. when transman Matt Rice got pregnant due to a similar situation. He has a beautiful healthy son.

    Posted by: Keith | Mar 26, 2008 10:15:25 AM


  24. I think the problem here is how the law legally defines a person's gender. There has to be consistency from state to state as to what is required for one gender to change to another legally. A person who feels they were born into the wrong body identifies and feels they are the opposite gender, and they probably are in their brain, but the body tells another story. But that doesn't and probably shouldn't legally make that person the gender they believe they are without a complete physical sexual reassignment. If this person was still left with the female organs that allows them to conceive a child, then they should never have been legally classified as a male. I'm presuming this "man" still has a vagina if he was able to be fertilized and will have a vaginal birth.

    Regardless of all that, he (and I still use the word "he" because that's how he wants to be addressed) should not be denied medical care based on the circumstances. Though I do think they (the couple) are probably exploiting all of this for personal gain.

    Posted by: Patrick | Mar 26, 2008 10:45:56 AM


  25. I don't understand the trans mentality. I enjoy a silky slip as much as the next guy, but we part ways there. My support for people going to any lengths to be themselves though is unconditional. We may all reserve the right to shrug and say weird. We can just say "you go girl, er dude" and leave it at that. I don't understand the upset families either. In my family any baby is cause for celebration and the total focus of our affection.
    A toast, TO LIFE!

    Posted by: Rikard | Mar 26, 2008 10:52:17 AM


  26. 1 2 3 4 »

Post a comment







Trending


« «On the Stage: Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, Adding Machine, Parlour Song« «