[PM_me_your_math]

Well, that's not terrifying in the least bit. Imagine knowing that you were born to a machine and not to a woman who you can call mother. On second thought, its not just terrifying, it is immeasurable sadness for most, and probably psychosis for some.

[Supermancho]

> Imagine knowing that you were born to a machine and not to a woman who you can call mother.

I'm really not sure what's so outrageous about the situation. Most adopted (or fostered) people manage without psychosis.

[tialaramex]

The biggest downside which appears to be cited by people who discover later that their birth parents weren't the people who brought them up is an uncertainty about why they exist - but for a person who can be told (once they're old enough to understand) the exact circumstances which brought them about that is resolved.

We already have surrogacy, which is when one human volunteers use of their womb to carry somebody else's child (that is, egg comes from person A, sperm from person B, A+B = new human life => fertilised egg is implanted in person C, the surrogate). I know two kids who were born this way, they have loving parents, the eldest will be aware that something is a bit unusual - any other mummies she knows who had a second kid the baby was obviously inside them, whereas her baby sister was inside this other nice lady who just showed up for a few weeks and she's been told that's how it worked for her too - but obviously the tricky details aren't going to be worth explaining to a pre-schooler once they're satisfied with any immediate questions (e.g. is this new baby my sister? Yes. Does the nice lady mean I get extra birthday presents? No)

An artificial womb potentially makes surrogacy an option for larger numbers of people. Some people find pregnancy pretty good really, and their main reason to stop after one or two is economics or practicalities, so this innovation changes nothing for them - but others don't want to risk a second pregnancy after discovering how badly their body reacted the first time, so such technology (if cheap enough) would mean they could have a second or third child.

This also changes the calculus for government intervention. Hiring women to be impregnated is a much more difficult proposition than hiring nursery or orphanage staff. An artificial womb would mean only the second is needed.

[tsol]

I mean orphans are well known to have a rough time in life. They're not exactly the stereotype of happiness

[themihai]

Perhaps b/c they are usually neglected just like kids from broken families not b/c they are born from an artificial woomb.

[staticman2]

If a child is told they were delivered by a stork do you think they have immeasurable sadness?

If we invent artificial womb's the egg is still coming out of the mother's body.

The egg still get inseminated by a father.

Why should anyone care whether the mother painfully forced the baby out of the vagina after 9 months?

[mym1990]

It would certainly be a shock to some but most kids have no idea where they came from until they learn about the reproductive system. Their first instinct is that a bird dropped them out of the sky. So closing the gap between X and Y wouldnt be too crazy.

Now the social pressures of being a “machine baby” vs “natural womb baby” would be a different thing.

[lostlogin]

> its not just terrifying, it is immeasurable sadness for most, and probably psychosis for some.

Much like now.

[themihai]

I'm pretty sure people will do just fine and tbh I don't really see what's so terrifying. It's just biology.

[pojzon]

Not even talking about lack of hormones during natural pregnacy we have zero idea about because this was not researched in humqns and how it would impact a human child post mortem.