Artificial Wombs, self-contained synthetic structures that replicate the best of a real woman's uterus, will surely soon be available in the mass market, as technology progresses in its relentlessly life-improving way.
The demand for such a thing is clearly, tentatively, huge. Offering a safer, healthier, more affordable and liberating way of having a child, only those most conservative, traditional, or desperately poor will choose the conventional organic method.
Scientists are already working on artificial womb projects and finding some niggling difficulties in doing so.
As for clarifying my listed benefits of such a technology, an artificial womb would present a safer option, as it would be of a mechanical design in common with life-support systems that are most probably less susceptible to failure than human bodies, including healthy mothers. Further more, these devices would be static, as opposed to climbing stairs, walking streets and driving cars.
An artificial womb would be a healthier womb. This holds for the same reasons technology is employed in the production of the vegetables and fruits we eat. Hydroponics set-ups administer carefully, optimally controlled doses of nutrient to plants roots, while allowing for maximum air flow, and minimal disturbance from soil-based pests. I do not mean to suggest an infant child and a tomato plant are one and the same, but there are in fact parallels to be drawn.
As for more affordable, please do the following maths; Pregnant women experience a significantly reduced capacity to work. Women expecting children the artificial way will have the flexibility to work for longer, if they wish. And so they will be more liberated, able to walk, fly and live more comfortably, also free of any possible concern that they might not recognise their own bodies, during and after pregnancy.