Sixteen-year-old Jamie Cooper would make medical history by becoming both the father and mother of his child by freezing his sperm before undergoing the sex change operation he hopes to have in two to five years.

The teenager from Birmingham, England told the The Scotsman newspaper, "I'd like to have children one day, so I am having my sperm frozen before the operation. That way it can be used to fertilise the egg of a surrogate mum. So I could be a mum one day, even though, biologically, I will be the baby's father as well."

Cooper who had to wait until he turned 16 before becoming eligible for a sex change under the NHS, has already had anti-testosterone injections, the first stage of the procedure. He has been dressing like a woman, with hair extensions and nail polish, since he turned 16 on August 25. The former performing arts student is one of the youngest people in the UK to undergo such treatment.

He has to wait a further two years before he can consider surgery, which will be paid for by Britain's National Health Service (NHS). The current waiting time for such an operation under the NHS is five years.

A spokeswoman from Mermaids, a support group for teenagers with gender identity issues, said that under-18-year-olds would not be given any irreversible treatment.

She said that the treatment, which is only given once the subject reaches the age of 18, becomes permanent after a few years of taking oestrogen tablets which will shrink the penis, start the growth of breasts in biological males and influence fertility.

The youth's plan has expectedly drawn criticism from the church leaders.

A spokesman for the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland, condemned the planned sex change and the freezing of sperm.

"It is wrong and unethical," he said. "It is an extremely unusual use of resources by a very stretched NHS, especially when there are thousands of people waiting many months for basic operations like hip replacements."

"This boy's plan to freeze his sperm so that he can father a baby and later look after it as its mother is very wrong.

A spokesman for the Church of Scotland said: "Such a plan would set a dangerous medical precedent and could cause great confusion and emotional instability for any child that is created in this way."