Michel Odent is a big name French obstetrician among natural and homebirth advocates. He's attended more than 15,000 births and written lots of books. He thinks midwives should be present for most births and that homebirth is better than hospital birth in most situations. He's all love, touch, peace, quiet, bond, bond, bond when it comes to women and birth -- a definite shift from the way things were when he started in the biz a half a billion years ago.
However! He has recently come out against one of the hallmarks of modern, evolved, woman-centered birth as we know it today. He thinks men should be nearby -- but not present -- at birth.
Huh.
Here's a bit of what he wrote in the Daily Mail:
... That there is little good to come for either sex from having a man at the birth of a child.
For her, his presence is a hindrance, and a significant factor
in why labours are longer, more painful and more likely to result in
intervention than ever.
As for the effect on a man - well, was I surprised to hear a
friend of mine state that watching his wife giving birth had started a
chain of events that led to the couple's divorce?
Okay, there, Dr. Odent. First, I think you need to settle down -- that divorce has got you totally freaked out. Second, you complain later that there hasn't been any scientific study on the effect of men's presence, so your anecdotes aren't exactly meaningful. Third, a couple of divorces/mother-child abandonments after 15,000 births? That's actually pretty good, non?
He goes on to say that men in the delivery room might be responsible for the increase in interventions and c-sections, because labor is being delayed or prolonged since women aren't relaxed enough to give birth with a man in the room.
Look, I'm not about to argue that watching your partner crap on the bed or push out a placenta is every (any?) person's form of fun. I'd even say that for some it's a real dread. Those people should be allowed to opt out. And knowing their husbands won't be comfortable seeing all that is certain to make some women uncomfortable or hesitant, and all that is just fine. Men who don't want to attend a birth shouldn't be stigmatized (which, my guess is, they are to some degree). And women who don't want their husbands/partners present shouldn't feel bad about making other arrangements.
But I still wouldn't discount every guy's presence as a hindrance to labor.
For me, my husband was a presence I can't imagine having been without. Who else but him knows that a subtle lift of my left eyebrow means shut the fucking midwife up (I was transitioning)? Who else knows to not laugh at my "jokes" during labor and instead give me looks of pity (but not too long or too pitiful).
Odent says the high-adrenalin response of a husband's fear is contagious and affects the moms and the labor. That might be true, but is every man scared of birth? Panicky? Not even.
All that said, I wonder if there aren't some women who think their births would have gone better without their husband/partners but didn't dare say anything. Any men feel like they had no choice but to stand there on the business end feeling totally uncomfortable?
Also, anybody find it weird that Odent's reporting these reactions of women due to men in the birthing room -- they sound like firsthand accounts -- and, well, Dr. Odent himself is a guy? How does that square with his argument?
Photo: BabyandPregnancy.co.uk
