To think men need to be more responsible for problems occurring in childbirth

[TheExecutionOfAllThings]

I’ve seen many posts on here saying that a woman has had physical injuries after childbirth and can’t/ doesn’t have the urge for penetrative sex anymore - and therefore the man is unfulfilled and wants to pursue another relationship.

On the one hand, I don’t think anyone should have a sexless marriage/relationship if it doesn’t suit them - but on the other hand, there’s something really unpleasant about a woman going through a horrific birth that means she can no longer have penetrative sex either physically or mentally and the man being free to just leave if it no longer suits.

It feels cruel and inhumane that a woman can end up with significant injuries when the man agreed (possibly indirectly) to the risk beforehand, but he can just walk away.

Childbirth, despite being as old as humankind, is only ever one parties responsibility - during birth and after (CMS a poor account for responsibility).

I’m not necessarily suggesting that men should stay in a relationship than leaves then unfulfilled if they can’t have sex - but there’s something really inhumane and unfair that the woman is equally as unfulfilled but can’t fix it and there’s no means for her to move on - when the decision that broke her was mutual. The man on the other hand can enjoy the spoils of childbirth if he wishes, but can rid his hands of the mother.

I don’t know what the answer is at all - do we make it compulsory that men always have 50/50 care when doing an act that could result in children (and possibly at that detriment to said children)? Do we cause equal harm to the man who has fathered a child with a woman who has suffered injury (very inhumane). Do we force compulsory relationships once a child is born or pregnant (absolutely horrific for all parties).

All terrible choices - but I do think there needs to be more accountability towards the man if a woman suffers injuries in a joint decision to have sex that may result in a child being born - especially in situations where the man has already committed through marriage ‘in sickness and health’ and all that.

Actually, despite being seriously inhumane, this point is pertinent:

Do we cause equal harm to the man who has fathered a child with a woman who has suffered injury (very inhumane).

If men had a risk of harm too, would they even consider children? And if they did have a risk of a harm, would they equally accept that a woman was free to walk away afterwards?

I don't have an answer op but I am watching with interest. Very interesting question and I'd agree with you that it doesn't seem fair.

Anyone should be free to walk away from a relationship at any time, for any reason, even if the reason makes you a bit of a cunt.

Would you expect a woman to be held accountable for a vasectomy having gone wrong and the mans sex drive vanishing, or any physical repercussions?

We know that women will take the physical burden of childbirth and anything that goes wrong from that. We make those choices, and can choose not to take the risks if we wish.

If we started going down the route of men taking responsibility for the physical problems of carrying a baby then that would be a very slippery slope to men getting a say over abortions.

Surely the answer is to improve women’s health services to reduce the risk of childbirth injuries.

In what circumstances will you be forcing a woman to stay in relationships with men that they no longer wish to be in?

Business fails and family are now destitute and the financial strain has ruined the relationship and made life a living hell? Tough, you agreed that he'd be in charge of financials and you would stay at home. You don't get to only honour your vows if his economic decisions are successful. No divorce for you!!!!

Whilst conception requires both parties to do their bit, the decision to continue a pregnancy is always the woman's (and that is how it should be). Men obviously cannot incur birth injuries and so the decision to take this risk is ultimately female.

We cannot change biology and we certainly shouldn't be changing women's rights. So maybe the answer lies in the increased discussion of these risks. Women need to know, as soon as they are of childbearing age, what a fourth degree tear is. They also need to know that if they incur one, they will be told 'But you've got a baby' and dismissed. They need to know that men can and do walk away, that there are no fairytales, no 'perfect'. They need to know that plenty of women regret having children, that it isn't always a 'blessing'. They need to be told that childrearing isn't the be all and end all. In short, women should be empowered to make informed choices.

At present, society tells women that we should be having babies. It says they are the holy grail, that every single woman enjoys motherhood. That PND and birth injuries don't matter as soon as you hear a child's laughter. Women are treated as little more than incubators.

Empower women to look beyond what society dictates and give them the facts so they can make their own informed choices.

@PurpleDaisies

Surely the answer is to improve women’s health services to reduce the risk of childbirth injuries.

This ^^ in bucketloads

Actually, it isn’t a mutual decision, it is only ever a woman’s decision in this society. We may choose to take our partner’s views into account when deciding to continue with a pregnancy, but equally we can choose to disregard their opinion completely. It’s just a fact of nature, women carry all the risk, so women get complete control over whether they take that risk. So no, men don’t have to take any responsibility for the harm caused by pregnancy, since I don’t want to live in a society where they have any say over my body. Responsibilities are linked to rights, and men have no rights over my body.

No. I had the opposite issue for a while in that dh was terrified of killing me by impregnating me again (interesting emcs at full dilation with around 20 people in the room and all the alarms going followed by postpartum psychosis) and I nearly left him rather than endure a sexless marriage.

Money on improving pregnancy and childbirth services including perinatal mental health would get my vote though.

Interesting.

In terms of birth, imo both are going into this situation often unaware of the risk and both can be 'injured' psychologically, though the physiological burden of birth affects the woman which in turn may impact her health, sexual identity and therefore her intimate relationships. Does this mean the man takes equal responsibility? No, that's a slippery slope. Women have bodily autonomy and should be informed of the associated risks by their care providers and ideally pre conception so women can make informed choices.

In terms of managing injury post birth, I'm an advocate for debriefing (for both parties) which can be a highly beneficial intervention for trauma/injury.

@DifficultPifcultLemonDifficult

Anyone should be free to walk away from a relationship at any time, for any reason, even if the reason makes you a bit of a cunt.

Would you expect a woman to be held accountable for a vasectomy having gone wrong and the mans sex drive vanishing, or any physical repercussions?

We know that women will take the physical burden of childbirth and anything that goes wrong from that. We make those choices, and can choose not to take the risks if we wish.

If we started going down the route of men taking responsibility for the physical problems of carrying a baby then that would be a very slippery slope to men getting a say over abortions.

Agree with this.

@PurpleDaisies

Surely the answer is to improve women’s health services to reduce the risk of childbirth injuries.

This. Cannot be said enough.

Also more eduction for both men and women. I suffered severe birth injuries as well as psychological trauma during my birth and still nearly a year later have been unable to have penetrative sex successfully.

This was neither on my radar nor my husband's as a possibility of birth. Luckily he is more concerned with my healing and we still have a great relationship. But even our NCT classes talked about it 'being closer to 12 weeks than 6 weeks healing' rather than raising any possibility of long term problems.

It has been a real wake up call to me how badly women are treated during and after birth. My problems were made worse by the culture of ignoring, minimizing and gas lighting about suffering. It is systemic rather than down to individual midwives / doctors, and it makes me so angry and at the same time so impotent to do anything about it.

So in answer, yes I agree that women unfairly suffer due to birth injuries but I think the answer is in avoiding these / proper treatment rather than forcing men to stick in relationships/ inflicting parallel injuries on them.

It's not quite the question you asked, but I'm interested in your idea about how an expectation of (or legal requirement for) 50/50 care would affect men's attitude to having children. I've often wondered about it from the other side, how an expectation of equal care in the event of a seperation would affect women's decision to have children. Most of the single mums I know tolerate their ex partners seeing the kids EOW but would really prefer it if they didn't have to. Lots of women on MN avoid leaving bad relationships out of fear that the father will go for 50/50 or even full care of the children. And I've often heard women on here lamenting missing out on every other christmas/birthday etc, even when they still are the main carers. "Taking the children" is a common threat used by abusive men for a reason. Anecdotally I have 2 friends who were happy to be careless with contraception (by which I mean not insisting on condoms) because they were confident that the men in question wouldn't be bothered about asking for much or anything in the way of contact if they got pregnant (which one did). The idea of seeing less of my children was also a major motivator to me when dp and I were working through some issues a few years ago. I knew for sure that he would want 50/50 care (because he's a good and loving dad, not to hurt me) but If I had felt confident that he would have been happy with EOW then I can't honestly say I'd have stayed with him. So even though this doesn't represent all women, I do wonder if an expectation of 50/50 care would make women less inclined to have children with unsuitable men.

As to the issue of birth injuries, no of course no one should stay in a relationship if they don't want to, but you're very right OP that in pregnancy women take all the risk and men share the rewards. This is just one of many ways in which our reproductive reality informs the power asymmetry in our relationships with men.

I think the benefit for women being the one at risk during childbirth is that they mostly get the say in how the child is raised. Most of the time they are awarded the main caregiver in custody battles, especially when the child is still a baby. Men are pretty pushed out of child raising on the whole.

Pregnancy comes with risks and every woman should be aware of that.

Nobody forces you to have a baby... so no I don't think men should be held responsible for injuries that occur during childbirth, unless it's a male doctor and the injuries occurred through medical negligence.

I hardly think this is the reason most men walk away from a relationship and wouldn't want a man to stay with me out of obligation if he wasn't happy.

@DifficultPifcultLemonDifficult

Anyone should be free to walk away from a relationship at any time, for any reason, even if the reason makes you a bit of a cunt.

Would you expect a woman to be held accountable for a vasectomy having gone wrong and the mans sex drive vanishing, or any physical repercussions?

We know that women will take the physical burden of childbirth and anything that goes wrong from that. We make those choices, and can choose not to take the risks if we wish.

If we started going down the route of men taking responsibility for the physical problems of carrying a baby then that would be a very slippery slope to men getting a say over abortions.

I completely agree with this. When a woman chooses to have sex, get pregnant, continue the pregnancy etc then she is choosing to accept the risks of that. The man is not responsible unless he FORCED her to do those things. A woman could adopt or use a surrogate if she didn't want to accept that risk. I agree with PP that you can't expect a man to stay in a relationship where he's unhappy just because he "benefitted" from the relationship previously.

When Man places his seed in Woman he takes on a tremendous responsibility from that very point and this is why coitus should take place under the institution of marriage under God! Then the couple remains together and committed through thick and thin till death do them part.

However I appreciate that this is not how you say "a la mode" so if you choose to cohabit and conceive not under marriage then you are personally responsible for your own actions. You can leave the man just like the man can leave you. It's a sad state of affairs but that's modern freedom and if you choose to play those rules then you take the rough with the smooth!!

I had very bad injuries from the birth of DC1 with internal and external tearing. It took the doctor almost three hours to repair me, it was really grim.

I would say it took a full year before I felt normal again and could think about sex. DH was perfectly free to leave me during that time but thankfully he is a decent human being who understood that I was recovering from a majorly traumatic event. Similarly if he became ill or depressed and lost all interest in sex, I would understand this and support him through it.

I guess I just think that people should try to be decent to each other.

@BubblyBarbara why do you think marriage makes a difference in the UK?

As ByGrabtharsHammerWhatASavings pointed out that some men would want 50/50 care of their children.

As each woman has agency they can have an abortion without the fathers say so. Plus couples can get divorced regardless of the health issues of the other party at any time.

The only post I've seen about this was where the woman thought she was possibly bi but probably gay and didn't want to be intimate at all - no kissing/oral/etc.

It depends if by "sex" you only mean PIV or if you mean all types of intimacy.

I don't think your point is valid. What woman would want a man to stay with her if he was so unhappy in the marriage that he wanted to leave? Once he has decided to leave, care of the child is a different matter. Many (most?) mothers would hate their baby to be away from them 50% of the time.

The fact is that birth injuries are part of life. Women and men should be made aware of them rather than it being a dirty secret like now. And there should be much better mental health support for both halves of the couple. Solutions can be found for this problem in a couple where the will is there. If a man is that desperate for sex that he can't wait a year or two for his partner to heal, the relationship was probably doomed to failure anyway. The chance of the woman healing mentally and physically will be increased by having access to physiotherapy, counselling, surgery if needed.

The answer can never be forcing men to do anything. It has to be about better education and support for both parties.

Interesting question. Men certainly need to be more aware of the risks of pregnancy and childbirth imo; more and more they seem to think sex is owed to them with no consequences. There are issues that need to be worked on more, at the moment all responsibility seems to be being thrown at women. There needs to be some watertight way of making men take responsibility for the kids in terms of paying for their upkeep, while enabling women to maintain their safety from abusive men. There also needs to be a recognition of and some sort of social recompense to women for the risks and sacrifices they make for children. But forcing responsibility for injuries in childbirth, not sure how that would work.

I think PPs are right that better women’s health services are key - but they continue to be low on a priority list. There’s definitely something about education here - do many men realise the risks of childbirth? For that matter, do many women before (and even during) pregnancy? I don’t think it was something that was taught about in school or even in pregnancy checks and health appointments.

I did consider the point about pregnancy being a women’s choice ultimately, but it’s important to remember that while that’s the case in our culture, it doesn’t apply to women everywhere. There are so many women across the world who aren’t allowed the autonomy to make choices about their body once pregnant but will still end up in the same position after birth if injured.

As I say in my OP, I don’t think anyone should be forced to stay in a sexless marriage/ relationship if they are unhappy and my answer wouldn’t be to force anyone to do so. I really don’t have any answer.

i don't see this as a legal question, as a matter of should we allow people to divorce or not.

I think it's a moral question - are you a selfish prick if you behave that way, and would we raise our son to think that way.

My answer is yes, it's a selfish prick behaviour. Marriage is actually fundamentally about a kind of commitment, and while in some cases there are good reasons to dissolve it, not getting laid because the other person is ill, unable, or cannot risk pregnancy is not one of them. That is a known risk of marriage. Many many people have to go without sex because they do not have a compatible partner for some reason beyond their control. It has never killed anyone, and although difficult for many, and although sometimes people fail even when they don't want that, it is entirely possible to live a good and happy life without having sexual intercourse.