@HatRack, ok, seeing as you think this is about gender politics rather that health, let's break this down for you.
My uncle is the most senior anaesthetist at his hospital. He's also in a vulnerable group so he's off for the next 12 weeks. My sister is a paediatric scrub nurse in the same hospital: this means she usually assists surgeons with children's operations but all routine ops have been cancelled so she's now re-deployed to obstetrics and is assisting in c-sections. She can hand over the instruments just as well, but it doesn't stop her from being nervous as hell as she's never done this before. This is all true.
Now let's imagine a scenario: many partners have attended scans, appointments and births and, over the next two weeks have unintentionally infected another third of the medical staff who are now displaying symptoms and they're all off sick. Right, your turn to give birth, OP! That elective section you were after? Sorry, short staffed. You'd like an epidural? Sorry, patient B a few beds down needs one more than you right now and there just aren't enough staff.
So, would you prefer to have everyone's partner coming along to everything and risking the above scenario, or would you prefer to give birth, not alone, because thankfully there are a reasonable number of staff who are going to take care of you, and your baby is safe and healthy but misses out on one single day of 'bonding' with their father?