Lack of Presence

a luminary of world science, thoughtfully said: Anatomy is destiny!

The founder of psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud, put a deep meaning into these words. He believed that belonging to one or another sex, expressed in the structure of the body and the specifics of bodily functions, leaves an indelible imprint on a person’s attitude and behavior.

Freud was simply convinced of the undeniable - primarily anatomical - superiority of the male sex. He believed that a woman from childhood was tormented by the consciousness of her imperfection and secretly envied men.

Freud's ideas, which today are unconditionally shared only by a narrow circle of his zealous followers and which most scientists recognize as quite subjective, nevertheless contain some rational grain.

It must be admitted that at all times, gender relations have been colored by explicit or implicit rivalry: men sought to defend their real or imaginary advantage, and women tried to challenge it.

Of course, the point here is not so much in anatomy, but in the existing system of social roles. Today, this system is rapidly collapsing. The modern woman no longer wants to lead the lifestyle that her great-grandmothers led. She feels entitled to stand on a par with a man and succeeds a lot in this.

True, nature has placed an obstacle on the path to gender equality: women are destined to give birth to children. Carrying a child and raising him prevents her from succeeding as a man. The only way to overcome this obstacle is to involve a man in parental care as much as possible, balancing motherhood and fatherhood.

Actually, this seems to be the reason for the now widespread fashion for the participation of fathers in childbirth. In the avalanche of reproaches that have recently fallen on men, one of the most important is this: the woman bears all the hardships of birth, and the man actually parasitizes on women’s selflessness.

Let's try to figure out what problems can be solved by involving the father in childbirth and how acceptable and desirable this approach is. According to the most radical reformers, maternity hospitals have so many shortcomings and so few advantages that it would be better to close them altogether. A woman should give birth at home, and her husband should help her with this.

But, firstly, it is a rare man who does not have special training who is able to flawlessly play the role of a midwife. One might argue: theoretical studios will provide him with such training during the nine months of pregnancy. But this is still hardly enough.

Only an experienced specialist, prepared for all possible situations, is able to adequately meet any turn of events. Often this requires appropriate medications and equipment that are simply not available at home. And it is not easy to maintain the necessary hygienic conditions in everyday life.

Some would argue that in the good old days people did without all these extravagances. However, let's not forget about the high level of mortality during childbirth, which has occurred throughout the history of mankind and has been overcome only in recent decades precisely thanks to the advances of medicine.

A more common practice is to involve fathers in childbirth as sympathetic observers. In this case, childbirth takes place in the traditional conditions of a maternity hospital. The only innovation is that the father is allowed to be near the woman in labor and communicate with her.

But if the father does not take direct physical participation in the act of childbirth, then his role is purely psychological. What does it consist of?

Proponents of this approach argue that this innovation has a double positive effect - for both women and men.

A woman in labor feels psychologically more comfortable in the presence of her husband, because she feels his sympathy and participation. And her positive attitude contributes to the successful course of childbirth.

The man, in turn, is imbued with the woman’s experiences and is fully aware of the responsibility of having a child. His affection for his wife