CELEBRITY figures are fashion trendsetters for mere mortals everywhere. Their influence is so great that even the slightest fad photographed in the tabloids soon filters down to the High Street and affordable clones suddenly appear as if by magic.

Yes, we take note of who's wearing Dolce & Gabbana and who's wearing Gucci, but are celebrities having a greater impact than we think and do they influence how we have our babies?

This week the results from a national survey of NHS hospital deliveries revealed that the number of women electing to have a caesarean section continues to increase and has now risen to 9.6 per cent.

This figure, coupled with an additional increase in emergency caesareans means that almost a quarter of women in the UK today are undergoing this major operation in order to give birth.

Despite midwives highlighting the medical risks involved, the sustained year-on-year increase in the rate of caesareans being performed has more than doubled over the past 20 years.

In the last decade, high-profile female celebrities have opted for the caesarean option and are thought to be a contributing factor to the significant increase we are witnessing.

Victoria Beckham, Elizabeth Hurley and Madonna have all elected for the caesarean section and rejected natural births for their offspring.

But are these women just pampered princesses who are too posh to push or are they merely exercising control of their bodies and a woman's right to choose their own most appropriate method of child birth?

There are various reasons why women seem to be plumping for the c-section option.

Labour pain is avoided, mothers are able to plan the birth date in order to aid their busy schedules and the procedure also ensures the mother remains "honeymoon fresh," to the benefit of her post-natal sex life.

In theory it sounds wonderful, and as someone with a low pain threshold who is prone to be squeamish, I can see the attraction.

But even for me, who could be described as a bit of a wuss, it just seems too clinical and contrived.

I know comfort and convenience are revered in today's society, but childbirth was never supposed to be quick, clean and easy.

Despite the prospect of potential pain, if it's good enough for my mother, it's good enough for me.

Last year New York Magazine published an article about the ridiculous lengths fashionable women go to stay thin during pregnancy and relayed a very disturbing rumour. The word on the streets was that some of Manhattan's mother-to-be elite were demanding caesareans early in their eighth month of pregnancy to avoid putting on that "last extra dollop of fat," clearly displaying little concern for the well being of their baby.

I'm sure every new mother would love to have a flat stomach within a matter of days and be able to push their designer baby buggy round Sainsbury's in size six jeans, but to resort to such a measure is simply spine-chilling.

Mothers should not have to feel so pressurised to look thin and trim straight after the nine months upheaval of pregnancy and subsequent childbirth.

It is astonishing and abnormal how quickly stars such as Catherine Zeta Jones and Victoria Beckham have lost weight after their pregnancies. But for most women this is not a realistic target, and let's not forget a film-star body in days is much easier to achieve when you have an army of personal trainers.

Whether it is celebrity influence which has attributed to the increase in caesarean sections or midwife staff shortages which have created this lack of confidence in natural childbirth, a one per cent rise every year is costing the NHS £5 million.

Emergency caesareans are life savers for both mother and child, but the cosmetic c-section is just a push too far.

The fee for this column is donated to the York City FC Development Fund

Updated: 08:34 Saturday, April 02, 2005