Don't insult mums over birth rights and wrongs

What makes me so angry is this American psycho-babble that gets pedalled by proponents of 'natural' childbirth (as well as the anti-epidural lobby and the breast is best obsessed).

The point they always try to make is that unless you have suffered up to 12 hours of indescribable agony, possibly had 20 or more stitches and may develop stress incontinence, then you cannot form a natural 'bond' with your child. This is insulting to all the mothers who have, for whatever reason, delivered their babies by caesarean section.

I have two beautiful daughters, both born by caesarean section (I am not going into the reasons here, because that is not my point). One of my daughers was on special care for three days.

I do not feel a sense of "loss and guilt" or that I missed out on their births.

How can I? I was there, they came out of me, they are my children, end of story.

What I feel is that I took full advantage of medical advances to produce two perfect babies with whom I 'bonded' totally. Am I meant to feel like a lesser mother because I did not give birth 'naturally'?

For a woman who had to have an emergency caesarean section in order to deliver her healthy happy baby, to feel some lack in their relationship or to have to spend her life compensating for that, well I think that would be a terribly sad and mixed up lady.

Look at the statistics in your article - only about 21.5 per cent of births in England and Wales are by caesarean section, of which 1.5 per cent are for non-medical reasons.

Compare that to the 25 out of every 1,000 babies dying in 1970 to the 7.5 in every 1,000 now. Do we really want to go back to that rate of infant mortality? Where would the baby bonding be then?

Medical reason or not, higher risk or not, us mothers of caesarean-section babies are no less fulfilled than any other mother, end of story.

Clare A Proctor,

Royal Chase,

Dringhouses, York.

Updated: 09:58 Monday, May 03, 2004