If my wife is suffering, I want to be there with her, even if it causes me suffering.  If my child is suffering, I want to be there.  I'm not going to go run and hide because I'm afraid of my own suffering.  I've watched my wife suffer (not only child birth but broken bones) and my children suffer (with a broken arm and other things) ... but I would never run away from them because it caused me pain.

 I am not suggesting that men run away from suffering.  Some women, like myself, do not find much comfort from the presence of a husband whom we know is suffering.  I found my husband's presence distracting.  I felt like I had to hide my discomfort because if was hurting him.  The birth process would have been easier without this.

I am not suggesting that men run away from suffering.  Some women, like myself, do not find much comfort from the presence of a husband whom we know is suffering.  I found my husband's presence distracting.  I felt like I had to hide my discomfort because if was hurting him.  The birth process would have been easier without this.

Sure, and that would be your choice ... something you would work out with your husband.  Other women want their husbands there with them.  I personally am extremely stoic in the midst of suffering.  I suffer badly inside but don't show it on the outside.  And my wife wants me there in crises for that particular reason.  I also never panic.  It's not a virtue necessarily, just the way I am.  I've had very scary traffic situations pop out of nowhere, with my wife and/or kids in the car, and my wife was very upset, while it didn't phase me; I just tried to react the best I could under the circuмstances.  That's just my temperament.

This was in response, I guess, to an earlier categorical statement made that men should not be in the delivery room.  That's why I started to ask "But why?"

But even if such women are present, would it preclude the husband also from being there?  There's something to be said, also, for being a witness to the birth of my child.  So I sometimes wonder if the earlier custom had to do with the fact that husbands tended to be more emotionally aloof from their wives?  Men would, stereotypically, be outside in the waiting room sharing cigars with their buddies.

I am not convinced that men were emotionally aloof from their wives.  The stereotype that I am familiar with is that the husband nervously paced back and forth in the waiting room.  Sharing of cigars with buddies happened after the birth.

Anyhow, let's turn the question around and ask "but why?" about the husband being present.  Why should the husband be there if he is not needed to support his wife?  He might enjoy the experience of witnessing a birth?  That is hardly compelling.  In an ideal situation in which a women has support and does not need to be protected from problematic hospital procedures, what would be the purpose of the husband?

Why should the husband be there if he is not needed to support his wife?  He might enjoy the experience of witnessing a birth?  That is hardly compelling.

No, it's not just about "enjoying" it.  In many ways, it's not even particularly enjoyable.  He has a right to participate in such a monumental event, rather than being relegated to the role of bystander in something that pertains to the wife alone.  There's symbolic significance even in the little custom of the father cutting the umbilical cord.

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-21701683

Here's an interesting article on it. It's a recent article looking back, so it's still mostly just guesswork, but the author still brings up some good points for both views. 

There’s scientific evidence for the husband providing natural pain relief when he is near the woman with physical contact like hugging, massaging etc. She receives extra oxytocin from those gestures. Also, it’s rubbish that men just stayed away routinely throughout the years other than this era. St. Elisabeth’s husband was nearby when she gave birth to the royal babies.

There is a difference between being nearby and being right in the same room for the entire labour and delivery.  When people gave birth in their homes, the husband could easily be close by.  He could come and go from the room depending on the stage of labour and how the woman was feeling.  These natural rhythms are difficult to reconcile with hospital routines and procedures.

And a husband is not the only one who can offer natural pain relief through touching.  Other women, especially those who have been trained to do this, can provide it.

According to many studies, women who use doulas have fewer requests for epidurals, fewer c-sections and are less likely to require forceps or vacuum births (amongst many other things).

In a recent review of all available doula studies, it was concluded that doulas were more effective at supporting a woman than hospital staff or the woman’s friends or family. This is likely because a doula provides a trifecta of care which no other person present in a hospital birth room can provide.

These are:
Continuous care – she doesn’t leave your side for shift changes (there are 3 in a 24 hour period)
Experienced in birth and is trained in support skills
Familiar – she known to the woman.

 Many studies tell us that having a doula present at your birth will make it less likely that you’ll want or ask for pain relief. A doula is trained in the art of birth support, where she learns about helpful positions, support methods and tools to help labouring women feel more comfortable and feel more supported. - See more at: https://www.bellybelly.com.au/birth/natural-pain-relief-for-labour/

I would like to see more evidence for your position than an assertion that my view is rubbish and a vague reference to your ancestors.

...let's turn the question around and ask "but why?" about the husband being present.  Why should the husband be there if he is not needed to support his wife?  He might enjoy the experience of witnessing a birth?  That is hardly compelling.  In an ideal situation in which a women has support and does not need to be protected from problematic hospital procedures, what would be the purpose of the husband?

Do you assume the husband is never needed for the wife?
I can say for my husband and I, that we joined together with God, and most intimately, in creating the person/life/soul that is about to be born. Of course we both want to share in that birth, and every moment of it, with all of the pain, wounds and tears that come as well.  
But, for any of the women attending to help in the process, they were definitely not there in the creation of the little one about to arrive, so the disconnect from them, and any support they could offer is very real. Especially if they are strangers at a hospital that you’ve never met before. 
I am close with my mother, but still would prefer my husband be there because of the intimate nature of birth. 

I had one experience with a nurse/midwife at a hospital..the one I had seen during my prenatal appointments left on vacation when I went into labor. The replacement for her was from the same office and was an obvious lesbian. I was extremely uncomfortable and upset by the switch but was stuck in the situation. 

Wow, and I had always thought previously that having a male OB was uncomfortable..that was an ordeal and SO much worse.