Whilst i can see where he is coming from, i personally really disagree.
There is no way my labour would have been shorter without him.
It was especially the moments labouring at home that gave me the confidence to stay calm while in labour. DP gave me so much strength, so many words and so much of his time...
He did not act scared, shocked, anxious or uncomfortable. He knew what to expect, and even when we encountered the unexpected he was still by my side one hundred percent of the time.
Noone else could have given me that support... I know this as I had my mother & my grandmother present at the birth, and my mum tried, and she tried hard, but nothing could compare to the kind of connection that I had with DP during labour and the birth of DS.

I especially disagreed with the following...
Physically, in order to deliver the placenta with ease, her levels of oxytocin - the hormone of love - need to peak.

This happens if she has a moment in which she can forget everything about the world, save for her baby, and if she has time in which she can look into the baby's eyes, make contact with its skin and take in its smell without any distractions.
As much as you forget 'everything' once baby is born, I think I would be distraught that DP was not there with me.

The final question I would like to see answered is what, if a man is present at birth, will be the effect on the sexual attraction he feels towards his wife over the long term?
Also this - I would have thought a lot of men would see their partners as the ultimate, having been through so much to bring his much adored children into the world?

If I was to have been a single woman giving birth then of course I would not grieve for my partner's loss in missing out... someone else would be 'acceptable'... but why should he not be entitles to see the birth of his child if it is especially what he so chooses?

***too tired not making sense***