Cut it out!

So it appears that episiotomies, the procedure whereby a woman's vaginal opening is surgically enlarged (i.e., cut) during childbirth, shouldn't be as routine as it is in this country. Via the Chicago Sun-Times (my emphasis):

A new review of 26 research studies shows that episiotomies, incisions to enlarge the vaginal opening during childbirth, are linked with a higher risk of injury, more trouble healing and more pain.

Episiotomies also had no effect on incontinence, pelvic floor strength or sexual function. Women who had the procedure waited longer to resume sex after childbirth, and their first post-birth intercourse caused them more pain. [snip]

Many women and their doctors already know episiotomies haven't proven beneficial, [lead researcher] Hartmann said, adding that rates are dropping, but not fast enough.

She estimated that 1 million women each year have unnecessary episiotomies, citing studies that indicate they are done in about 30 percent of vaginal births.

One million. That's alotta unnecessary procedures, folks. Tsuredzuredgusa notes that in the past the conventional wisdom was that episiotomies improved sex life ... except maybe not for the woman:

The answer?--"the husband stitch." The husband stitch refers to the practice where (predominantly male) doctors, typically without consulting their female patient, stitch up that incision and then helpfully keep stitching, to make the post-birth vaginal opening even smaller than it was before delivery, in order to keep things "nice and tight" for the husband. You know, the same way they do with third-world female genital mutilation practices.

Indeed. Let's give it a rest, shall we?