Since 25-30% of women in the US are obese and 2% are morbidly obese, I think you’re looking at an atypical sample of women. Sure, fewer than 35% of pregnant women are probably obese, but easily more than 10%. This site says 25% of those giving birth are obese. Obesity Raises Risk Of Complications In Pregnancy, Study Shows | ScienceDaily And that’s just one health risk.
Thanks, that’s exactly what I had in mind. I forgot I was in GQ, and should have cited something, but I think we all know that more than 10% of American women in the prime of their lives are obese. And it looks like at least 5% have diabetes, which I know is a significant problem during pregnancy. My point was simply that the complication rate for the general population, without medical intervention, would probably be higher than the rate for women with no known medical problems or risk factors.
To some extent of course we’re creating a reverse Darwinian situation.
Healthy term infants are getting bigger and the human female pelvis hasn’t quite caught up.
Without medical intervention if you have a small or malformed pelvis and a big baby, you get obstructed labour and baby dies, and possibly mother dies too, or at least isn’t in a position to have more babies.
However, this unhappy situation rarely happens in the developed world (still common enough in the developing world to make places like the Addis Ababa Fistula Hospital necessary) because a c-section is undertaken and everyone survives.
Enough women with pelves not ideal for childbirth successfully pass on their genes to their daughters and the human race becomes less and less able to deliver their own babies without intervention as time progresses.
Not that the “leave everything to nature and let the fittest survive” is an acceptable alternative, of course.