Conceptual and ethical problems underpinning calls to abandon vaginal breech birth

The view that vaginal breech birth is unjustifiable due to neonatal safety concerns has resulted in continued calls for breech pregnancies to be managed via a policy of planned caesarean birth. Vaginal breech birth has of course always occurred, but women with term breech pregnancies who seek to have a vaginal birth often face coercive pressures to have a caesarean birth instead. In this paper I argue that even if there is population level evidence that vaginal birth is relatively riskier for the breech presenting fetus, implementing a policy of planned caesarean birth would essentially be an unjustified attempt at forced medical intervention upon women. Advocates of a policy of planned caesarean birth often conflate the acceptability of allocating participants to a treatment group (policy) within the context of a randomized controlled trial with the justifiability of doing that as part of individual health care. Calls for obstetricians to "abandon vaginal breech birth" mistakenly position vaginal breech birth itself as a form of medical intervention that can simply be removed as an option for women by obstetricians. In reality, abandoning vaginal breech birth would entail abandoning women by denying them access to healthcare options that are otherwise available to any woman having a vaginal birth.