Episiotomy continues to be a frequently used procedure in obstetrics despite little scientific support for its routine use. Although episiotomy does decrease the occurrence of anterior lacerations, it fails to accomplish the majority of goals stated as reasons for its use. Episiotomy does not decrease damage to the perineum but rather increases it. The midline episiotomy increases the risk for third-degree and fourth-degree lacerations. Episiotomy fails to prevent the development of pelvic relaxation and its attendant complications. Rather than decreasing maternal morbidity, episiotomy increases blood loss and is related to greater initial postpartum pain and dyspareunia. It has been associated with a more difficult and lengthy repair as measured by the need for suture material and operating room time. The claims of a protective effect on the fetus in shortening the second stage of labor, improving Apgar scores, and preventing perinatal asphyxia have not been borne out. The value of episiotomy use on a routine basis bears scientific examination in prospective, randomized, controlled trials. These types of trials are certainly achievable, ethically correct, and much needed. Until these trials are completed and published, obstetricians should not routinely perform the procedure but rather determine the need for episiotomy on a case-by-case basis.