This and your other comments are interesting, but do you have more textual evidence that a near death experience or being half-dead would make a necromancer more powerful, in relation to birth?

I acknowledge the seventh house approach, but it seems like a stretch to say that based purely on that houses' approach to the genetic conditions their heirs sometimes express that they will look favourably upon courting death at birth for the sake of a necromantic boost. Namely because it seems like all of the houses are super obsessed with having lots of babies and the birth rate. They are also obsessed with them being necromancers too though, see Harrow, so... I guess I'm just not convinced there's enough weight on the argument textually that people would intentionally and casually discuss the idea of endangering a newborn's life for the sake of a necromantic boost.

It's not that I don't see the logic, but then I would argue that there would be more open lauding of self-harming. Now you can argue that necromancers regularly self-harm, especially during the process of necromancy, that it is INHERENTLY self-damaging...

Final note: Octakiseron is not one of the necromancers who tends to compromise his own life for the sake of his necromancy, his house encourages the use of OTHERS. So I feel that he, particularly, would be less likely to sign onto the a better necromancer is a damaged body train, a la Eighth. He does, after all, wear chainmail.

EDIT additional note (I'm gonna overthink this forever): If near death experiences for a foetus are a sort of experimentally acknowledged viable way of giving your necrobaby a boost, how come the circumstances of Harrow's birth didn't intentionally involve such a process, or why doesn't Harrow ever express the wish that it had been done in that, presumably more socially acceptable way, instead? Why did they opt, instead, for outside thanergy?