They have rights too, you know!
Okay, I could see the part about wanting to lower the risk of infection, but since when is smiling and cooing at a baby a violation of human rights?
While behind the glass, coo away IMO.
If you see my beautiful daughter in the supermarket, or out in public, coo all you want, from a distance. Do not touch, fold, or spindle the daughter.
Huh? I’ve never been to a UK hospital maternity ward (or the UK) (or any hospital maternity ward), but - and I get this from watching TV, so please excuse & educate me if I’m wrong, but - you mean they don’t keep their newborns behind glass like we do?
And, being all for reasonable, responsible freedoms & against ridiculous rules & PC-“don’t violate my rights or offend me”-type crap, I say, if the babies don’t want to be smiled at, they don’t have to look at the people mugging & cooing at them! They can close their eyes & go to sleep!
wipes spittle from corner of mouth, stomps off to kitchen to refill coffee cup
I wish people would coo at me.
UK and Irish hospitals room the babies in.
That means that baby spends all the time at their mother’s bedside in an isolette.
No being taken away by nurses, mum does all the changing, washing and feeding herself, with whatever assistance she needs from the staff. Baby is only removed from her bedside if she is too exhausted to cope.
Maternity wards in the UK also have 6 or 8 bedded wards as the norm, with few women having private rooms, no real restriction on visiting hours or number of visitors.
So you’re talking about the family of each mother cooing over every baby in the ward, and bothering these fairly exhausted new mothers with endless questions about their baby, and their labour and birth experiences. people in hospital, especially maternity hospitals can feel justified in asking incredibly personal and rude questions that they wouldn’t dream of asking outside.
This seems pretty reasonable to me.
[quote]
This seems pretty reasonable to me.
[quote]
In the rest of the world, we have a simple solution to this: “Get lost, I’m sleeping.”
Or, perhaps a Do Not Disturb sign.
What Irishgirl said.
It can be a real problem for new mothers if complete strangers are wandering across the room from where *their * visitor is and prodding mum’s just-asleep infant. Not to mention it’s rude.
Plus of course there’s the greater risk of infection. And given that MRSA is so high-profile right now (with even newborns contracting it) i’d say the hospital are doing the right thing by asking visitors to control themselves. Sure it’s dressed up as human rights but until hospitals get empowered Matrons back then they have to use *some * excuse for ordering round all the visitors 
Also agreed with Irishgirl. I read one interview with a staff member from the hospital in question, who pointed out that sometimes people would not only ‘coo over’ babies, but pick them up, uninvited.
Wow–I can only speak to the OB portions of hospitals from my own experiences in them, having three kids.
In America (well, Chicago)–security is tight, tight, tight in the OB section. You are buzzed in. The nursery is locked with a secure access.
If baby is rooming in (we have that too)–visitors are issued passes and there are cameras to monitor hallways, and public entrances etc.
but maybe it’s more of a cultural thing–certainly, I never had any stranger (other than a nurse) look at or hold any of my babies. It isn’t done. (it may well be, but I have never seen it.)
Now, if said visitor is in Mom’s room (presumably this person knows Mom and vice versa) and just picks up baby–time for Mom to say, please put baby down and go wash your hands.
I have no problem with signs extolling the virtues of good handwashing. I find plenty to satirize in the “baby’s have rights, too” bit. Of course they do. But TPTB are invoking the wrong authority to gain compliance for infection control.
Educate the public, don’t browbeat them with philosophy.
Just my 2 cents.
ahem
cough
Coo.
Awwwww! Who’s a pwecious wittle zebwa? Yous is. Yous is! Awwww…cute lil’ zebwa!
I think it’s mostly because Chicago has had at least two incidents I can think of offhand where a woman entered a maternity ward and left with a baby that was not hers.
Yes, I guess it is a cultural or procedural thing…where we’re talking about a place where strangers will be present, we can’t expect mother to be gatekeeper at all times. Would I be right in thinking (with zero experience) that the sleep patterns of a new mother might be a little inpredictable?
You can be sure that the same English newspapers that ‘exposed’ this story would be far more vitriolic about any attempt to keep all newborn babies behind some kind of extra security.
I’m certain that the “I have rights” bit was intended as a humorous element to the instructions, which got picked up on and isolated.
It is that way in the Boston area too. Each parent gets an armband with an ID number along with the baby and they get matched up every single time the baby and parents are removed from sight of one another.
A mother can keep the baby in the room or send it to the nursery if the parents want a break. The nursery is surrounded by glass and absolutely no one other than parents and staff are allowed in.
Rooms are private so the baby never comes in contact with strangers.
This is one of those chinks in socialized medicine that Americans like to point to any time someone mentions adopting it here.
I can be sure the BBC just passes along an exaggerated story? I’m shocked, shocked.
You mean you spoke to the person who authorized/put up the sign before this hit the news?
Just passing along my 20+ year old rooming-in data from the good ole usa, chicago area and upstate ny. If the Mom chose rooming-in–visitors were restricted to Dad and sibs. This was a very nice thing, no MIL’s, SIL’s, idiot drunken brothers, various and sundry friends, aunts, and miscellaneous old ladies visiting Mom and baby when both are trying to get adjusted to a brave new world. And it was hospital policy, so no guilt trip on Mom.