8 ms·

Based on this, expect US hospital prices for that service to go up.

joana035 5y ago
It should not be charged at all IMHO. And it should be a right of the parents to hold their newborn in the moment they enter this world.
- e1g 5y ago
  OP was being sarcastic. “Skin-to-skin” contact with mum is the very first thing they do after child birth, and continue recommending for the entire stay.
  - tsjq 5y ago
    there's a lot of stories / examples about this an item in the hospital bills .
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - e1g 5y ago
      You might be thinking of one story that went viral a few years ago, and was amplified by the media. It was successful at generating outrage and so became popular, but it was not correct.
      - nicoburns 5y ago
        It would only be one of many ridiculous charges in the US medical system. I personally think it's pretty outrageous that one has to pay for medical care while giving birth at all.
        jaywalk 5y ago
        So the doctors and nurses involved should just deliver babies for free? Does the free care apply only to standard births, and then they get paid if there are complications? Or is anything involving the delivery plus anything arising from it provided for free?
        wizzwizz4 5y ago
        The central bank prints money (partially offset by tax). Some of that money could go to basic medical care like this, as it does in most other countries.
        jaywalk 5y ago
        We're currently seeing exactly what happens when the central bank money printer goes into overdrive, which is rising inflation. Maybe we shouldn't be encouraging that.
        nicoburns 5y ago
        Taxation funded healthcare seems to work pretty well. It allows you to avoid the situation where individuals pay significantly more due to bad luck with their health. Plus you get to cut out the insurance companies' cut completely.
        Tabular-Iceberg 5y ago
        Some of the countries that implement universal healthcare could actually use some increased inflation. So it doesn't seem like a real concern in practice.
      - DangitBobby 5y ago
        They do actually charge for supervised skin-to-skin contact after a C-section [1]. 1. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/doula-explains-why-hospital-charged-parents-39-to-hold-newborn-baby-in-viral-post/#app https://www.cbsnews.com/news/doula-explains-why-hospital-cha...
- baliex 5y ago
  IYHO?! It's patently absurd to expect anything less Edit: I'm agreeing with you but it seems absurd that it should have to be opinion!
awestroke 5y ago
Do you have to pay to hold your newborn in the US? Land of the free indeed
- wyager 5y ago
  Medical is probably the single most regulated industry in the US. The US landed at the worst possible system where the government mostly only pays for medical for old people (where the returns on expenditures are very low), but simultaneously interferes a lot with hospitals and insurance in ways that make the process very punishing for everyone. You can get much better service for way less money if you avoid the red tape and do a home birth.
  - aidos 5y ago
    We’ve had 2 home births now. And the 1st birth was nearly a homebirth too. They’ve all gone well for us, so I recommend them from that point of view, but on the other hand, I don’t recommend them because I’d hate to have any hand in a situation that went wrong for someone else. Our last we actually delivered on our own because the midwifes didn’t get to us in time.
    - choeger 5y ago
      While home birth is certainly possible and apparently can be a very nice experience, I strongly suggest going into a hospital for birth (you should be able to choose a hospital of your liking after talking to the nurses/doctors/midwifes working there). Birth is safe in most cases, but complications do happen. While the probability is low, the possible damage is extreme. Please consider the availability of experienced medical professionals as a safety net for mother and child! I witnessed an "emergency" C-section after 18hours of labor without any prior indications and was extremely happy that professionals were literally in the next room when this became necessary.
      - jmkd 5y ago
        As a counterpoint, home births are in general very safe if recommended prerequisites have been met. Typically: 1) low-risk pregnancy 2) within X minutes of suitable hospital 3) higher level of monitoring in late pregnancy and perhaps two midwives at birth Birth - a natural process - has been commercially medicalised, especially in Brasil (C-section rate >60%) and the US (>30%). If giving birth at home was normalised, we'd see a huge growth in natural birth and an increased availability for medical staff to support in emergencies if required. But the rates of emergencies would actually decline too.
LibertyBeta 5y ago
Who charges? We just had our second and they didn't charge at all. Gave the nurses/midwives a chance to make more ready..... And this was at Major CT Hospital.
- sodality2 5y ago
  The hospital may charge for this due to someone needing to stay and monitor you and the baby while you hold them. Ridiculous charge, certainly very rare, but that is typically the justification given
isolli 5y ago
You're joking, but my wife gave birth to our first-born in the US, and she had to wait several hours until she could hold her baby because... the transportation team (whose job was to roll her bed to the elevator) was unavailable due to a change-of-shift.

It should not be charged at all IMHO. And it should be a right of the parents to hold their newborn in the moment they enter this world.

e1g 5y ago
OP was being sarcastic. “Skin-to-skin” contact with mum is the very first thing they do after child birth, and continue recommending for the entire stay.
- tsjq 5y ago
  there's a lot of stories / examples about this an item in the hospital bills .
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - e1g 5y ago
    You might be thinking of one story that went viral a few years ago, and was amplified by the media. It was successful at generating outrage and so became popular, but it was not correct.
    - nicoburns 5y ago
      It would only be one of many ridiculous charges in the US medical system. I personally think it's pretty outrageous that one has to pay for medical care while giving birth at all.
      - jaywalk 5y ago
        So the doctors and nurses involved should just deliver babies for free? Does the free care apply only to standard births, and then they get paid if there are complications? Or is anything involving the delivery plus anything arising from it provided for free?
        wizzwizz4 5y ago
        The central bank prints money (partially offset by tax). Some of that money could go to basic medical care like this, as it does in most other countries.
        jaywalk 5y ago
        We're currently seeing exactly what happens when the central bank money printer goes into overdrive, which is rising inflation. Maybe we shouldn't be encouraging that.
        nicoburns 5y ago
        Taxation funded healthcare seems to work pretty well. It allows you to avoid the situation where individuals pay significantly more due to bad luck with their health. Plus you get to cut out the insurance companies' cut completely.
        Tabular-Iceberg 5y ago
        Some of the countries that implement universal healthcare could actually use some increased inflation. So it doesn't seem like a real concern in practice.
    - DangitBobby 5y ago
      They do actually charge for supervised skin-to-skin contact after a C-section [1]. 1. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/doula-explains-why-hospital-charged-parents-39-to-hold-newborn-baby-in-viral-post/#app https://www.cbsnews.com/news/doula-explains-why-hospital-cha...
baliex 5y ago
IYHO?! It's patently absurd to expect anything less Edit: I'm agreeing with you but it seems absurd that it should have to be opinion!

awestroke 5y ago

Do you have to pay to hold your newborn in the US? Land of the free indeed

wyager 5y ago
Medical is probably the single most regulated industry in the US. The US landed at the worst possible system where the government mostly only pays for medical for old people (where the returns on expenditures are very low), but simultaneously interferes a lot with hospitals and insurance in ways that make the process very punishing for everyone. You can get much better service for way less money if you avoid the red tape and do a home birth.
- aidos 5y ago
  We’ve had 2 home births now. And the 1st birth was nearly a homebirth too. They’ve all gone well for us, so I recommend them from that point of view, but on the other hand, I don’t recommend them because I’d hate to have any hand in a situation that went wrong for someone else. Our last we actually delivered on our own because the midwifes didn’t get to us in time.
  - choeger 5y ago
    While home birth is certainly possible and apparently can be a very nice experience, I strongly suggest going into a hospital for birth (you should be able to choose a hospital of your liking after talking to the nurses/doctors/midwifes working there). Birth is safe in most cases, but complications do happen. While the probability is low, the possible damage is extreme. Please consider the availability of experienced medical professionals as a safety net for mother and child! I witnessed an "emergency" C-section after 18hours of labor without any prior indications and was extremely happy that professionals were literally in the next room when this became necessary.
    - jmkd 5y ago
      As a counterpoint, home births are in general very safe if recommended prerequisites have been met. Typically: 1) low-risk pregnancy 2) within X minutes of suitable hospital 3) higher level of monitoring in late pregnancy and perhaps two midwives at birth Birth - a natural process - has been commercially medicalised, especially in Brasil (C-section rate >60%) and the US (>30%). If giving birth at home was normalised, we'd see a huge growth in natural birth and an increased availability for medical staff to support in emergencies if required. But the rates of emergencies would actually decline too.

LibertyBeta 5y ago

Who charges? We just had our second and they didn't charge at all. Gave the nurses/midwives a chance to make more ready..... And this was at Major CT Hospital.

sodality2 5y ago
The hospital may charge for this due to someone needing to stay and monitor you and the baby while you hold them. Ridiculous charge, certainly very rare, but that is typically the justification given

isolli 5y ago

You're joking, but my wife gave birth to our first-born in the US, and she had to wait several hours until she could hold her baby because... the transportation team (whose job was to roll her bed to the elevator) was unavailable due to a change-of-shift.