They say that after forty-eight hours without sleep the human brain begins to slow down. Think of a computer burdened by a hundred different open browsers. After seventy-two hours, psychosis can set in. I for one have first-hand knowledge of this process, not because I was subjected to some covert military experiment, but simply because a year and a half ago, I gave birth to my son at a family birthing centre that, like many facilities of its sort, adheres to a policy of "rooming in" for new mothers.
I first learned of this policy about a month before my due date, when my husband and I took a tour of the facility. The nurse showed us one of the post-delivery rooms, letting us marvel at just how un-hospital-like it seemed. And then, as we left the room, she gestured briskly at the hospital’s nursery: "But you and your babies hopefully won’t be seeing much of that. Our expectation is that babies will be sleeping beside their mums. The nursery is only used for babies experiencing medical complications."
At the time, this sounded great. After waiting nine-plus months to meet the baby of my dreams, why would I possibly want to ship him off to a sterile, fluorescent-lit nursery where I wouldn’t be able to stare into his eyes or caress his little hands or cuddle him against my chest? Provided the guy was in good health, why would I not want him beside me every moment of those first few days? In other words, our hospital’s rooming-in policy seemed like little more than common sense… until, that is, I gave birth.
I know that labour isn’t easy for anyone, and having talked to plenty of other mums about their experiences, I feel pretty lucky — no serious complications, no c-section, no back-labour, no tearing or vacuum extractions or other horror scenarios. I went into labour a little after midnight and thirty-two hours later: presto.
At the time of my first contraction, I was in good health and good spirits but not exactly well rested after three months of trying to sleep with what my midwife referred to as itty-bitty bladder syndrome. My first night of contractions was manageable, but sleepless (was I really going to doze off knowing I was having my baby?). The second night was relatively painless thanks to my epidural, but still sleepless, as I experienced the not-uncommon side effect of shaking and shivering through most of the night. So by the time I gave birth, I’d gone forty-eight hours without a wink.
Now, I know what you’re thinking: enter husband/ partner/ impregnator. And indeed, my husband was a superhero during those first post-birth days and weeks. The problem we faced was that, despite all those much-craved burgers and bowls of guacamole I consumed throughout my third trimester, our little guy was born absolutely famished and really psyched about this whole breastfeeding thing — as in, wanting to do it constantly.
And in addition to being famished, he was quite the moody newborn. Apparently, his thirty-two-hour entry into the world hadn’t tuckered him out one bit. Begin sleepless night numbers three and four.
Around my sixtieth waking hour, the flowery wallpaper and homey-style furniture of my birthing centre suite began to blur into the interior of a garish funhouse. At some point during our last night in our nursery-less hospital, a nurse who I remember only as having the face of an angel took pity on me, scooped up the baby and walked him around the halls, somehow keeping him quiet, while I slept. Maybe she rubbed whiskey on his gums. I didn’t know and frankly, I didn’t care. I collapsed into a coma-like state for a couple of blessed hours before the sun rose and it was time for our happy family to get ready to go home.
Promoted by the midwife/ doula/ home-birth-movement community, as well as the World Health Organization, the practice of newborns rooming-in has been widely embraced. It’s a pretty straightforward philosophy: newborns should be within arms-reach of their mothers whenever possible. They argue that separation between mother and child during these first few days can disrupt bonding, impede nursing, and force hospitals to take extensive security and identification precautions for infants who are shuttled back and forth between nursery and post-delivery rooms.
As a result, most hospitals now offer parents the choice of having their baby room with them or go to the nursery. And such a choice makes sense; many of the mums I know spoke glowingly about their rooming-in experiences — especially mums who had relatively short labours or sleepy babies who gave them the chance to recover from the not insignificant strains of childbirth. But other women — women who had marathon labours like mine, or difficult labours, women who bore fussy or hungry or colicky babies and then attempted to care for them through the night — found the experience torturous, or in many cases, simply impossible, and were grateful to be able to send the baby to the nursery for a night or two before going home.
Often, I find myself recalling with bitter amusement the tour guide’s explanation for our hospital’s policy: "We believe that new mothers actually sleep better with their babies close by."
Yes, this must be why enemy interrogators frequently use tape recordings of screaming infants as a form of low-grade torture, because the sound is just so soporific.
Could a more likely explanation be that rooming-in allows hospitals to cut down on staffing and other costs associated with running a nursery? It’s hard for me to accept that it’s really “better” for a woman who has been laboring for days, who perhaps hasn’t slept well in weeks, to be kept awake for an additional two nights and sent home with her new infant in a state of debilitating exhaustion.
The seriousness of this situation descended on me a couple of days after arriving home, when I felt a sore throat and muscle aches coming on, which I thought might be a flu. I completely broke down. I can’t do this, I thought. I haven’t slept in five nights. If I get sick, even a little, I won’t be able to take care of this baby. I phoned my mother, who’d been planning on flying in to visit a few days later. She answered the phone and I greeted her by repeating the same word again and again: Help, help, help.
I’m all for bonding. I’m all for women having the option of keeping their new babies beside them. Options are great. But so is rest and recovery. So is not being made to feel like a failed mother if you need to let someone else — say, a well-trained nurse — help care for your newborn while you regain the strength that labour saps.
That’s why, should I do it all again, I will deliver at a hospital where rooming-in is an option and not an expectation — where, should the need arise, I can stare into my new baby’s big beautiful eyes and caress his little hands all night long, in my dreams.

I so agree with you Kim. I really felt the pressure to have my son room-in with me after he was born – I felt that I was being a bad mother by wanting a few hours sleep! I wish I’d been stronger!
This is an argument for better post-natal support, not against rooming in! I’m sorry you were utterly exhausted – but did you really want your baby being fed formula in a nursery and increasing his risk of asthma and other nasties? Because unless you wanted the nurses to feed him formula, somebody needed to wake you for those all important first feeds…
Perhaps next time you could organise a post-partum doula to help for the first week or so?
I’m interested in learning more about whether forced rooming in is an issue drawing more attention – especially among birth activists and maternity user groups. Does anyone know of any other work done on this area-say a survey that may illustrate women’s preferences or other examples of women’s experiences with rooming in either in australia, the U.S. or abroad? Well-written and great piece Kim! I’m personally still a fan of rooming-in but I also believe 100% in offering and then supporting women’s choices in all areas of birth. Also, I do agree with Kristen in that the lack of nursing and birth assistant support during the postnatal time is of critical importance – I’d be more inclined to push for improvements in postnatal support than not support rooming in.
First I would like to say that I am sorry for your bad experience and that surely, you are not the only one having faced this or similar situation. I am a student studying parenting, lactation and breastfeeding, and I would like to share some information with you in the hope of benefiting you and others that will read this.
The information given to you about rooming-in with your newborn was correct, but there is a system that comes with this practice that seems to have been missing in that hospital you delivered.
First and foremost, any drug powerful enough to obliterate labor pain is too powerful to have no other consequences. The epidural you were given comes with repercussions including that it:
o Causes the baby to be drowsy and affects his motor skills;
o Delays his pre-feeding behaviour lessening the likelihood of early breastfeeding;
o Increases his crying and raises his body temperature;
o Reduces both the mothers and baby’s beta-endorphins (in the baby, they are found in high concentration in colostrum contributing to fetal adaptation, overcoming birth stress, postnatal developments);
o Baby’s whose mother received an epidural have poorer alertness and ability to orient;
o Also, babies depressed by epidural drugs are less capable of stimulating the mother’s milk production at postnatal period.
Then, to top this off, if you were separated, even for a short time, after the delivery, then most likely it caused your baby to become distressed, which usually causes despair and withdrawal with lowered heart rate and temperature accompanied with a massive rise in stress hormones. A study by DiGirolamo (2001) found the strongest risk factors for breastfeeding termination were late breastfeeding initiation, which occurs when mothers and babies are separated, and milk supplements are given to the infant.
Alternatively, immediate after birth initiation of skin-to-skin releases a set of instinct behaviors in the new born accompanied by high blood levels of beta-endorphins, oxytocin and prolactin in both mother and infant encouraging successful breastfeeding and co-dependence.
Then when the mother is stressed during labor, it causes a significant rise in cortisol levels. Maternal stress interferes also with oxytocin release affecting milk removal.
Did the hospital inform you about the:
1. consequences of bottle and artificial milk feeding;
2. avoiding to wash baby and mother after birth;
3. how to recognize a good latch of baby to breast;
4. how to recognize proper intake and output of milk.
After delivery, the mother’s body is usually alert and ready to care for the baby. This state is boosted by the immediate skin-to-skin contact ensuring onset of hormones and bonding chemicals. Also at this time there is available dedicated professional support overseeing the mother and baby’s progress. These two factors then usually lead to a content mother and baby.
In a nut shell, it seems like you did not have optimal practices after your baby’s birth and your baby didn’t latch on properly – did not have his lips turned out against your breasts for good stimulation for his oxytocin release to calm and satisfy him. Without uninterrupted skin to skin cuddling there were less hormones to help you bond and transfer your milk to him.
I hope, in time, that you will decide to have another baby. If you do the try to deliver in a hospital where rooming-in is supported by the practices which assist in bonding and breastfeeding, particularly a hospital that offers lactation support. The main things to look for are uninterrupted skin-to-skin contact right after birth, and then, rooming-in should be a pleasure and a precious bonding experience, while taking nothing away from your rest and recovery.
For any other questions and difficulties, you may refer to the following: La Leche League organization; or any Lactation Consultants in your area. Best success!
I agree with Kim in her point she makes that it would be most desirable to meet both, the child’s and the mother’s needs equally. Yes, in the initial crucial bonding phase directly after birth, most mothers and babies are in fact alert enough to use this precious time for bonding and breast-feeding, but after that I think the most practical support for the mother (and hence for the baby in the long run) is, to do rooming-in in a ore flexible way, meaning, let a nurse or family member take care of the baby when he is sleeping so that mum can also sleep during that time and wake her for breast-feeding (or, if she is really that exhausted, let her pump some milk and give breast milk with a syringe or even a bottle to the baby, because if baby is latched on at almost each feeding he will eventually learn breast-feeding, the potential problem of nipple confusion is overestimated). Whenever mum is strong enough to take care for baby herself in her room, she should do so. This would be a type of rooming-in that does not insist on 24 hours non stop, but rather leaves space for individual needs and still supports breast-feeding. We have lots of data on the benefit of rooming-in versus nursery, but I am still waiting for a study to compare the rather flexible approach to rooming-in with the strict rooming-in philosophy and take the mother into account. I would assume that the results will not reveal any disadvantages for the baby.
Dorit, a mum of two kids and a pediatrician