birth choices | breastfeeding | skin to skin | uninterrupted first hour

Skin to Skin Is Not A Fad (Updated 2025)

Published: March 5, 2016

Skin to skin was never a “Fad”

Nine years ago, I felt compelled to respond to an article in The West Australian titled “Fad Blamed for Deaths of Babies.”

In it, Dr Michael Gannon made the astonishing claim that there was a “new obsession amongst mothers and midwives with immediate skin-to-skin contact after birth,” even suggesting this was behind newborn deaths at Fiona Stanley Hospital.

I said then, and I’ll say again now, wanting to hold your baby after birth is not a fad.

It’s biology. It’s instinct. It’s human.

We Knew the Benefits Nine Years Ago: Now the Evidence Is Unmistakable

Even back then, there was strong evidence that skin-to-skin contact improves outcomes for mothers and babies.

Now, the just-released 2025 Cochrane Review (Moore et al., 2025), “Immediate or Early Skin-to-Skin Contact for Mothers and Their Healthy Newborn Infants”, confirms what midwives and parents have known all along.

After reviewing 69 studies involving over 7,000 mother–baby pairs, the authors concluded that:

Exclusive breastfeeding rates were significantly higher for those who had immediate skin-to-skin contact, both at hospital discharge and months later.
Babies maintained better temperature regulation: including after caesarean birth. Infants held skin-to-skin had warmer, more stable body temperatures than those placed in cots or under warmers.
Babies had higher blood glucose levels: skin-to-skin contact helped stabilise blood sugars more effectively in the hours after birth.
Cardiorespiratory stability improved: babies’ heart rates and breathing were more consistent.
The third stage of labour was shorter:skin-to-skin contact after vaginal birth helped the placenta deliver more quickly, likely due to increased oxytocin release and stronger uterine contractions.
There may be a protective effect against excessive maternal bleeding: several studies observed improved uterine tone and a trend toward reduced postpartum haemorrhage in mothers who held their babies skin-to-skin
No harms were reported when skin-to-skin contact was supported safely and appropriately.

In fact, the authors go so far as to say that it may no longer be ethical to randomise babies to separation, because we already know that immediate, uninterrupted skin-to-skin contact is best practice.

We’re Not Just Talking About Vaginal Births

When we talk about the importance of skin-to-skin contact, we’re not just talking about vaginal births.

Babies born by caesarean, whether planned or emergency, benefit just as much. In fact, they may need it even more.

After a caesarean, babies often miss out on the hormonal and physical cues of labour that help them transition smoothly to life outside the womb. Skin-to-skin contact helps bridge that gap. It stabilises their temperature, heart rate, and blood sugar, supports breastfeeding, and helps both mother and baby calm after surgery.

The 2025 Cochrane Review confirmed that immediate or early skin-to-skin contact after caesarean birth carries the same benefits as after vaginal birth, without added risk when supported by staff.

It’s time to stop thinking of skin-to-skin as something that only happens in the birth suite. Every baby, however they enter the world, deserves that same first connection.

“Skin-to-skin after caesarean is not just possible — it’s essential.”

If you’d like to read more about how to make this happen, even in theatre, I wrote a detailed guide earlier this year:

👉 Skin-to-Skin After Caesarean: Why It Matters (and How to Make It Happen)

The Myth of the “Cold Baby” After a Caesarean

One persistent myth is that babies born by caesarean will get cold if they’re not placed under a radiant warmer straight away.

But the evidence tells a very different story.

The 2025 Cochrane Review found that babies held skin-to-skin after birth — including after caesarean — actually had warmer and more stable body temperatures than those separated from their mothers.

In other words, it’s the separation, not the skin-to-skin, that puts babies at risk of chilling.

One of the Things That Gets in the Way

One of the biggest things that gets in the way of skin-to-skin contact is staff-focused rather than mother and baby-focused hospital policies and practices.

Too often, policies, procedures, or routines interrupt that powerful first meeting between mother and baby. Inductions, opiates, epidurals, and caesarean births can all influence how easily a mother can hold her baby right after birth, but instead of supporting her through that, we often remove the baby altogether.

If medications or surgical births affect a mother’s ability to safely hold her baby, the solution isn’t separation, it’s support.

That means ensuring someone, her partner, a midwife, or another trusted person, helps maintain that closeness until she’s ready. Because babies don’t just need to be warm; they need to feel safe, connected, and held.

Let’s Finally Retire the “Fad” Label

The 2025 Cochrane Review cements it: skin-to-skin contact after birth is essential, evidence-based, and safe.

It should be our standard of care, not seen as a “nice” optional extra.

I truly hope that, nearly a decade after this conversation began, no one is still calling it a fad.

Because holding your baby close after birth isn’t a trend.

It’s what both mother and baby were born to do. It was never just a fad.

Beyond the “Golden Hour”: The Journey of Skin-to-Skin Doesn’t Stop at 60 Minutes

Now that the importance of immediate skin-to-skin contact has been firmly confirmed, it’s time to shift our focus, not just to the first hour, but to how we can maintain and extend that vital connection over the hours and days that follow.

Research from Kerstin Uvnäs Moberg et al, shows that the neuro-hormonal mechanisms triggered by skin-to-skin, especially activation of the oxytocin system through warmth, touch, and proximity, occur well beyond the first hour. These ongoing sensory cues continue to regulate both mother’s and baby’s physiology, reducing stress, supporting digestion, and promoting calm connection.

Meanwhile, Dr Nils Bergman emphasises the “zero separation” in the first 24 hours principle: mother and baby together, uninterrupted, is the biological norm. His work demonstrates that continuous skin-to-skin contact, not just a single “golden hour”, optimises temperature regulation, heart rate, sleep organisation, and neuro-developmental stability.

Together, their research tells us that skin-to-skin isn’t a one-hour event, it’s an ongoing process.

Frequent, prolonged, and repeated contact supports both the oxytocin and parasympathetic systems, helping babies grow and mothers recover.

The “golden hour” should be the starting line, not the finish line.

The Bottom Line

The 2025 Cochrane Review confirms what we’ve known for years: skin-to-skin contact after birth isn’t a fad, it’s essential.

The evidence is now so strong that separating mothers and babies after birth — without medical need — is no longer ethically justifiable.

Skin-to-skin contact supports both sides of the mother–baby dyad — physiologically, hormonally, and emotionally.

It’s time for every hospital policy, birth plan, and care provider to move beyond the “golden hour” and make continuous, responsive skin-to-skin contact the new normal.

I’ve Been Talking About Skin-to-Skin for Years

As you can see, this isn’t a new conversation for me. I’ve been sharing the science and practical benefits of skin-to-skin contact for years across my blogs, classes, and workshops. Here are a few of the posts you might like to revisit:

References:

Moore ER et al. Immediate or early skin-to-skin contact for mothers and their healthy newborn infants. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2025; Issue 10. Art. No.: CD003519. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003519.pub5

Uvnäs Moberg, K., Handlin, L., & Petersson, M. (2020). Neuroendocrine mechanisms involved in the physiological effects caused by skin-to-skin contact – with a particular focus on the oxytocinergic system. Acta Physiologica, 230(3), e13533. https://doi.org/10.1111/apha.13533

Bergman, N. J. (2024). The neuroscience of birth – and the case for zero separation. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1385320. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1385320

Here is the original blog:

I really felt the need to respond to yesterday’s article in the West Australia entitled Fad Blamed For Deaths of Babies

In this article, Dr Micheal Gannon makes the outrageous claim that “There is this new obsession amongst mothers and midwives with immediate skin-to-skin contact after birth.” He even goes as far as to blame this on recent newborn deaths at Fiona Stanley Hospital.

My heart goes out to the families concerned and I am stunned that Dr Gannon appears to be putting the blame on Mums and Midwives rather than looking at obstetric practices.

When Did Wanting to Hold Your Baby Become “a Fad”?

Wanting to hold your baby after birth is not a fad, nor is it anything new.

Women have been doing it for centuries for the benefit of the baby and the new mum.

Our leading maternity hospital, King Edwards Memorial Hospital, has signs posted all over promoting the practice because of the known benefits.

Research has proved that immediate skin-to-skin contact

improves physiologic stability for both mother and baby,
increases maternal attachment behaviours,
protects against the negative effects of maternal–infant separation,
supports optimal infant brain development,
promotes initiation of the first breastfeeding,
and it may also lower the risk of a PPH (bleeding too much after birth).

The evidence is so clear that I actually won’t bother arguing the point. If Dr Gannon is truly unaware of the benefits then I suggest he attends the Skin-to-Skin Evidence and Implementation: A One-Day Seminar with world-renowned Dr Nils Bergman, in Perth in May this year, to further his own professional development. I will certainly be going.

What I really take issue with in this article, is the fact that Dr Gannon does concede that it may be the opiates, epidurals, and caesarean sections that are interfering with a new mum’s physical and mental ability to care for her baby after birth. However, his solution to this problem is not to examine obstetric practices and look at ways of reducing drugs and intervention, so that we optimise the physiological processes and the new mum is in the perfect state to meet and care for her baby. No, his solution is not to let new Mums hold their newborn babies unless they are supervised.

The article also doesn’t mention the effects of opiate drugs, epidurals, and caesarean sections have on babies and their abilities to adapt to life outside the womb.

It is my sincerest hope that Dr Gannon is just playing Devil’s Advocate because I would hate to think a “prominent Perth obstetrician” is really not aware of the hormonal processes of physiological birth and the postnatal period.

I’d really encourage him to read this wonderful, free, comprehensive report which examines the Science of the Hormonal Physiology of Childbearing and Its Implications for Women, Babies and Maternity Care: HORMONAL PHYSIOLOGY OF CHILDBEARING.

Perhaps then he would recommend looking at ways to support women to optimise the physiological processes of natural birth, breastfeeding, and beyond rather than denying women the right to hold their babies whenever they want to wants to.

And personally, I think that if a medical professional knows that his/her actions (such as induction, epidural, the cascade of interventions, emergency caesarean) have led to a state where a mum is not in the right physical and mental state to meet and hold her baby, then he/she has an obligation to stay with that woman and baby (or at the very least ensure someone else stays with them), making sure they are safe, for as long as that mum wants to hold her baby, rather than just putting the baby in a cot and walking off.

Perhaps the solution would be to actively encourage new dads, or another support person to stay with the new mum and baby 24/7.

We need to remember that traditionally a new mother was never left alone in the first few days after birth.

Unfortunately, modern hospital policies and practices mean we do leave new mums on their own in single rooms in the postnatal period, right at the time when they need the most support.