Quentin Bryce did not have an easy childhood herself.I can rember her as a slight child with leg irons.

Her mother was a very determinded woman who pestered the doctors & defied the education department

by educating her child at home. Any time I see footage of  Quentin walking or standing at functions it is

pleasing to see.

I have no doubt the family are grateful................. I still think it is apalling that a newborn and his mum cannot be together. It is a proven fact that bonding occurs during this time and both of them need this!

Sure the baby is being cared for but that does not replace his mum. It isn't like she is going to take off and leave him?

---

@*elizabeths-mum* wrote:
I had the same in 1987 with my first child, azure.

If it meant the best care for my child, I would put up with it today as well.

---

No one has to put up with it today, that is the point, however this mother and baby do.

 i don't think so. its unnecessarily heavy handed.

Regardless of where they come from or who they are there are some medical procedures that do exclude the mothers from their child.

If that mother and child were elsewhere, she would probably be in mourning now.

 

And of course we don't hear of those who did not have the same advantage of this mother and child, there is no political mileage in them.

If my child was in a mental health unit I wouldn't be able to be with them for hours on end and certainly not overnight.

Even though I know bonding is important. I think it is demeaning to adoptive and foster parents to carry on as if a relationship can't be formed without contact in those early weeks. The situation is that the asylum claim hasn't been processed and the family shouldn't be given the freedoms of an Australian citizen until it is, hard as it is.

Most likely the mother would be dead as well.

It is the natural mother, who will be caring for the baby from now on, who doesn't get to bond with it. Not good for the baby either.

 

Not ideal but not a total tragedy.