New Mom Says Her Mother-in-Law Wouldn’t Give Back Her Newborn — Then Cried When She Set a No-Holding Rule

A new mom says she tried to be clear before her baby was born: during cold, flu and RSV season, she did not want visitors holding her newborn right away. But once the baby arrived, her husband’s family pushed the boundary almost immediately.

The woman shared the situation in a Reddit post, explaining that she had told both sides of the family during pregnancy that she was nervous about germs and did not want anyone holding the baby at first. She said she already deals with health anxiety, and with the baby arriving during a high-risk season for illness, she wanted to be cautious. The original Reddit post is here: “Am I overreacting for not wanting anyone around my newborn yet?”

The issue started at the hospital. The poster said she allowed visitors to come the day after the baby was born, and her mother-in-law somehow convinced her to let her hold the baby. The new mom said she was still out of it and expected it to be brief. Instead, her mother-in-law kept holding the newborn, snuggling her, and did not hand her back when asked. The poster said her own mom had warned the mother-in-law ahead of time that she would not be comfortable with people holding the baby, so this was not a surprise request.

The hospital visit kept getting worse from there. The poster said her mother-in-law tried to step in while her husband was changing the baby’s diaper, made comments about the baby needing socks and came across as passive-aggressive while the new mom was still recovering. When the poster finally got her baby back, the baby was crying, and the mother-in-law allegedly said, “see she wants her grandma.” The poster said she broke down crying after the visit ended.

When the mother-in-law later found out the poster had cried, she apologized but also minimized it, telling the husband she had “only held her for 20 mins.” The poster tried to smooth things over by saying it was okay that time and that she was hormonal, but the bigger boundary still stood: they did not want people holding the newborn yet.

That is when the mother-in-law’s reaction escalated. According to the post, the family was told they could still come over, but they could not hold the baby for now. The mother-in-law cried to the husband and asked why he got to hold the baby if she could not. She also said there was no point in visiting if she could not hold the baby, and claimed the family “NEEDS” to bond with the newborn.

The poster did not understand that argument. From her point of view, the baby was a newborn who needed her parents, not extended family members competing for holding time. She said the baby barely wanted to be with anyone besides her and her husband, and she was trying to protect both the baby’s health and her own postpartum recovery.

Her father-in-law also got involved. The poster said he sent a long message saying he felt left out and that the new parents should be checking in with them and asking for advice. That confused her because she said they had sent pictures and updates, kept them informed during labor, and had not cut them off. They were simply asking people not to hold the baby yet.

The poster said she told the family she was dealing with postpartum depression and anxiety and wanted space. She also said the restriction would not last forever. But instead of accepting that, she said they continued telling her they disagreed and that this was the time she should be accepting their help.

Commenters largely sided with the new mom. One person said the situation showed how quickly a woman can be treated like “just the mother” once a baby is born, with everyone focused on their own access to the baby instead of the person who just gave birth. Another commenter said no one is entitled to ignore a parent’s rules just because a baby has arrived.

Several people focused on the health concerns, especially RSV. A commenter who said they had worked in pediatrics warned that even a small illness in an adult can become dangerous for a newborn. Others said cold, flu, COVID and RSV season is exactly when parents should feel free to set stricter rules, especially before a newborn has had time to build any protection.

One of the strongest reactions came from people who said the mother-in-law lost trust the first time she refused to hand the baby back. A commenter said anyone who does not return a newborn to the mother when asked is wrong, period. Another said the grandparents’ priority seemed to be physical access to the baby, while the parents’ priority was the baby’s health and the mother’s recovery.

Some commenters did offer softer suggestions, like asking the pediatrician for guidance or setting rules around masks, handwashing and vaccines. But even those comments generally agreed that the final decision belongs to the parents. If the new mom says no holding yet, that should be enough.

By the end of the thread, the poster’s rule did not come across like an overreaction. She had just given birth, she was dealing with postpartum anxiety and depression, and her first boundary had already been ignored in the hospital. The family may want to bond with the baby, but the baby’s mother was asking for time, space and basic respect — and commenters made it pretty clear that should have mattered more than anyone else’s hurt feelings.